Literature DB >> 24908545

Findings of a national comparative audit of mastectomy and breast reconstruction surgery in England.

Ranjeet Jeevan1, David A Cromwell2, John P Browne3, Christopher M Caddy4, Jerome Pereira5, Carmel Sheppard6, Kimberley Greenaway7, Jan H P van der Meulen8.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: This paper summarises the findings of a national audit of mastectomy and breast reconstruction surgery carried out in England. It describes patterns of treatment, and the clinical and patient-reported quality of life outcomes associated with these types of procedure.
DESIGN: Prospective cohort study.
SETTING: All 150 National Health Service hospital groups (NHS trusts) in England that provided mastectomy or breast reconstruction surgery, along with six NHS trusts in Wales and Scotland and 114 independent hospitals. PARTICIPANTS: Women aged 16 years and over undergoing mastectomy with or without immediate breast reconstruction, or primary delayed breast reconstruction, between 1st January 2008 and 31st March 2009. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Reconstructive utilisation, post-operative complications and sequelae, and patient-reported satisfaction and quality of life.
RESULTS: Overall, 21% of the 16,485 women who had mastectomy underwent immediate reconstruction. However, the proportion varied between regions from 9% to 43% (p < 0.001). Levels of patient satisfaction with information, choice and the quality of care were high. The proportion of women who experienced local complications was 10.30% (95% CI 9.78-10.84) for mastectomy surgery, ranged from 11.02% (9.31-12.92) to 18.24% (14.80-22.10) for different immediate reconstructive procedures, and from 5.00% (2.76-8.25) to 19.86% (16.21-23.94) for types of delayed reconstruction. Breast appearance and overall well-being scores reported 18 months after surgery were higher among women having immediate breast reconstruction compared to mastectomy only. Postoperative outcomes were similar across providers..
CONCLUSIONS: The Audit found women were highly satisfied with their peri-operative care, with hospital providers achieving similar outcomes. English providers should examine how to reduce the variation in rates of immediate reconstruction.
Copyright © 2014 British Association of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Breast cancer; Breast reconstruction; England; Mastectomy; Outcomes; Quality of life

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24908545     DOI: 10.1016/j.bjps.2014.04.022

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg        ISSN: 1748-6815            Impact factor:   2.740


  51 in total

1.  Patient satisfaction with nipple-sparing mastectomy: A prospective study of patient reported outcomes using the BREAST-Q.

Authors:  Michael A Howard; Mark Sisco; Katharine Yao; David J Winchester; Ermilo Barrera; Jeremy Warner; Jennifer Jaffe; Peter Hulick; Kristine Kuchta; Andrea L Pusic; Stephen F Sener
Journal:  J Surg Oncol       Date:  2016-07-08       Impact factor: 3.454

2.  Geographic Variation Immediate and Delayed Breast Reconstruction Utilization in Ontario, Canada and Plastic Surgeon Availability: A Population-Based Observational Study.

Authors:  Jennica Platt; Toni Zhong; Rahim Moineddin; Gillian L Booth; Alexandra M Easson; Kimberly Fernandes; Peter Gozdyra; Nancy N Baxter
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2015-08       Impact factor: 3.352

3.  Breast Cancer and Reconstruction: Normative Data for Interpreting the BREAST-Q.

Authors:  Lily R Mundy; Karen Homa; Anne F Klassen; Andrea L Pusic; Carolyn L Kerrigan
Journal:  Plast Reconstr Surg       Date:  2017-05       Impact factor: 4.730

Review 4.  Patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) following mastectomy with breast reconstruction or without reconstruction: a systematic review.

Authors:  Leonardo Z Cordova; David J Hunter-Smith; Warren M Rozen
Journal:  Gland Surg       Date:  2019-08

5.  Patient-Reported Outcomes 1 Year After Immediate Breast Reconstruction: Results of the Mastectomy Reconstruction Outcomes Consortium Study.

Authors:  Andrea L Pusic; Evan Matros; Neil Fine; Edward Buchel; Gayle M Gordillo; Jennifer B Hamill; Hyungjin M Kim; Ji Qi; Claudia Albornoz; Anne F Klassen; Edwin G Wilkins
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2017-03-27       Impact factor: 44.544

6.  Achieving consistent and equitable access to post mastectomy breast reconstruction.

Authors:  Anne C O'Neill
Journal:  Gland Surg       Date:  2020-08

Review 7.  Women's expectations of breast reconstruction following mastectomy for breast cancer: a systematic review.

Authors:  Kathy Flitcroft; Meagan Brennan; Andrew Spillane
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2017-05-04       Impact factor: 3.603

8.  Reconstructive utilisation and outcomes following mastectomy surgery in women with breast cancer treated in England.

Authors:  R Jeevan
Journal:  Ann R Coll Surg Engl       Date:  2019-08-16       Impact factor: 1.891

Review 9.  The BREAST-Q in surgical research: A review of the literature 2009-2015.

Authors:  Wess A Cohen; Lily R Mundy; Tiffany N S Ballard; Anne Klassen; Stefan J Cano; John Browne; Andrea L Pusic
Journal:  J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg       Date:  2015-11-26       Impact factor: 2.740

10.  The Effect of Mini-Latissimus Dorsi Flap (MLDF) Reconstruction on Shoulder Function in Breast Cancer Patients.

Authors:  Tomris Duymaz; Zeynep Erdoğan İyigün; Ahmet Serkan İlgün; Çetin Ordu; Muhammed Üçüncü; Gül Alço; Alper Öztürk; Filiz Elbüken; Fatma Aktepe; Vahit Özmen
Journal:  Eur J Breast Health       Date:  2019-07-01
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.