Quality of Life and Patient-Reported Outcomes in Breast Cancer Survivors: A Multicenter Comparison of Four Abdominally Based Autologous Reconstruction Methods. Issue 3 (March 2016)
- Record Type:
- Journal Article
- Title:
- Quality of Life and Patient-Reported Outcomes in Breast Cancer Survivors: A Multicenter Comparison of Four Abdominally Based Autologous Reconstruction Methods. Issue 3 (March 2016)
- Main Title:
- Quality of Life and Patient-Reported Outcomes in Breast Cancer Survivors
- Authors:
- Macadam, Sheina A.
Zhong, Toni
Weichman, Katie
Papsdorf, Michael
Lennox, Peter A.
Hazen, Alexes
Matros, Evan
Disa, Joseph
Mehrara, Babak
Pusic, Andrea L. - Abstract:
- Abstract : Background: Approximately 20 percent of women select autologous tissue for postmastectomy breast reconstruction, and most commonly choose the abdomen as the donor site. An increasing proportion of women are seeking muscle-sparing procedures, but the benefit remains controversial. It is therefore important to determine whether better outcomes are associated with these techniques, thereby justifying longer operative times and increased costs. Methods: Patients from five North American centers were eligible if they underwent reconstruction by means of the deep inferior epigastric artery perforator (DIEP) flap, muscle-sparing free transverse abdominis myocutaneous (TRAM) flap, free TRAM flap, or the pedicled TRAM flap. Patients were sent the BREAST-Q. Demographics and complications were collected. Results: The authors analyzed 1790 charts representing 670 DIEP, 293 muscle-sparing free TRAM, 683 pedicled TRAM, and 144 free TRAM patients with an average follow-up of 5.5 years. Flap loss did not differ by flap type. Partial flap loss was higher in pedicled TRAM compared with DIEP ( p = 0.002). Fat necrosis was higher in pedicled TRAM compared with DIEP and muscle-sparing free TRAM ( p < 0.001). Hernia/bulge was highest in pedicled TRAM ( p < 0.001). Physical well-being (abdomen) scores were higher in DIEP compared with pedicled TRAM controlling for confounders. Conclusions: Complications and patient-reported outcomes differ when comparing abdominally based breastAbstract : Background: Approximately 20 percent of women select autologous tissue for postmastectomy breast reconstruction, and most commonly choose the abdomen as the donor site. An increasing proportion of women are seeking muscle-sparing procedures, but the benefit remains controversial. It is therefore important to determine whether better outcomes are associated with these techniques, thereby justifying longer operative times and increased costs. Methods: Patients from five North American centers were eligible if they underwent reconstruction by means of the deep inferior epigastric artery perforator (DIEP) flap, muscle-sparing free transverse abdominis myocutaneous (TRAM) flap, free TRAM flap, or the pedicled TRAM flap. Patients were sent the BREAST-Q. Demographics and complications were collected. Results: The authors analyzed 1790 charts representing 670 DIEP, 293 muscle-sparing free TRAM, 683 pedicled TRAM, and 144 free TRAM patients with an average follow-up of 5.5 years. Flap loss did not differ by flap type. Partial flap loss was higher in pedicled TRAM compared with DIEP ( p = 0.002). Fat necrosis was higher in pedicled TRAM compared with DIEP and muscle-sparing free TRAM ( p < 0.001). Hernia/bulge was highest in pedicled TRAM ( p < 0.001). Physical well-being (abdomen) scores were higher in DIEP compared with pedicled TRAM controlling for confounders. Conclusions: Complications and patient-reported outcomes differ when comparing abdominally based breast reconstruction techniques. The results of this study show that the DIEP flap was associated with the highest abdominal well-being and the lowest abdominal morbidity compared with the pedicled TRAM flap, but did not differ from muscle-sparing free TRAM and free TRAM flaps. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, III. … (more)
- Is Part Of:
- Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Volume 137:Issue 3(2016:Mar.)
- Journal:
- Plastic and reconstructive surgery
- Issue:
- Volume 137:Issue 3(2016:Mar.)
- Issue Display:
- Volume 137, Issue 3 (2016)
- Year:
- 2016
- Volume:
- 137
- Issue:
- 3
- Issue Sort Value:
- 2016-0137-0003-0000
- Page Start:
- Page End:
- Publication Date:
- 2016-03
- Subjects:
- Surgery, Plastic -- Periodicals
617.95205 - Journal URLs:
- http://journals.lww.com ↗
- DOI:
- 10.1097/01.prs.0000479932.11170.8f ↗
- Languages:
- English
- ISSNs:
- 0032-1052
- Deposit Type:
- Legaldeposit
- View Content:
- Available online (eLD content is only available in our Reading Rooms) ↗
- Physical Locations:
- British Library DSC - 6528.924000
British Library DSC - BLDSS-3PM
British Library HMNTS - ELD Digital store - Ingest File:
- 5235.xml