3
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Body mass index and nipple preservation are major contributors to satisfaction and aesthetic outcome rates after implant-based immediate breast reconstruction

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Introduction

          Immediate breast reconstructions (IBR) have become an integral part of modern breast cancer management. However, in a small breast unit the spectrum of methods used for IBR could be limited, which could result in poorer results in some cases. The aim of the study is to evaluate the patient satisfaction and aesthetic outcome results in a breast unit where only implant-based IBR were performed.

          Material and methods

          During 2009–2016, 64 cases of implant-based IBR were performed in the university hospital. 55 patients completed the questionnaire and 38 underwent evaluation by a plastic surgeon. 33 skin-sparing and 22 nipple-sparing mastectomies were included. The study included 30 two-stage expander/implant and 25 direct-toimplant IBR cases.

          Results

          Overall satisfaction was reported by 89% of respondents. 93% were satisfied with appearance in clothes and 82% with appearance in a bra. There was a significant difference with satisfaction in nude appearance between groups with a removed (3%) and a spared nipple (46%). The plastic surgeon evaluated overall outcome as satisfactory in 61% and poor in 39%. Spearman coefficient showed a moderate negative correlation between body mass index (BMI) and aesthetic outcome ( p = 0.02), as well as BMI and volume differences between breasts ( p = 0.03). Patients evaluated their breast symmetry as satisfactory in 55%, and the plastic surgeon concluded the same in 55% of 38 cases.

          Conclusions

          Most of the patients were satisfied with the aesthetic outcome of IBR. Nipple preservation considerably improved satisfaction rates. However, implant-based IBR revealed suboptimal cosmetic results in the subset of cases with increased BMI and other IBR methods should be considered in those cases.

          Related collections

          Most cited references11

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Comparison of implant-based immediate breast reconstruction with and without acellular dermal matrix.

          Acellular dermal matrix is frequently used in implant-based breast reconstruction to cover the inferior aspect of the breast pocket. Its performance profile remains equivocal. The authors studied whether adding it in implant-based immediate breast reconstruction improved outcomes when compared with non-acellular dermal matrix reconstruction. Patients undergoing implant-based immediate breast reconstruction at a single academic medical center were evaluated. Aesthetic outcomes and postoperative complications were assessed and direct comparisons were made between acellular dermal matrix and non-acellular dermal matrix cohorts. A total of 203 patients underwent 337 immediate expander-based breast reconstructions [with acellular dermal matrix, n=208 (61.7 percent); without, n=129 (38.3 percent)]. Patient characteristics, including age at time of reconstruction (mean, 49±11 versus 47±10 years) and body mass index (mean, 23±5 versus 23±3 kg/m) were similar between groups (p>0.05). Complications occurred in one-third of patients (33.5 percent). In univariate analyses, acellular dermal matrix use had fewer overall complications (odds ratio, 0.61; 95 percent CI, 0.38 to 0.97). The incidences of seroma/hematoma (p=0.59), infection (p=0.31), and wound complications (p=0.26) did not differ. Aesthetic outcomes were higher in the acellular dermal matrix group. In multivariate logistic regression, acellular dermal matrix use was associated with less capsular contracture (odds ratio, 0.18; 95 percent CI, 0.08 to 0.43) and mechanical shift (odds ratio, 0.23; 95 percent CI, 0.06 to 0.78). Optimizing the inframammary fold with acellular dermal matrix creates a superior aesthetic result. Its use appears safe and is associated with less capsular contracture and mechanical shift and improvement in the inframammary fold appearance, without increasing postoperative complications. Therapeutic, III.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            A Systematic Review and Head-to-Head Meta-Analysis of Outcomes following Direct-to-Implant versus Conventional Two-Stage Implant Reconstruction.

            Innovative approaches to reconstruction have ushered in an era of breast reconstruction in which direct-to-implant procedures can provide an immediately reconstructed breast. Balancing the benefits against its technical challenges is vital. The authors evaluated the safety and efficacy of using direct-to-implant versus conventional two-stage reconstruction through a systematic meta-analysis.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Does patient satisfaction with breast reconstruction change over time? Two-year results of the Michigan Breast Reconstruction Outcomes Study.

              Previously, we found patient satisfaction with breast reconstruction at postoperative year 1 significantly higher in the autogenous tissue compared with the expander/implant population. But breast reconstructive procedures have different "aging" processes, and the point at which outcomes stabilize is unclear. So we evaluated patient satisfaction with breast reconstruction at postoperative year 2 and compared the results with those from our previous study. As part of the Michigan Breast Reconstruction Outcomes Study, women undergoing mastectomy reconstruction (including expander/implants and pedicle and free transverse rectus abdominis musculocutaneous flaps [TRAM]) were prospectively evaluated. Preoperatively and at postoperative years 1 and 2, women completed a questionnaire that collected a variety of validated health status information. The postoperative questionnaire had an additional seven items assessing both general and esthetic satisfaction as separate subscales. To assess the effects of procedure on satisfaction and control for possible confounding, multiple logistic regression was used. At year 2, patients with TRAM flaps (both free and pedicle) continued to have higher levels of esthetic satisfaction compared with expander/implant patients (odds ratio 2.8, p < 0.01). But no significant differences were appreciated in esthetic satisfaction between women with free and pedicle TRAM flaps. In regard to general satisfaction, the type of reconstruction (expander/implant, pedicle TRAM, and free TRAM) had no statistically significant effect. At postoperative year 2, procedural differences initially found in women's general satisfaction with breast reconstruction diminish. Specifically, women with pedicle TRAM flaps, free TRAM flaps, and expander/implants had similar levels of general satisfaction. But at year 2, patients continue to be more esthetically satisfied with autogenous tissue than with expander/implant reconstructions.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Contemp Oncol (Pozn)
                Contemp Oncol (Pozn)
                WO
                Contemporary Oncology
                Termedia Publishing House
                1428-2526
                1897-4309
                13 June 2019
                2019
                : 23
                : 2
                : 96-99
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Surgery, Rīga Stradiņš University, Riga, Latvia
                [2 ]Breast Unit, Paul’s Stradiņš Clinical University Hospital, Riga, Latvia
                [3 ]Institute of Oncology, Riga Stradiņš University, Riga, Latvia
                Author notes
                Address for correspondence Stanislavs Ukleikins, Department of Surgery, Rīga Stradiņš University, 13 Pilsoņu iela, Rīga LV-1002, Latvia. e-mail: uk.stanislavs@ 123456gmail.com
                Article
                85881
                10.5114/wo.2019.85881
                6630387
                5364f260-3470-427c-8bf9-88e4fd339921
                Copyright: © 2019 Termedia Sp. z o. o.

                This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0) License, allowing third parties to copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format and to remix, transform, and build upon the material, provided the original work is properly cited and states its license.

                History
                : 08 March 2019
                : 08 May 2019
                Categories
                Original Paper

                immediate breast reconstruction,breast cancer
                immediate breast reconstruction, breast cancer

                Comments

                Comment on this article