Background: Patients considering postmastectomy radiation and reconstruction require information regarding expected outcomes to make preference-concordant decisions. Methods: A prospective multicenter cohort study of women diagnosed with breast cancer at 11 centers between 2012 and 2015 compared complications and patient-reported outcomes of 622 irradiated and 1625 unirradiated patients who received reconstruction. Patient characteristics and outcomes between irradiated and unirradiated patients were analyzed using ttests for continuous variables and chi-square tests for categorical variables. Multivariable mixed-effects regression modelsassessed the impact of reconstruction type and radiotherapy on outcomes after adjusting for relevant covariates. All statistical tests were two-sided. Results: Autologous reconstruction was more commonly received by irradiated patients (37.9% vs 25.0%, P < .001). Immediate reconstruction was less common in irradiated patients (83.0% vs 95.7%, P < .001). At least one breast complication had occurred by two years in 38.9% of irradiated patients with implant reconstruction, 25.6% of irradiated patients with autologous reconstruction, 21.8% of unirradiated patients with implant reconstruction, and 28.3% of unirradiated patients with autologous reconstruction. Multivariable analysis showed bilateral treatment and higher body mass index to be predictive of developing a complication, with a statistically significant interaction between radiotherapy receipt and reconstruction type. Among irradiated patients, autologous reconstruction was associated with a lower risk of complications than implant-based reconstruction at two years (odds ratio [OR] = 0.47, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.27 to 0.82, P = .007); no between-procedure difference was found in unirradiated patients. The interaction was also statistically significant for satisfaction with breasts at two years (P = .002), with larger adjusted difference in satisfaction between autologous vs implant approaches (63.5, 95% CI = 55.9 to 71.1, vs 47.7, 95% CI = 40.2 to 55.2, respectively) in irradiated patients than between autologous vs implant approaches (67.6, 95% CI = 60.3 to 74.9, vs 60.5, 95% CI = 53.6 to 67.4) in unirradiated patients. Conclusions: Autologous reconstruction appears to yield superior patient-reported satisfaction and lower risk of complications than implant-based approaches among patients receiving postmastectomy radiotherapy.
Background: Patients considering postmastectomy radiation and reconstruction require information regarding expected outcomes to make preference-concordant decisions. Methods: A prospective multicenter cohort study of women diagnosed with breast cancer at 11 centers between 2012 and 2015 compared complications and patient-reported outcomes of 622 irradiated and 1625 unirradiated patients who received reconstruction. Patient characteristics and outcomes between irradiated and unirradiated patients were analyzed using ttests for continuous variables and chi-square tests for categorical variables. Multivariable mixed-effects regression modelsassessed the impact of reconstruction type and radiotherapy on outcomes after adjusting for relevant covariates. All statistical tests were two-sided. Results: Autologous reconstruction was more commonly received by irradiated patients (37.9% vs 25.0%, P < .001). Immediate reconstruction was less common in irradiated patients (83.0% vs 95.7%, P < .001). At least one breast complication had occurred by two years in 38.9% of irradiated patients with implant reconstruction, 25.6% of irradiated patients with autologous reconstruction, 21.8% of unirradiated patients with implant reconstruction, and 28.3% of unirradiated patients with autologous reconstruction. Multivariable analysis showed bilateral treatment and higher body mass index to be predictive of developing a complication, with a statistically significant interaction between radiotherapy receipt and reconstruction type. Among irradiated patients, autologous reconstruction was associated with a lower risk of complications than implant-based reconstruction at two years (odds ratio [OR] = 0.47, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.27 to 0.82, P = .007); no between-procedure difference was found in unirradiated patients. The interaction was also statistically significant for satisfaction with breasts at two years (P = .002), with larger adjusted difference in satisfaction between autologous vs implant approaches (63.5, 95% CI = 55.9 to 71.1, vs 47.7, 95% CI = 40.2 to 55.2, respectively) in irradiated patients than between autologous vs implant approaches (67.6, 95% CI = 60.3 to 74.9, vs 60.5, 95% CI = 53.6 to 67.4) in unirradiated patients. Conclusions: Autologous reconstruction appears to yield superior patient-reported satisfaction and lower risk of complications than implant-based approaches among patients receiving postmastectomy radiotherapy.
Authors: M Overgaard; M B Jensen; J Overgaard; P S Hansen; C Rose; M Andersson; C Kamby; M Kjaer; C C Gadeberg; B B Rasmussen; M Blichert-Toft; H T Mouridsen Journal: Lancet Date: 1999-05-15 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: M Overgaard; P S Hansen; J Overgaard; C Rose; M Andersson; F Bach; M Kjaer; C C Gadeberg; H T Mouridsen; M B Jensen; K Zedeler Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 1997-10-02 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Reshma Jagsi; Jing Jiang; Adeyiza O Momoh; Amy Alderman; Sharon H Giordano; Thomas A Buchholz; Steven J Kronowitz; Benjamin D Smith Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2014-02-18 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Ashish K Chawla; Lisa A Kachnic; Alphonse G Taghian; Andrzej Niemierko; Daniel T Zapton; Simon N Powell Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2002-10-01 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Katherine B Santosa; Xiaoxue Chen; Ji Qi; Tiffany N S Ballard; Hyungjin M Kim; Jennifer B Hamill; Jessica M Bensenhaver; Andrea L Pusic; Edwin G Wilkins Journal: Plast Reconstr Surg Date: 2016-10 Impact factor: 4.730
Authors: Adeyiza O Momoh; Raouf Ahmed; Brian P Kelley; Oluseyi Aliu; Kelley M Kidwell; Jeffrey H Kozlow; Kevin C Chung Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2013-10-01 Impact factor: 5.344
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
Authors: Thomas Hehr; René Baumann; Wilfried Budach; Marciana-Nona Duma; Jürgen Dunst; Petra Feyer; Rainer Fietkau; Wulf Haase; Wolfgang Harms; David Krug; Marc D Piroth; Felix Sedlmayer; Rainer Souchon; Frederick Wenz; Rolf Sauer Journal: Strahlenther Onkol Date: 2019-08-26 Impact factor: 3.621
Authors: Won Sup Yoon; Chai Hong Rim; Dae Sik Yang; Jung Ae Lee; Gil Soo Son; Young Woo Chang; Sang Uk Woo; Deok-Woo Kim; Eun-Sang Dhong Journal: Ann Transl Med Date: 2019-12