Literature DB >> 30114323

Quality of life and sexual well-being after nipple sparing mastectomy: A matched comparison of patients using the breast Q.

Kahyun Yoon-Flannery1, Lauren M DeStefano2, Lucy M De La Cruz3, Carla S Fisher4, Lisa Y Lin3, Lauren S Coffua5, Rose E Mustafa6, Dahlia M Sataloff3, Julia C Tchou3, Ari D Brooks3.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Nipple sparing mastectomy (NSM) is considered safe for select patients. Our objective was to examine quality of life (QOL) and satisfaction for NSM compared with skin sparing mastectomy (SSM). We aimed to evaluate these using the BREAST-Q.
METHODS: After IRB approval, we analyzed patients who underwent NSM and reconstruction between July 2010-June 2015. NSM patients were matched with those after SSM based on age, race, and body mass index. Telephone interviews were prospectively conducted using the BREAST-Q Mastectomy Postoperative Module. Bivariate analysis and a paired samples t-test were performed.
RESULTS: We identified 43 patients meeting our inclusion criteria with a response rate 60% (N = 26). NSM and SSM patients were matched well in age (P = 1.00), race (P = 1.00), and Body Mass Index (P = 0.99). There were no significant differences in stage, estrogen and progesterone status, HER2 expression, reconstruction type and radiation. Mean BREAST-Q scores did not vary between NSM and SSM in regards to satisfaction with breasts (P = 0.604), psychosocial well-being (P = 0.146), physical well-being (P = 0.121), and satisfaction with surgeon (P = 0.170). Sexual well-being was significantly higher in NSM patients (P = 0.011).
CONCLUSION: NSM provides patients with favorable results in psychosocial, sexual, and physical well-being and overall satisfaction. Sexual well-being showed significant improvement for NSM.
© 2018 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Entities:  

Keywords:  nipple sparing mastectomy; quality of life; sexual well-being

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 30114323     DOI: 10.1002/jso.25107

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Surg Oncol        ISSN: 0022-4790            Impact factor:   3.454


  5 in total

1.  Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy versus Skin-Sparing Mastectomy: Does Saving the Nipple Impact Short- and Long-Term Patient Satisfaction?

Authors:  Bridget N Kelly; Heather R Faulkner; Barbara L Smith; Jenna E Korotkin; Conor R Lanahan; Carson Brown; Michele A Gadd; Michelle C Specht; Kevin S Hughes; T Salewa Oseni; Amy S Colwell; Suzanne B Coopey
Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol       Date:  2021-09-08       Impact factor: 5.344

2.  Prospective pilot study protocol evaluating the safety and feasibility of robot-assisted nipple-sparing mastectomy (RNSM).

Authors:  Ko Un Park; Sandy Lee; Angela Sarna; Matthew Chetta; Steven Schulz; Doreen Agnese; Valerie Grignol; William Carson; Roman J Skoracki
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2021-11-15       Impact factor: 2.692

3.  Satisfaction and Quality of Life of Healthy and Unilateral Diseased BRCA1/2 Pathogenic Variant Carriers after Risk-Reducing Mastectomy and Reconstruction Using the BREAST-Q Questionnaire.

Authors:  Natalie Herold; Martin Hellmich; Frank Lichtenheldt; Beyhan Ataseven; Vanessa Hillebrand; Barbara Wappenschmidt; Rita Katharina Schmutzler; Kerstin Rhiem
Journal:  Genes (Basel)       Date:  2022-07-28       Impact factor: 4.141

4.  What Is in a Number? Evaluating a Risk Assessment Tool in Immediate Breast Reconstruction.

Authors:  Jordan D Frey; Ara A Salibian; Jonathan M Bekisz; Mihye Choi; Nolan S Karp; Vishal D Thanik
Journal:  Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open       Date:  2019-12-31

5.  The Role of Sharp Dissection in Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy: A Safe Procedure with No Necrosis of the Nipple-Areolar Complex.

Authors:  Ci-Qiu Yang; Fei Ji; Hong-Fei Gao; Liu-Lu Zhang; Mei Yang; Teng Zhu; Min-Yi Chen; Jie-Qing Li; Kun Wang
Journal:  Cancer Manag Res       Date:  2019-12-04       Impact factor: 3.989

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.