BACKGROUND: Contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM) is increasingly chosen by breast cancer patients and may be related to increased use of immediate reconstruction. This study examines long-term patient satisfaction with CPM and reconstruction in a historical cohort. METHODS: 621 unilateral breast cancer patients with a family history of breast cancer who underwent CPM between 1960 and 1993 were surveyed regarding quality of life (QOL) and satisfaction with CPM at two time points (approximately 10 and 20 years after CPM). RESULTS: 583 women responded to the first follow-up questionnaire (median 10.7 years; mean 11.9 years) after CPM. There were 403 (69 %) patients who underwent reconstruction and 180 (31 %) patients who did not. Women electing reconstruction were younger [mean age 47 versus (vs.) 53 years; p = 0.01] and more likely to be married (85 vs. 78 %; p = 0.048). Most women reported satisfaction with CPM (83 %), and they would choose CPM again (84 %) and make the same choice regarding reconstruction (73 %). However, reconstruction patients demonstrated significantly lower satisfaction (p = 0.0001) and were less likely to choose CPM again (p < 0.0001). Within the reconstruction group, 39 % needed 1 + unplanned reoperation, which was strongly associated with lower satisfaction (p = 0.0001), lower likelihood of choosing CPM again (p = 0.006), and lower likelihood of choosing reconstruction again (p < 0.0001). There were 269 women who responded to the second questionnaire (median 18.4 years; mean 20.2 years after CPM). Satisfaction with CPM remained high, with 92 % of the women stating they would choose CPM again. CONCLUSIONS: Most women report stable long-term satisfaction with CPM. Women who had reconstruction and required reoperations in this historical cohort reported lower satisfaction.
BACKGROUND: Contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM) is increasingly chosen by breast cancerpatients and may be related to increased use of immediate reconstruction. This study examines long-term patient satisfaction with CPM and reconstruction in a historical cohort. METHODS: 621 unilateral breast cancerpatients with a family history of breast cancer who underwent CPM between 1960 and 1993 were surveyed regarding quality of life (QOL) and satisfaction with CPM at two time points (approximately 10 and 20 years after CPM). RESULTS: 583 women responded to the first follow-up questionnaire (median 10.7 years; mean 11.9 years) after CPM. There were 403 (69 %) patients who underwent reconstruction and 180 (31 %) patients who did not. Women electing reconstruction were younger [mean age 47 versus (vs.) 53 years; p = 0.01] and more likely to be married (85 vs. 78 %; p = 0.048). Most women reported satisfaction with CPM (83 %), and they would choose CPM again (84 %) and make the same choice regarding reconstruction (73 %). However, reconstruction patients demonstrated significantly lower satisfaction (p = 0.0001) and were less likely to choose CPM again (p < 0.0001). Within the reconstruction group, 39 % needed 1 + unplanned reoperation, which was strongly associated with lower satisfaction (p = 0.0001), lower likelihood of choosing CPM again (p = 0.006), and lower likelihood of choosing reconstruction again (p < 0.0001). There were 269 women who responded to the second questionnaire (median 18.4 years; mean 20.2 years after CPM). Satisfaction with CPM remained high, with 92 % of the women stating they would choose CPM again. CONCLUSIONS: Most women report stable long-term satisfaction with CPM. Women who had reconstruction and required reoperations in this historical cohort reported lower satisfaction.
Authors: Marlene H Frost; Jeffrey M Slezak; Nho V Tran; Constance I Williams; Joanne L Johnson; John E Woods; Paul M Petty; John H Donohue; Clive S Grant; Jeff A Sloan; Thomas A Sellers; Lynn C Hartmann Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2005-10-03 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Sarah T Hawley; Reshma Jagsi; Monica Morrow; Nancy K Janz; Ann Hamilton; John J Graff; Steven J Katz Journal: JAMA Surg Date: 2014-06 Impact factor: 14.766
Authors: Katja Goldflam; Kelly K Hunt; Jeffrey E Gershenwald; S Eva Singletary; Nadeem Mirza; Henry M Kuerer; Gildy V Babiera; Frederick C Ames; Merrick I Ross; Barry W Feig; Aysegul A Sahin; Banu Arun; Funda Meric-Bernstam Journal: Cancer Date: 2004-11-01 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Natalie B Jones; John Wilson; Linda Kotur; Julie Stephens; William B Farrar; Doreen M Agnese Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2009-06-09 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: David W Lim; Helene Retrouvey; Isabel Kerrebijn; Kate Butler; Anne C O'Neill; Tulin D Cil; Toni Zhong; Stefan O P Hofer; David R McCready; Kelly A Metcalfe Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2021-04-05 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Chelsea Anderson; Jessica Y Islam; M Elizabeth Hodgson; Susan A Sabatino; Juan L Rodriguez; Clara N Lee; Dale P Sandler; Hazel B Nichols Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2017-01-05 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Clara Nan-Hi Lee; Michael Patrick Pignone; Allison M Deal; Lillian Blizard; Caprice Hunt; Ruth Huh; Yuen-Jong Liu; Peter Anthony Ubel Journal: JAMA Surg Date: 2018-04-18 Impact factor: 14.766