-
Breast Cancer Research and Treatment Sep 2017Although there is no consensus on whether pre-operative MRI in women with breast cancer (BC) benefits surgical treatment, MRI continues to be used pre-operatively in... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Although there is no consensus on whether pre-operative MRI in women with breast cancer (BC) benefits surgical treatment, MRI continues to be used pre-operatively in practice. This meta-analysis examines the association between pre-operative MRI and surgical outcomes in BC.
METHODS
A systematic review was performed to identify studies reporting quantitative data on pre-operative MRI and surgical outcomes (without restriction by type of surgery received or type of BC) and using a controlled design. Random-effects logistic regression calculated the pooled odds ratio (OR) for each surgical outcome (MRI vs. no-MRI groups), and estimated ORs stratified by study-level age. Subgroup analysis was performed for invasive lobular cancer (ILC).
RESULTS
Nineteen studies met eligibility criteria: 3 RCTs and 16 comparative studies that included newly diagnosed BC of any type except for three studies restricted to ILC. Primary analysis (85,975 subjects) showed that pre-operative MRI was associated with increased odds of receiving mastectomy [OR 1.39 (1.23, 1.57); p < 0.001]; similar findings were shown in analyses stratified by study-level median age. Secondary analyses did not find statistical evidence of an effect of MRI on the rates of re-excision, re-operation, or positive margins; however, MRI was significantly associated with increased odds of receiving contralateral prophylactic mastectomy [OR 1.91 (1.25, 2.91); p = 0.003]. Subgroup analysis for ILC did not find any association between MRI and the odds of receiving mastectomy [OR 1.00 (0.75, 1.33); p = 0.988] or the odds of re-excision [OR 0.65 (0.35, 1.24); p = 0.192].
CONCLUSIONS
Pre-operative MRI is associated with increased odds of receiving ipsilateral mastectomy and contralateral prophylactic mastectomy as surgical treatment in newly diagnosed BC patients.
Topics: Breast Neoplasms; Female; Humans; Magnetic Resonance Imaging; Mastectomy; Mastectomy, Segmental; Odds Ratio; Preoperative Care; Prognosis; Reoperation; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 28589366
DOI: 10.1007/s10549-017-4324-3 -
Breast (Edinburgh, Scotland) Apr 2016Several complex treatment decisions may be offered to women with early stage breast cancer, about a range of treatments from different modalities including surgery,... (Review)
Review
Several complex treatment decisions may be offered to women with early stage breast cancer, about a range of treatments from different modalities including surgery, radiotherapy, and endocrine and chemotherapy. Decision aids can facilitate shared decision-making and improve decision-related outcomes. We aimed to systematically identify, describe and appraise the literature on treatment decision aids for women with early breast cancer, synthesise the data and identify breast cancer decisions that lack a decision aid. A prospectively developed search strategy was applied to MEDLINE, the Cochrane databases, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Web of Science and abstract databases from major conferences. Data were extracted into a pre-piloted form. Quality and risk of bias were measured using Qualsyst criteria. Results were synthesised into narrative format. Thirty-three eligible articles were identified, evaluating 23 individual treatment decision aids, comprising 13 randomised controlled trial reports, seven non-randomised comparative studies, eight single-arm pre-post studies and five cross-sectional studies. The decisions addressed by these decision aids were: breast conserving surgery versus mastectomy (+/- reconstruction); use of chemotherapy and/or endocrine therapy; radiotherapy; and fertility preservation. Outcome measures were heterogeneous, precluding meta-analysis. Decisional conflict decreased, and knowledge and satisfaction increased, without any change in anxiety or depression, in most studies. No studies were identified that evaluated decision aids for neoadjuvant systemic therapy, or contralateral prophylactic mastectomy. Decision aids are available and improved decision-related outcomes for many breast cancer treatment decisions including surgery, radiotherapy, and endocrine and chemotherapy. Decision aids for neoadjuvant systemic therapy and contralateral prophylactic mastectomy could not be found, and may be warranted.
Topics: Breast Neoplasms; Cross-Sectional Studies; Decision Making; Decision Support Techniques; Drug Therapy; Early Detection of Cancer; Female; Fertility Preservation; Humans; Mastectomy; Mastectomy, Segmental; Radiotherapy; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 27017240
DOI: 10.1016/j.breast.2015.12.007 -
Breast Cancer (Tokyo, Japan) Sep 2018Prophylactic mastectomy is used to reduce the incidence of breast cancer in women with genetic predisposition and family history of breast cancer, and the rate of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Prophylactic mastectomy is used to reduce the incidence of breast cancer in women with genetic predisposition and family history of breast cancer, and the rate of application is increased nowadays. Chronic pain, body image, and sexuality may negatively affect quality of life, while patients generally have increased quality of life and satisfaction after prophylactic mastectomy. The aim of this study is the evaluation of the results of the studies about quality of life of patients who underwent breast reconstruction after prophylactic mastectomy.
METHODS
For the 1996-2016 literature, we searched the databases of Scopus, Science Direct, PubMed, EBSCO, Cochrane, Medline Complete, Ovid, Springer Link, Google Academic, Taylor & Francis, PsychINFO databases. For the gray literature, National Thesis Center and ULAKBIM databases were searched. Seven studies complying with the criteria were included in the review.
RESULTS
Seven studies included in this study aimed to investigate the effect of prophylactic mastectomy on breast pain, numbness, sexuality and quality of life. When the studies were reviewed, we were found that the majority of the patients were satisfied with the results of the procedure, although the body image perception and pain/ movement/ perception and sexual problems were experienced after the breast surgery.
CONCLUSIONS
While overall satisfaction with cosmetic results was high, most women were not satisfied with the softness of the reconstructed breasts, and had problems with breast hardness, numbness and sex. Therefore, it is very important to inform the patients about the complications that may develop after the operation, while there is not enough data about the importance of informing the patients before the operation.
Topics: Breast Implants; Breast Neoplasms; Female; Humans; Mammaplasty; Prophylactic Mastectomy; Quality of Life
PubMed: 29721811
DOI: 10.1007/s12282-018-0862-8 -
Medicine Jul 2020Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) is a common complication after mastectomy. Although many researches have been studied the prophylactic effect of antiemetics,... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) is a common complication after mastectomy. Although many researches have been studied the prophylactic effect of antiemetics, none of the results are effective. To overcome this problem, dexamethasone was used to relieve the occurrence of PONV. Since concerns about steroid-related morbidity still remain, We carried out a meta-analysis to evaluate the impact of prophylactic dexamethasone on PONV, post-operative pain undergoing mastectomy.
METHODS
Literature search was conducted through PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, MEDLINE, and Cochrane library database till June 2019 to identify eligible studies. Meanwhile, we also consulted some Chinese periodicals, such as China Academic Journals, Wanfang and Weipu. The research was reported according to the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analysis guidelines. Randomized controlled trials were included in our meta-analysis. Meanwhile, the assessment of the risk of bias was conducted according to the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions version. The pooled data are processed by software RevMan 5.3.
RESULTS
Four studies with 490 patients were enrolled to this meta-analysis. Our study demonstrated that the dexamethasone group was significantly more effective than the placebo group in term of PONV (risk ratio [RR] = 0.46, 95% confidence intervals [CI]: 0.30-0.70, P = .0003), nausea (RR = 0.26, 95% CI: 0.10-0.68, P = .006) and vomiting (RR = 0.15, 95% CI: 0.04∼0.55, P = .004). The visual analog scale score was significantly diminished at 1 hour (weighted mean difference = -1.40, 95% CI: -1.53 to -1.26, P < .00001) in the dexamethasone group, while, no statistically significant difference was observed between the two groups in terms of visual analog scale at 24 hours (weighted mean difference = -0.56, 95% CI: -1.24 to 0.13, P = 0.11).
CONCLUSION
Not only does Dexamethasone reduce the incidence of PONV but also decreases postoperative pain. However, we still need larger samples and higher quality studies to determine the relationship between symptoms and administration time to reach the conclusion.
TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER
PROSPERO CRD 42018118575.
Topics: Antiemetics; Dexamethasone; Humans; Mastectomy; Pain, Postoperative; Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting
PubMed: 32791759
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000021417 -
Annals of Plastic Surgery Oct 2021Complications from prosthetic breast reconstruction are distressing for patients, and their management is challenging. For decades, negative-pressure wound therapy... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Complications from prosthetic breast reconstruction are distressing for patients, and their management is challenging. For decades, negative-pressure wound therapy (NPWT) has been successfully used for the closure of complex wounds. This study analyzes the outcomes of NPWT use in the prevention and management of complications from prosthetic breast reconstruction.
METHOD
A systematic search of studies published until August 2020 was conducted using the PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Ebscohost/CINAHL databases and using the following key words: "negative-pressure wound therapy," "breast reconstruction," and "prosthesis" (including breast implants and tissue expanders). Analyzed endpoints were outcomes of NPWT use in prosthetic breast reconstruction compared with conventional dressings. The methodological quality of included studies was assessed independently. Comparative studies were further meta-analyzed to obtain pooled odds ratios (ORs) describing the effectiveness of NPWT in prosthetic breast reconstruction.
RESULTS/DISCUSSION
Ten studies were included with a total of 787 patients (1230 breasts) undergoing prosthetic breast reconstruction with breast implants or tissue expanders. Three case-control studies focused on preventing breast wound complications. The meta-analysis of the 3 studies included 502 breasts receiving NPWT and 698 breasts receiving conventional wound care. The meta-analysis favored NPWT for less mastectomy flap necrosis (5.6% vs 14.3%; OR, 0.46; 95% confidence interval, 0.27 -0.77; P = 0.004; I2 = 0%) and less overall wound complications (10.6% vs 21.1%; OR, 0.49; 95% confidence interval, 0.35-0.70; P < 0.00001; I2 = 0%). In the management of nipple-areolar complex venous congestion, 1 case report demonstrated 85% rescue of nipple-areolar complex after using NPWT (-75 mm Hg) for a total of 12 days. In the management of periprosthetic infections, 2 case series used NPWT with instillation. It accelerated the treatment of infection and maintained the breast cavity for future reconstruction. Conventional NPWT also showed good salvage outcome in four studies.
CONCLUSIONS
Current evidence suggests that prophylactic use of NPWT in prosthetic breast reconstruction reduces the rate of overall wound complications and mastectomy flap necrosis. In the management of complications from prosthetic breast reconstructions, NPWT may be a promising option showing beneficial results. Additional high-quality trials are warranted to corroborate the findings of this systematic review.
Topics: Breast Neoplasms; Female; Humans; Mammaplasty; Mastectomy; Negative-Pressure Wound Therapy; Surgical Wound Infection; Wound Healing
PubMed: 34060773
DOI: 10.1097/SAP.0000000000002722 -
The Breast Journal 2016The gain by performing sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) during prophylactic mastectomy (PM) is debatable, and we performed a meta-analysis of existing literature to... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
The gain by performing sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) during prophylactic mastectomy (PM) is debatable, and we performed a meta-analysis of existing literature to evaluate that the role of SLNB in subjects undergoing PM. A systematic search was conducted using MEDLINE, PubMed, EMBASE, Current Contents Connect, Cochrane library, Google Scholar, Science Direct, and Web of Science. The search identified 11 relevant articles reporting on patients who underwent SLNB at the time of PM. Data were abstracted from each study and used to calculate a pooled odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (95% CI). We included 14 studies comprising of 2,708 prophylactic mastectomies. Among 2,708 prophylactic mastectomies, the frequency of occult invasive cancer (51 cases) was 1.8% and the rate of positive SLNs (33 cases) was 1.2%. In 25 invasive cancers at the time of PM were found to have negative SLNs which avoided axillary lymph node dissection (ALND). In seven cases with positive SLNBs were found not to have invasive cancer at the time of PM and needed a subsequent ALND. Most of the patients with positive SLNs had locally advanced disease in the contralateral breast. SLNB may be suitable for patients with ipsilateral, locally advanced breast cancer and is not recommend for all patients undergoing PM.
Topics: Breast Neoplasms; Elective Surgical Procedures; Female; Humans; Lymph Node Excision; Lymphatic Metastasis; Mastectomy; Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy
PubMed: 26748493
DOI: 10.1111/tbj.12549 -
Cureus Sep 2020Gastric cancer is the third-most fatal cancer in the world. Though over the years, we saw patients mostly with intestinal type accounting for the highest mortality... (Review)
Review
Gastric cancer is the third-most fatal cancer in the world. Though over the years, we saw patients mostly with intestinal type accounting for the highest mortality rate, the recent rise of the diffuse form with germline E-cadherin (CDH1) mutations has added a whole new level of interest to study in detail about the association between CDH1 and diffuse gastric cancer (DGC). This introduced a set guideline formulated by Internal Gastric Cancer Linkage Consortium (IGCLC) for patients with family history of diffuse gastric cancer and invasive lobular breast cancer (ILBC). The analysis of this link was also important to set proper management protocol for patients who were CDH1 mutation carriers which now involves genetic counselling, endoscopic surveillance and screening and prophylactic total gastrectomy (PTG). The study was conducted in accordance to the 'PRISMA guidelines for reporting systematic review and meta-analysis'. Peer-reviewed studies were included from the PubMed database and relevant articles were selected to be included in the study. Appropriate inclusion/exclusion criteria with free full text English articles were applied while selecting the articles. A total of 10 studies on review with different study populations showed that of the 42 patients who were diagnosed with diffuse gastric cancer, 88% of them showed a positive germline E-cadherin gene mutation and 100% of the CDH1 mutation carriers showed microscopic changes of signet ring cell adenocarcinoma of the stomach. The beneficial effects of PTG with better survival rates and low mortality rates has outweighed other treatment modalities. Laparoscopic approach has proved to be more useful and a safer approach for gastrectomy surgeries with better post-operative management. The need for prophylactic mastectomy is also increased in the recent times and thus this requires a new set of guidelines for ILBC patients with hereditary diffuse gastric cancer (HDGC) syndrome.
PubMed: 33062523
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.10406 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... May 2016Breast cancer is the most common cancer in women worldwide, and is a leading cause of cancer death among women. Prophylactic or curative mastectomy is often followed by... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Breast cancer is the most common cancer in women worldwide, and is a leading cause of cancer death among women. Prophylactic or curative mastectomy is often followed by breast reconstruction for which there are several surgical approaches that use breast implants with which surgeons can restore the natural feel, size and shape of the breast.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of different types of breast implants on capsular contracture, surgical short- and long-term complications, postoperative satisfaction level and quality of life in women who have undergone reconstructive breast surgery after mastectomy.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Breast Cancer Group's Specialised Register on 20 July 2015, MEDLINE (1985 to 20 July 2015), EMBASE (1985 to 20 July 2015) and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; Issue 8, 2015). We also searched the World Health Organization's International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (WHO ICTRP) and ClinicalTrials.gov on 16 July 2015.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs that compared different types of breast implants for reconstructive surgery. We considered the following types of intervention: implant envelope surfaces - texturised versus smooth; implant filler material - silicone versus saline, PVP-Hydrogel versus saline; implant shape - anatomical versus round; implant volume - variable versus fixed; brands - different implant manufacturing companies and implant generation (fifth versus previous generations).
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently assessed methodological quality and extracted data. We used standard Cochrane methodological procedures. The quality of the evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system.
MAIN RESULTS
Five RCTs with 202 participants met the inclusion criteria. The women participants were typically in their 50s, and the majority of them (about 82%) received reconstructive surgery following breast cancer, while the others had reconstructive surgery after prophylactic mastectomy. The studies were heterogenous in terms of implant comparisons, which prevented us from pooling the data.The studies were judged as being at an unclear risk of bias for most risk of bias items owing to poor quality of reporting in the trial publications. Three of the five RCTs were judged to be at high risk of attrition bias, and one at high risk of detection bias.Textured silicone versus smooth silicone implants: textured implants were associated with worse outcomes when compared to smooth implants (capsular contracture: risk ratio (RR) 0.82, 95% CI 0.14 to 4.71; 1 study, 20 participants; very low quality evidence; reintervention: RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.14 to 4.71; 1 study, 20 participants; very low quality evidence). No results in this comparison were statistically significant.Silicone versus saline implants: saline-filled implants performed better than silicone-filled implants for some outcomes; specifically, they produced less severe capsular contracture (RR 3.25, 95% CI 1.24 to 8.51; 1 study, 60 participants; very low quality evidence) and increased patient satisfaction (RR 0.60, 95% CI 0.41 to 0.88; 1 study, 58 participants; very low quality evidence). However reintervention was significantly more frequent in the saline-filled implant group than in the silicone-filled group (OR 0.08, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.43; 1 study, 60 participants; very low quality evidence).Poly(N-vinyl-2-pyrrolidone) hydrogel-filled (PVP-hydrogel) versus saline-filled implants: PVP-hydrogel-filled implants were associated with worse outcomes when compared to saline-filled implants (capsular contracture: RR 3.50, 95% CI 0.83 to 14.83; 1 study, 40 participants; very low quality evidence; short-term complications: RR 2.10, 95% CI 0.21 to 21.39; 1 study, 41 participants; very low quality evidence).Anatomical versus round implants: anatomical implants were associated with worse outcomes than round implants (capsular contracture: RR 2.00, 95% CI 0.20 to 20.15; 1 study, 36 participants; very low quality evidence; short-term complications: RR 2.00, 95% CI 0.42 to 9.58; 1 study, 36 participants; very low quality evidence; reintervention: RR 1.50, 95% CI 0.51 to 4.43; 1 study, 36 participants; very low quality evidence). No results in this comparison were statistically significant.Variable-volume versus fixed-volume implants: data about one-stage reconstruction using variable-volume implants were compared with data about fixed-volume implants positioned during the second surgical procedure of two-stage reconstructions. Fixed-volume implant reconstructions were possibly associated with a greater number of women reporting that their reconstruction corresponded with expected results (RR 0.25, 95% CI 0.10 to 0.62; 1 study, 40 participants; very low quality evidence) and fewer reinterventions (RR 7.00, 95% CI 1.82 to 26.89; 1 study, 40 participants; very low quality evidence) when compared to variable-volume implants. A higher patient satisfaction level (rated from 1 to 6, with 1 being very bad and 6 being very good) was found with the fixed-volume implants for overall aesthetic result (mean difference (MD) -1.10, 95% CI -1.59 to -0.61; 1 study, 40 participants; very low quality evidence).There were no studies that examined the effects of recent (fifth) generation silicone implants versus previous generations or different implant manufacturing companies.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Despite the central role of breast reconstruction in women with breast cancer, the best implants to use in reconstructive surgery have been studied rarely in the context of RCTs. Furthermore the quality of these studies and the overall evidence they provide is largely unsatisfactory. Some of our results can be interpreted as early evidence of potentially large differences between different surgical approaches, which should be confirmed in new high-quality RCTs that include a larger number of women. These days - even after a few million women have had breasts reconstructed - surgeons cannot inform women about the risks and complications of different implant-based breast reconstructive options on the basis of results derived from RCTs.
Topics: Breast Implants; Breast Neoplasms; Female; Humans; Hydrogels; Mammaplasty; Mastectomy; Middle Aged; Patient Satisfaction; Prophylactic Surgical Procedures; Prosthesis Failure; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Silicone Gels; Sodium Chloride
PubMed: 27182693
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD010895.pub2 -
Current Oncology (Toronto, Ont.) Mar 2023Female pathogenic variant carriers have an increased lifetime risk for breast and ovarian cancer. Cancer-unaffected women who are newly diagnosed with this pathogenic... (Review)
Review
Female pathogenic variant carriers have an increased lifetime risk for breast and ovarian cancer. Cancer-unaffected women who are newly diagnosed with this pathogenic variant may experience psychological distress because of imminent health threat. No comprehensible review on psychological morbidity in cancer-unaffected pathogenic variant carriers is currently available. This review aims to give an overview about all available the studies in which psychological outcomes have been assessed in cancer-unaffected pathogenic variant carriers, whether as a primary outcome or secondary measurement. A systematic search across four databases (Web of Science, PubMed, ScienceDirect, and EBSCO) was conducted. Studies had to report on cancer-unaffected pathogenic variant carriers (exclusively or separately) and use a validated measure of psychological morbidity to be eligible. Measures were only included if they were used in at least three studies. The final review consisted of 45 studies from 13 countries. Distress measures, including anxiety and cancer worry, were most often assessed. Most studies found a peak of distress immediately after genetic test result disclosure, with a subsequent decline over the following months. Only some studies found elevated distress in carriers compared to non-carriers in longer follow-ups. Depression was frequently investigated but largely not found to be of clinical significance. Quality of life seemed to be largely unaffected by a positive genetic test result, although there was some evidence that younger women, especially, were less satisfied with their role functioning in life. Body image has been infrequently assessed so far, but the evidence suggested that there may be a decrease in body image after genetic test result disclosure that may decrease further for women who opt for a prophylactic mastectomy. Across all the outcomes, various versions of instruments were used, often limiting the comparability among the studies. Hence, future research should consider using frequently used instruments, as outlined by this review. Finally, while many studies included cancer-unaffected carriers, they were often not reported on separately, which made it difficult to draw specific conclusions about this population.
Topics: Female; Humans; BRCA1 Protein; Quality of Life; Breast Neoplasms; BRCA2 Protein; Mastectomy
PubMed: 37185387
DOI: 10.3390/curroncol30040274 -
The Patient Jul 2022The aims of this review were (i) to evaluate whether patient-reported outcome measures used in clinical studies for assessing sensation after mastectomy and breast...
AIMS
The aims of this review were (i) to evaluate whether patient-reported outcome measures used in clinical studies for assessing sensation after mastectomy and breast reconstruction are suitable for this purpose, and (ii) to explore whether any measures used for assessing sensation after non-oncologic breast surgery are worth modifying for use in post-mastectomy patients.
METHODS
PRISMA guidelines were followed (PROSPERO number CRD42020178066). We searched six databases for studies of oncologic (i.e., therapeutic, prophylactic, and reconstructive) and non-oncologic breast surgery (e.g., breast reduction) in which sensation was assessed with a patient-reported outcome measure. From the selected studies, we extracted eligible measures, evaluated their fitness for purpose, and summarized the content of sensation-specific items.
RESULTS
Of 6728 articles identified, we selected 135 studies that used 124 eligible patient-reported outcome measures. For 97% of these measures, details regarding development and measurement properties were unavailable. Four (3%) validated measures-the Sensory Disturbances subscale of the Breast Cancer Sequelae Cause Scales, the Discomfort subscale of the Breast Sensation Assessment Scale (BSAS), Didier et al.'s questionnaire for "Assessment of the patients' satisfaction with cosmetic results, physical and emotional impact of mastectomy", and the Breast Specific Pain subscale of the Breast Cancer Treatment Outcomes Scale (BCTOS)-each contain at least one item pertaining to breast sensation, but target different concepts of interest. In total, the measures feature 215 sensation-specific items, most of which concern symptom severity (97%) as opposed to impact on daily functioning (3%).
CONCLUSION
Patient-reported outcome measures used in clinical studies for assessing sensation after mastectomy and breast reconstruction are unsuitable for this purpose: they are either non-validated or non-specific. We failed to identify any measures for use in non-oncologic breast surgery populations worth modifying. To collect meaningful, patient-relevant data regarding sensation after mastectomy, it is pertinent that future clinical trials adopt psychometrically robust, specific patient-reported outcome measures.
Topics: Breast Neoplasms; Female; Humans; Mammaplasty; Mastectomy; Patient Reported Outcome Measures; Patient Satisfaction; Quality of Life; Sensation
PubMed: 35040096
DOI: 10.1007/s40271-021-00565-5