Literature DB >> 28346808

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

Andrea L Pusic1, Evan Matros1, Neil Fine1, Edward Buchel1, Gayle M Gordillo1, Jennifer B Hamill1, Hyungjin M Kim1, Ji Qi1, Claudia Albornoz1, Anne F Klassen1, Edwin G Wilkins1.   

Abstract

Purpose The goals of immediate postmastectomy breast reconstruction are to minimize deformity and optimize quality of life as perceived by patients. We prospectively evaluated patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in women undergoing immediate implant-based or autologous reconstruction. Methods Women undergoing immediate postmastectomy reconstruction for invasive cancer and/or carcinoma in situ were enrolled at 11 sites. Women underwent implant-based or autologous tissue reconstruction. Patients completed the BREAST-Q, a condition-specific PRO measure for breast surgery patients, and Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System-29, a generic PRO measure, before and 1 year after surgery. Mean changes in PRO scores were summarized. Mixed-effects regression models were used to compare PRO scores across procedure types. Results In total, 1,632 patients (n = 1,139 implant, n = 493 autologous) were included; 1,183 (72.5%) responded to 1-year questionnaires. After analysis was controlled for baseline values, patients who underwent autologous reconstruction had greater satisfaction with their breasts than those who underwent implant-based reconstruction (difference, 6.3; P < .001), greater sexual well-being (difference, 4.5; P = .003), and greater psychosocial well-being (difference, 3.7; P = .02) at 1 year. Patients in the autologous reconstruction group had improved satisfaction with breasts (difference, 8.0; P = .002) and psychosocial well-being (difference, 4.6; P = .047) compared with preoperative baseline. Physical well-being of the chest was not fully restored in either the implant group (difference, -3.8; P = .001) or autologous group (-2.2; P = .04), nor was physical well-being of the abdomen in patients who underwent autologous reconstruction (-13.4; P < .001). Anxiety and depression were mitigated at 1 year in both groups. Compared with their baseline reports, patients who underwent implant reconstruction had decreased fatigue (difference, -1.4; P = .035), whereas patients who underwent autologous reconstruction had increased pain interference (difference, 2.0; P = .006). Conclusion At 1 year after mastectomy, patients who underwent autologous reconstruction were more satisfied with their breasts and had greater psychosocial and sexual well-being than those who underwent implant reconstruction. Although satisfaction with breasts was equal to or greater than baseline levels, physical well-being was not fully restored. This information can help patients better understand expected outcomes and may guide innovations to improve outcomes.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28346808      PMCID: PMC5536162          DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2016.69.9561

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Oncol        ISSN: 0732-183X            Impact factor:   44.544


  50 in total

1.  Use of autologous and microsurgical breast reconstruction by U.S. plastic surgeons.

Authors:  Anita R Kulkarni; Erika Davis Sears; Dunya M Atisha; Amy K Alderman
Journal:  Plast Reconstr Surg       Date:  2013-09       Impact factor: 4.730

2.  Discussion. Sensibility following innervated free TRAM flap for breast reconstruction: Part II. Innervation improves patient-rated quality of life.

Authors:  Amy K Alderman; Kevin C Chung
Journal:  Plast Reconstr Surg       Date:  2009-11       Impact factor: 4.730

3.  Increasing national mastectomy rates for the treatment of early stage breast cancer.

Authors:  Usama Mahmood; Alexandra L Hanlon; Matthew Koshy; Robert Buras; Saranya Chumsri; Katherine H Tkaczuk; Sally B Cheston; William F Regine; Steven J Feigenberg
Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol       Date:  2012-11-08       Impact factor: 5.344

4.  Skin-Reduction Breast Reconstructions with Prepectoral Implant.

Authors:  Glenda Giorgia Caputo; Alberto Marchetti; Edoardo Dalla Pozza; Enrico Vigato; Lavinia Domenici; Emanuele Cigna; Maurizio Governa
Journal:  Plast Reconstr Surg       Date:  2016-06       Impact factor: 4.730

5.  Prepectoral implant placement and complete coverage with porcine acellular dermal matrix: a new technique for direct-to-implant breast reconstruction after nipple-sparing mastectomy.

Authors:  Roland Reitsamer; Florentia Peintinger
Journal:  J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg       Date:  2014-10-16       Impact factor: 2.740

6.  Trends in contralateral prophylactic mastectomy for unilateral cancer: a report from the National Cancer Data Base, 1998-2007.

Authors:  Katharine Yao; Andrew K Stewart; David J Winchester; David P Winchester
Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol       Date:  2010-05-12       Impact factor: 5.344

7.  Increase in contralateral prophylactic mastectomy: echoes of a bygone era? Surgical trends for unilateral breast cancer.

Authors:  Chee-Chee H Stucky; Richard J Gray; Nabil Wasif; Amylou C Dueck; Barbara A Pockaj
Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol       Date:  2010-09-19       Impact factor: 5.344

8.  Patient satisfaction and health-related quality of life after autologous tissue breast reconstruction: a prospective analysis of early postoperative outcomes.

Authors:  Toni Zhong; Colleen McCarthy; Sandar Min; Jing Zhang; Brett Beber; Andrea L Pusic; Stefan O P Hofer
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2011-10-24       Impact factor: 6.860

9.  Experience with a generic quality of life instrument in a general surgical practice.

Authors:  V Velanovich
Journal:  Int J Surg Investig       Date:  2000

Review 10.  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

View more
  61 in total

1.  Elective Revisions after Breast Reconstruction: Results from the Mastectomy Reconstruction Outcomes Consortium.

Authors:  Jonas A Nelson; Sophocles H Voineskos; Ji Qi; Hyungjin M Kim; Jennifer B Hamill; Edwin G Wilkins; Andrea L Pusic
Journal:  Plast Reconstr Surg       Date:  2019-12       Impact factor: 4.730

2.  Secondary use of electronic medical records for clinical research: Challenges and Opportunities.

Authors:  Wen-Wai Yim; Amanda J Wheeler; Catherine Curtin; Todd H Wagner; Tina Hernandez-Boussard
Journal:  Converg Sci Phys Oncol       Date:  2018-02-12

3.  Impact of Radiotherapy on Complications and Patient-Reported Outcomes After Breast Reconstruction.

Authors:  Reshma Jagsi; Adeyiza O Momoh; Ji Qi; Jennifer B Hamill; Jessica Billig; Hyungjin M Kim; Andrea L Pusic; Edwin G Wilkins
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2018-02-01       Impact factor: 13.506

Review 4.  Current Therapeutic Approaches to DCIS.

Authors:  Kaleigh Doke; Shirley Butler; Melissa P Mitchell
Journal:  J Mammary Gland Biol Neoplasia       Date:  2018-09-29       Impact factor: 2.673

5.  PROMIS® Adult Health Profiles: Efficient Short-Form Measures of Seven Health Domains.

Authors:  David Cella; Seung W Choi; David M Condon; Ben Schalet; Ron D Hays; Nan E Rothrock; Susan Yount; Karon F Cook; Richard C Gershon; Dagmar Amtmann; Darren A DeWalt; Paul A Pilkonis; Arthur A Stone; Kevin Weinfurt; Bryce B Reeve
Journal:  Value Health       Date:  2019-05       Impact factor: 5.725

6.  Introducing BREAST-Q Computerized Adaptive Testing: Short and Individualized Patient-Reported Outcome Assessment following Reconstructive Breast Surgery.

Authors:  Danny A Young-Afat; Christopher Gibbons; Anne F Klassen; Andrew J Vickers; Stefan J Cano; Andrea L Pusic
Journal:  Plast Reconstr Surg       Date:  2019-03       Impact factor: 4.730

7.  The past, the present and the future of UK breast reconstruction-are our practices outdated in 2020?

Authors:  Primeera Wignarajah; Parto Forouhi; Charles M Malata
Journal:  Gland Surg       Date:  2020-08

Review 8.  Incorporating Patient-Reported Outcome Measures into Breast Surgical Oncology: Advancing Toward Value-Based Care.

Authors:  Mirelle Lagendijk; Elizabeth Mittendorf; Tari A King; Christopher Gibbons; Andrea Pusic; Laura S Dominici
Journal:  Oncologist       Date:  2019-12-17

9.  Long-term Patient-Reported Outcomes in Postmastectomy Breast Reconstruction.

Authors:  Katherine B Santosa; Ji Qi; Hyungjin M Kim; Jennifer B Hamill; Edwin G Wilkins; Andrea L Pusic
Journal:  JAMA Surg       Date:  2018-10-01       Impact factor: 14.766

10.  Met and Unmet Expectations for Breast Reconstruction in Early Posttreatment Breast Cancer Survivors.

Authors:  Laurie E Steffen; Aimee Johnson; Beverly J Levine; Deborah K Mayer; Nancy E Avis
Journal:  Plast Surg Nurs       Date:  2017 Oct/Dec
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.