Literature DB >> 31418290

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

R Jeevan1,2.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Breast cancer usually necessitates breast-conserving surgery or mastectomy, which adversely affect appearance and wellbeing. Immediate reconstruction restores the breast mound but its availability and efficacy are uncertain.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two discrete datasets were used to evaluate mastectomies in England: Hospital Episode Statistics to measure overall activity and variation over time and by region and a national prospective audit to evaluate immediate reconstruction decision making, complication rates and patient-reported satisfaction with information, choice and outcomes.
RESULTS: The 2005-08 Hospital Episode Statistics analyses identified 20% breast-conserving surgery reoperation rates nationally, frequently involving mastectomy. Rates were higher with in-situ disease present (30% vs 18%) and varied across NHS trusts (10th-90th centiles 12-30%). The 2008-09 national audit examined 18,216 women. The 19% immediate reconstruction rate varied regionally (9-43%), as did 2006-09 Hospital Episode Statistics data (8-32%). A total of 48% of women were offered immediate reconstruction, again varying regionally (24-75%). Offer likelihood fell with increasing age. National immediate reconstruction rates increased from 10% to 23% from 2000 to 2014, but regional variation persisted. Despite high care satisfaction, just 65% of mastectomy patients received the right amount of reconstructive information (90% for immediate reconstruction). Women from deprived areas experienced higher complication rates. Flap-based immediate reconstruction led to greater satisfaction with breast area appearance, emotional and sexual wellbeing and overall outcome than mastectomy; implant-only immediate reconstruction scored no better.
CONCLUSION: Reconstruction is central to improving breast cancer outcomes. The differential outcomes and persistent regional inequalities identified should facilitate decision making, support improved access to all reconstructive options and inform the development of an optimal patient pathway.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Breast neoplasms; Breast reconstruction; Mastectomy; Outcomes; Patient satisfaction

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31418290      PMCID: PMC6996420          DOI: 10.1308/rcsann.2019.0101

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann R Coll Surg Engl        ISSN: 0035-8843            Impact factor:   1.891


  10 in total

1.  Measuring the patient perspective on latissimus dorsi donor site outcomes following breast reconstruction.

Authors:  John P Browne; Ranjeet Jeevan; Andrea L Pusic; Anne F Klassen; Carmel Gulliver-Clarke; Jerome Pereira; Christopher M Caddy; Stefan J Cano
Journal:  J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg       Date:  2017-09-13       Impact factor: 2.740

2.  Surgical Determinants of Patient-Reported Outcomes following Postmastectomy Reconstruction in Women with Breast Cancer.

Authors:  Ranjeet Jeevan; John P Browne; Carmel Gulliver-Clarke; Jerome Pereira; Christopher M Caddy; Jan H P van der Meulen; David A Cromwell
Journal:  Plast Reconstr Surg       Date:  2017-05       Impact factor: 4.730

3.  National trends and regional variation in immediate breast reconstruction rates.

Authors:  R Jeevan; J C Mennie; P N Mohanna; J M O'Donoghue; R M Rainsbury; D A Cromwell
Journal:  Br J Surg       Date:  2016-06-21       Impact factor: 6.939

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

Authors:  Ranjeet Jeevan; David A Cromwell; John P Browne; Christopher M Caddy; Jerome Pereira; Carmel Sheppard; Kimberley Greenaway; Jan H P van der Meulen
Journal:  J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg       Date:  2014-05-14       Impact factor: 2.740

5.  National trends in immediate and delayed post-mastectomy reconstruction procedures in England: A seven-year population-based cohort study.

Authors:  J C Mennie; P-N Mohanna; J M O'Donoghue; R Rainsbury; D A Cromwell
Journal:  Eur J Surg Oncol       Date:  2016-10-15       Impact factor: 4.424

6.  Socioeconomic deprivation and inpatient complication rates following mastectomy and breast reconstruction surgery.

Authors:  R Jeevan; J P Browne; J Pereira; C M Caddy; C Sheppard; J H P van der Meulen; D A Cromwell
Journal:  Br J Surg       Date:  2015-06-15       Impact factor: 6.939

7.  Regional variation in use of immediate breast reconstruction after mastectomy for breast cancer in England.

Authors:  R Jeevan; D A Cromwell; J P Browne; M Trivella; J Pereira; C M Caddy; C Sheppard; J H P van der Meulen
Journal:  Eur J Surg Oncol       Date:  2010-07-06       Impact factor: 4.424

8.  Association between age and access to immediate breast reconstruction in women undergoing mastectomy for breast cancer.

Authors:  R Jeevan; J P Browne; C Gulliver-Clarke; J Pereira; C M Caddy; J H P van der Meulen; D A Cromwell
Journal:  Br J Surg       Date:  2017-02-08       Impact factor: 6.939

9.  Trends in the use of bilateral mastectomy in England from 2002 to 2011: retrospective analysis of hospital episode statistics.

Authors:  Jenny Neuburger; Fiona Macneill; Ranjeet Jeevan; Jan H P van der Meulen; David A Cromwell
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2013-08-01       Impact factor: 2.692

10.  Reoperation rates after breast conserving surgery for breast cancer among women in England: retrospective study of hospital episode statistics.

Authors:  R Jeevan; D A Cromwell; M Trivella; G Lawrence; O Kearins; J Pereira; C Sheppard; C M Caddy; J H P van der Meulen
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2012-07-12
  10 in total
  4 in total

1.  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

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

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

3.  Breast cancer management pathways during the COVID-19 pandemic: outcomes from the UK 'Alert Level 4' phase of the B-MaP-C study.

Authors:  Ashu Gandhi; Cliona C Kirwan; Rajiv V Dave; Baek Kim; Alona Courtney; Rachel O'Connell; Tim Rattay; Vicky P Taxiarchi; Jamie J Kirkham; Elizabeth M Camacho; Patricia Fairbrother; Nisha Sharma; Christopher W J Cartlidge; Kieran Horgan; Stuart A McIntosh; Daniel R Leff; Raghavan Vidya; Shelley Potter; Chris Holcombe; Ellen Copson; Charlotte E Coles; Ramsey I Cutress
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2021-03-25       Impact factor: 7.640

4.  Cost-effectiveness of single-use negative-pressure therapy compared with standard care for prevention of reconstruction failure in prepectoral breast reconstruction.

Authors:  J A Murphy; D Myers; P Trueman; R Searle
Journal:  BJS Open       Date:  2021-03-05
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.