BACKGROUND: In oncoplastic surgery, post-surgical subjective outcome evaluation is usually performed for patients with breast-conserving surgery and patients with mastectomy. This study attempts to broaden the spectrum by comparing mastopexy (MP) and lumpectomy (BCS). Evaluating this aspect is important, since performing a mastopexy along with tumor removal offers a chance for simultaneous breast enhancement, thus possibly offering a more beneficial subjective outcome. Both procedures were used to remove single-locus tumors. A total of 143 patients, 71 of which answered a questionnaire regarding post-surgical body image, were evaluated. RESULTS: Post-surgical patient evaluation showed the following results: A "very satisfactory" or "satisfactory" outcome was achieved in 87% of BCS cases and 86% of MP cases. No significant difference was established here (p=0.48). Evaluation of overall cosmetic outcome, scar tissue formation, shape and size of the breast and overall quality of life were answered positively in both groups. Regarding the remaining superficial scar tissue, patients answered as being satisfied with the result in 85% of BCS cases and 79% of MP cases. A significant difference was established between the very satisfied (77% BCS/44% MP) and satisfied (8% BCS/35% MP) group (p=0.013). Post-surgical swelling, nipple sensitivity and overall quality of life did not differ significantly. CONCLUSION: Simple lumpectomy, i.e. classic BCS, leads to less scar tissue and involves a shorter surgical procedure, both of which may be considered as arguments for performing BCS. Scar tissue formation was more positively evaluated in the BCS group, where 77% of patients were "very satisfied" and 8% "satisfied". The other evaluated parameters did not differ significantly. MP may be offered as an option when simultaneous breast enhancement is desired at little cost to post-surgical patient satisfaction.
BACKGROUND: In oncoplastic surgery, post-surgical subjective outcome evaluation is usually performed for patients with breast-conserving surgery and patients with mastectomy. This study attempts to broaden the spectrum by comparing mastopexy (MP) and lumpectomy (BCS). Evaluating this aspect is important, since performing a mastopexy along with tumor removal offers a chance for simultaneous breast enhancement, thus possibly offering a more beneficial subjective outcome. Both procedures were used to remove single-locus tumors. A total of 143 patients, 71 of which answered a questionnaire regarding post-surgical body image, were evaluated. RESULTS: Post-surgical patient evaluation showed the following results: A "very satisfactory" or "satisfactory" outcome was achieved in 87% of BCS cases and 86% of MP cases. No significant difference was established here (p=0.48). Evaluation of overall cosmetic outcome, scar tissue formation, shape and size of the breast and overall quality of life were answered positively in both groups. Regarding the remaining superficial scar tissue, patients answered as being satisfied with the result in 85% of BCS cases and 79% of MP cases. A significant difference was established between the very satisfied (77% BCS/44% MP) and satisfied (8% BCS/35% MP) group (p=0.013). Post-surgical swelling, nipple sensitivity and overall quality of life did not differ significantly. CONCLUSION: Simple lumpectomy, i.e. classic BCS, leads to less scar tissue and involves a shorter surgical procedure, both of which may be considered as arguments for performing BCS. Scar tissue formation was more positively evaluated in the BCS group, where 77% of patients were "very satisfied" and 8% "satisfied". The other evaluated parameters did not differ significantly. MP may be offered as an option when simultaneous breast enhancement is desired at little cost to post-surgical patient satisfaction.
Authors: Max H Haloua; José H Volders; Nicole M A Krekel; Alexander M F Lopes Cardozo; Wifred K de Roos; Louise M de Widt-Levert; Henk van der Veen; Herman Rijna; Elisabeth Bergers; Katarzyna Jóźwiak; Sybren Meijer; Petrousjka van den Tol Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2016-01 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Kristel E Everaars; Marlies Welbie; Stefan Hummelink; Esther P M Tjin; Erik H de Laat; Dietmar J O Ulrich Journal: J Cancer Surviv Date: 2020-08-20 Impact factor: 4.442