Long-term Patient-Reported Outcomes in Postmastectomy Breast Reconstruction

被引:346
作者
Santosa, Katherine B. [1 ]
Qi, Ji [1 ]
Kim, Hyungjin M. [2 ,3 ]
Hamill, Jennifer B. [1 ]
Wilkins, Edwin G. [1 ]
Pusic, Andrea L. [4 ,5 ]
机构
[1] Univ Michigan Hlth Syst, Dept Surg, Sect Plast Surg, Ann Arbor, MI USA
[2] Univ Michigan, Ctr Stat Consultat & Res, Ann Arbor, MI 48109 USA
[3] Univ Michigan, Dept Biostat, Ann Arbor, MI 48109 USA
[4] Mem Sloan Kettering Canc Ctr, Dept Surg, Plast & Reconstruct Surg Serv, 1275 York Ave, New York, NY 10021 USA
[5] Brigham Hlth, Dept Surg, Div Plast & Reconstruct Surg, 75 Francis St, Boston, MA 02115 USA
基金
美国国家卫生研究院;
关键词
CONTRALATERAL PROPHYLACTIC MASTECTOMY; CANCER; SATISFACTION; DECISIONS; QUALITY; TRENDS; RADIOTHERAPY; CONSORTIUM; RADIATION; IMPLANT;
D O I
10.1001/jamasurg.2018.1677
中图分类号
R61 [外科手术学];
学科分类号
摘要
IMPORTANCE Previous outcome studies comparing implant and autologous breast reconstruction techniques have been limited by short-term follow-up, single-center design, and a lack of rigorous patient-reported outcome data. An understanding of the expected satisfaction and breast-related quality of life associated with each type of procedure is central to the decision-making process. OBJECTIVE To determine outcomes reported by patients undergoing postmastectomy breast reconstruction using implant or autologous techniques 2 years after surgery. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Patients were recruited from 11 centers (57 plastic surgeons) across North America for the Mastectomy Reconstruction Outcomes Consortium study, a prospective, multicenter trial, from February 1, 2012, to July 31, 2015. Women undergoing immediate breast reconstruction using implant or autologous tissue reconstruction after mastectomy for cancer treatment or prophylaxis were eligible. Overall. 2013 women (1490 implant and 523 autologous tissue reconstruction) met the inclusion criteria. All patients included in this analysis had 2 years of follow-up. EXPOSURES Procedure type (ie, implant vs autologous tissue reconstruction). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary outcomes of interest were scores on the BREAST-Q, a validated, condition-specific, patient-reported outcome instrument, which were collected prior to and at 2 years after surgery. The following 4 domains of the BREAST-Q reconstruction module were evaluated: satisfaction with breasts, psychosocial well-being, physical well-being, and sexual well-being. Responses from each scale were summed and transformed on a 0 to 100 scale, with higher numbers representing greater satisfaction or quality of life. RESULTS Of the 2013 women in the study (mean [SD] age, 48.1 [10.5] years for the group that underwent implant-based reconstruction and 51.6 [8.7] years for the group that underwent autologous reconstruction), 1217 (60.5%) completed questionnaires at 2 years after reconstruction, After controlling for baseline patient characteristics, patients who underwent autologous reconstruction had greater satisfaction with their breasts (difference, 7.94; 95% CI, 5.68-10.20; P < .001), psychosocial well-being (difference, 3.27; 95% CI, 1.25-5.29; P = .002), and sexual well-being (difference, 5.53; 95% CI, 2.95-8.11; P < .001) at 2 years compared with patients who underwent implant reconstruction. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE At 2 years, patients who underwent autologous reconstruction were more satisfied with their breasts and had greater psychosocial well-being and sexual well-being than did those who underwent implant reconstruction. These findings can inform patients and their clinicians about expected satisfaction and quality of life outcomes of autologous vs implant-based procedures and further support the adoption of shared decision making in clinical practice.
引用
收藏
页码:891 / 899
页数:9
相关论文
共 30 条
[1]   Bilateral Mastectomy versus Breast-Conserving Surgery for Early-Stage Breast Cancer: The Role of Breast Reconstruction [J].
Albornoz, Claudia R. ;
Matros, Evan ;
Lee, Clara N. ;
Hudis, Clifford A. ;
Pusic, Andrea L. ;
Elkin, Elena ;
Bach, Peter B. ;
Cordeiro, Peter G. ;
Morrow, Monica .
PLASTIC AND RECONSTRUCTIVE SURGERY, 2015, 135 (06) :1518-1526
[2]   Implant Breast Reconstruction and Radiation: A Multicenter Analysis of Long-Term Health-Related Quality of Life and Satisfaction [J].
Albornoz, Claudia R. ;
Matros, Evan ;
McCarthy, Colleen M. ;
Klassen, Anne ;
Cano, Stefan J. ;
Alderman, Amy K. ;
VanLaeken, Nancy ;
Lennox, Peter ;
Macadam, Sheina A. ;
Disa, Joseph J. ;
Mehrara, Babak J. ;
Cordeiro, Peter G. ;
Pusic, Andrea L. .
ANNALS OF SURGICAL ONCOLOGY, 2014, 21 (07) :2159-2164
[3]   Does patient satisfaction with breast reconstruction change over time? Two-year results of the Michigan breast reconstruction outcomes study [J].
Alderman, Amy K. ;
Kuhn, Latoya E. ;
Lowery, Julie C. ;
Wilkins, Edwin G. .
JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF SURGEONS, 2007, 204 (01) :7-12
[4]  
Andrich D, 2011, EXPERT REV PHARM OUT, V11, P571, DOI [10.1586/ERP.11.59, 10.1586/erp.11.59]
[5]  
Berry MG, 1998, ANN ROY COLL SURG, V80, P173
[6]  
Bhat S, 2017, AM SURGEON, V83, P233
[7]   Contralateral Prophylactic Mastectomy with Immediate Breast Reconstruction Increases Healthcare Utilization and Cost [J].
Boughey, Judy C. ;
Schilz, Stephanie R. ;
Van Houten, Holly K. ;
Zhu, Lin ;
Habermann, Elizabeth B. ;
Lemaine, Valerie .
ANNALS OF SURGICAL ONCOLOGY, 2017, 24 (10) :2957-2964
[8]   Interpreting Clinical Differences in BREAST-Q Scores: Minimal Important Difference [J].
Cano, Stefan J. ;
Klassen, Anne F. ;
Scott, Amie ;
Alderman, Amy ;
Pusic, Andrea L. .
PLASTIC AND RECONSTRUCTIVE SURGERY, 2014, 134 (01) :173E-175E
[9]   The BREAST-Q: Further Validation in Independent Clinical Samples [J].
Cano, Stefan J. ;
Klassen, Anne F. ;
Scott, Amie M. ;
Cordeiro, Peter G. ;
Pusic, Andrea L. .
PLASTIC AND RECONSTRUCTIVE SURGERY, 2012, 129 (02) :293-302
[10]   A Paradigm Shift in U.S. Breast Reconstruction: Part 2. The Influence of Changing Mastectomy Patterns on Reconstructive Rate and Method [J].
Cemal, Yeliz ;
Albornoz, Claudia R. ;
Disa, Joseph J. ;
McCarthy, Colleen M. ;
Mehrara, Babak J. ;
Pusic, Andrea L. ;
Cordeiro, Peter G. ;
Matros, Evan .
PLASTIC AND RECONSTRUCTIVE SURGERY, 2013, 131 (03) :320E-326E