-
Journal of Plastic, Reconstructive &... Mar 2021Post-mastectomy breast reconstruction (PMBR) is an important component of the multidisciplinary care of breast cancer patients. Despite the improved quality of life,...
INTRODUCTION
Post-mastectomy breast reconstruction (PMBR) is an important component of the multidisciplinary care of breast cancer patients. Despite the improved quality of life, significant racial disparities exist in the receipt of PMBR. Given the increasing population of Black, Asian and minority ethnic (BAME) women in UK, it is important to address this disparity. Our review aims to identify the barriers and facilitators influencing the uptake of PMBR in BAME women and raise awareness for physicians on interventions that could improve uptake of PMBR in BAME women.
METHODS
The methodology outlined by the Cochrane guidelines was used to structure this systematic review. Systematic searches for qualitative studies on barriers and/or facilitators to PMBR in ethnic women published in English were conducted. The following databases were searched from their inception up to June 2019: MEDLINE, EMBASE, PubMed, Cochrane Library, Google Scholar and Scopus. Reference lists of all included articles and relevant systematic reviews were also hand-searched for possible additional publications. Publication year or status restrictions were not applied. Only full text articles published in English and by peer reviewed journals are included. Exclusion criteria were as follows: quantitative studies on barriers and/or facilitators to PMBR, abstracts, conference proceedings, non-English language and non-specific to BAME women. A thematic synthesis approach was used through the development of sub-themes and themes from the findings of the included qualitative studies.
RESULTS
Five studies satisfied the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Three overarching themes emerged from our review: physician-associated factors (physician recommendations), patient-associated factors (knowledge, language, community and cultural, emotions, logistics, patient characteristics) and system-associated factors (insurance coverage, income status).
CONCLUSION
Our systematic review suggests that there is a paucity of data in the literature on the barriers and facilitators to PMBR in BAME women. Considering the expanding population of BAME women and increasing breast cancer incidence, it is imperative that future research in this field is carried out. Physician and patient-associated factors were identified as the most important yet modifiable factors. Adopting a combination of culturally tailored interventions targeting these factors may help improve the access of PMBR in BAME women.
REGISTRATION
Prospero ID: CRD42019133233.
Topics: Breast Neoplasms; Culturally Competent Care; Ethnicity; Female; Humans; Mammaplasty; Mastectomy; Patient Acceptance of Health Care; Quality of Life
PubMed: 33309318
DOI: 10.1016/j.bjps.2020.10.055 -
Annals of Surgical Oncology Jan 2023Implant-based breast reconstruction (IBBR) remains the standard and most popular option for women undergoing breast reconstruction after mastectomy worldwide. Recently,... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Implant-based breast reconstruction (IBBR) remains the standard and most popular option for women undergoing breast reconstruction after mastectomy worldwide. Recently, prepectoral IBBR has resurged in popularity, despite limited data comparing prepectoral with subpectoral IBBR.
METHODS
A systematic search of PubMed and Cochrane Library from January 1, 2011 to December 31, 2021, was performed following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) reporting guidelines, data were extracted by independent reviewers. Studies that compared prepectoral with subpectoral IBBR for breast cancer were included.
RESULTS
Overall, 15 studies with 3,101 patients were included in this meta-analysis. Our results showed that patients receiving prepectoral IBBR experienced fewer capsular contractures (odds ratio [OR], 0.54; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.32-0.92; P = 0.02), animation deformity (OR, 0.02; 95% CI, 0.00-0.25; P = 0.002), and prosthesis failure (OR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.42-0.80; P = 0.001). There was no significant difference between prepectoral and subpectoral IBBR in overall complications (OR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.64-1.09; P = 0.19), seroma (OR, 1.21; 95% CI, 0.59-2.51; P = 0.60), hematoma (OR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.49-1.18; P = 0.22), infection (OR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.63-1.20; P = 0.39), skin flap necrosis (OR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.45-1.08; P = 0.11), and recurrence (OR, 1.31; 95% CI, 0.52-3.39; P = 0.55). Similarly, no significant difference was found in Breast-Q scores between the prepectoral and subpectoral IBBR groups.
CONCLUSIONS
The results of our systematic review and meta-analysis demonstrated that prepectoral, implant-based, breast reconstruction is a safe modality and has similar outcomes with significantly lower rates of capsular contracture, prosthesis failure, and animation deformity compared with subpectoral, implant-based, breast reconstruction.
Topics: Female; Humans; Breast Neoplasms; Mammaplasty; Mastectomy; Prosthesis Failure
PubMed: 36245049
DOI: 10.1245/s10434-022-12567-0 -
Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery Jul 2021Reduction mammaplasty for macromastia is one of the most common operations performed by plastic surgeons. There remains hesitancy in operating on adolescents, as there... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Reduction mammaplasty for macromastia is one of the most common operations performed by plastic surgeons. There remains hesitancy in operating on adolescents, as there is ongoing debate about breast regrowth and potential impact on breastfeeding. The goal of this study was to analyze these concerns by reviewing the current literature.
METHODS
A systematic review of MEDLINE, Scopus, and Google Scholar was conducted using the following terms: "breast reduction" or "mammaplasty" or "breast reconstruction" and "adolescent" or "youth" or "pediatric" or "child" or "teen." Primary outcomes were success of breastfeeding after the procedure and procedure-related complications.
RESULTS
Twenty-three studies (87 percent retrospective), consisting of 2926 patients with preoperative cup sizes of C to KK (mean, DDD), met inclusion criteria. Mean age at the time of surgery ranged from 16 to 21 years, with the youngest patient being 12 years old. The overall complication rate was 27.3 percent (95 percent CI, 14.4 to 42.5 percent). Minor complications (22.8 percent; 95 percent CI, 10.2 to 38.5 percent) were more common than major (4.2 percent; 95 percent CI, 1.6 to 7.9 percent). Eighteen percent of patients (95 percent CI, 2.2 to 43.8 percent) reported regrowth of their breast tissue postoperatively, with 2.7 percent (95 percent CI, 0.9 to 5.5 percent) undergoing a second revision mammaplasty. Fifty-three percent of patients (95 percent CI, 36.0 to 69.3 percent) did not attempt breastfeeding. Of those who attempted, 55.1 percent (95 percent CI, 34.4 to 74.9 percent) were successful.
CONCLUSIONS
Prospective data are lacking. Patient counseling should focus on encouraging a trial of breastfeeding, despite surgical history. One-fifth of adolescent patients may notice breast regrowth postoperatively; however, the amount of regrowth is likely small and unlikely to reexacerbate symptoms, as the rate of revision surgery is small.
Topics: Adolescent; Age Factors; Breast; Breast Feeding; Child; Counseling; Female; Humans; Hypertrophy; Mammaplasty; Patient Education as Topic; Postoperative Complications; Practice Guidelines as Topic; Reoperation; Retrospective Studies; Symptom Flare Up; Time-to-Treatment; Treatment Outcome; Young Adult
PubMed: 34181602
DOI: 10.1097/PRS.0000000000008102 -
Journal of Reconstructive Microsurgery Oct 2021Stacked and conjoined (SC) flaps are a useful means of increasing flap volume in autologous breast reconstruction. The majority of studies, however, have been limited... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Stacked and conjoined (SC) flaps are a useful means of increasing flap volume in autologous breast reconstruction. The majority of studies, however, have been limited to smaller, single-center series.
METHODS
A systematic literature review was performed to identify outcomes-based studies on microvascular SC-flap breast reconstruction. Pooled rates of flap and operative characteristics were analyzed. Meta-analytic effect size estimates were calculated for reconstructive complication rates and outcomes of studies comparing SC flaps to non-SC flaps. Meta-regression analysis identified risk factors for flap complications.
RESULTS
Twenty-six studies were included for analysis (21 case series, five retrospective cohort studies) for a total of 869 patients, 1,003 breasts, and 2006 flaps. The majority of flaps were harvested from the bilateral abdomen (78%, 782 breasts) followed by combined abdomen-thigh stacked flaps (22.2%, 128 breasts). About 51.1% of flaps were anastomosed to anterograde/retrograde internal mammary vessels (230 breasts) and 41.8% used internal mammary/intraflap anastomoses (188 breasts). Meta-analysis revealed a rate of any flap complication of 2.3% (95% confidence interval: 1.4-3.3%), Q-statistic value = 0.012 ( = 43.3%). SC flaps had a decreased risk of fat necrosis compared with non-SC flaps (odds ratio = 0.126, < 0.0001, = 0.00%), though rates of any flap and donor-site complication were similar. Age, body mass index, flap weight, and flap donor site and recipient vessels were not associated with increased risk of any flap complication.
CONCLUSION
A global appraisal of the current evidence demonstrated the safety of SC-flap breast reconstruction with low complication rates, regardless of donor site, and lower rates of fat necrosis compared with non-SC flaps.
Topics: Breast; Humans; Mammaplasty; Mastectomy; Perforator Flap; Retrospective Studies
PubMed: 33592635
DOI: 10.1055/s-0041-1723820 -
Trends in Patient-Reported Outcomes Reporting in Breast Reconstruction: A Scoping Literature Review.Annals of Plastic Surgery May 2023Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) provide essential information in reconstructive surgery, where interventions center on patients' functional and aesthetic goals.... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) provide essential information in reconstructive surgery, where interventions center on patients' functional and aesthetic goals. Although multiple patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) have been validated for breast reconstruction since 2009, no studies have assessed recent frequency and consistency in use. This study aims to characterize recent trends in inclusion of PROs in recent breast reconstruction literature.
METHODS
Articles published between 2015 and 2021 pertaining to autologous and/or prosthetic breast reconstruction in Annals of Plastic Surgery and Journal of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery were considered in a scoping review. Original breast reconstruction articles were reviewed for use of PROMs and characteristics of administration in accordance with PRISMA-Scr guidelines. Previously defined scoping review criteria were considered, including PROM used, timeline of collection, and topics addressed, with trends in frequency and consistency of usage assessed over the designated period.
RESULTS
Of the 877 articles reviewed and 232 articles included, 24.6% reported using any PROM. The majority used BREAST-Q (n = 42, 73.7%), with the remainder being institutional surveys or previously validated questionnaires. Patient-reported outcomes were most often collected retrospectively (n = 20, 64.9%) and postoperatively (n = 33, 57.9%). The average time point of postoperative survey administration was 16.03 months (SD, 19.185 months). χ2 Analysis revealed no significant association between the numbers of articles, including PROMs and the year (P = 0.1047).
CONCLUSIONS
This study demonstrates that only one-fourth of breast reconstruction articles report the use of PROMs with no interval increase over recent years. Patient-reported outcome measures were predominantly used retrospectively and postoperatively with notable variation in timing of administration. The findings highlight the need for improved frequency and consistency of PROM collection and reporting, as well as for further exploration into barriers and facilitators of PROM use.
Topics: Humans; Retrospective Studies; Mammaplasty; Patient Reported Outcome Measures; Surveys and Questionnaires; Esthetics
PubMed: 37146316
DOI: 10.1097/SAP.0000000000003545 -
BMC Surgery Sep 2021There is no consensus for when publicly funded breast reduction is indicated and recommendations in guidelines vary greatly, indicating a lack of evidence and unequal... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
There is no consensus for when publicly funded breast reduction is indicated and recommendations in guidelines vary greatly, indicating a lack of evidence and unequal access. The primary aim of this review was to examine risks and benefits of breast reduction to treat breast hypertrophy. Secondary aims were to examine how the studies defined breast hypertrophy and indications for a breast reduction.
METHODS
A systematic literature search was conducted in PubMed, MEDLINE All, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and PsycInfo. The included articles were critically appraised, and certainty of evidence was assessed using the GRADE approach. Meta-analyses were performed when possible.
RESULTS
Fifteen articles were included; eight reporting findings from four randomised controlled trials, three non-randomised controlled studies, three case series, and one qualitative study. Most studies had serious study limitations and problems with directness. Few of the studies defined breast hypertrophy. The studies showed significantly improved health-related quality of life and sexuality-related outcomes in patients who had undergone breast reduction compared with controls, as well as reduced depressive symptoms, levels of anxiety and pain. Most effect sizes exceeded the reported minimal important difference for the scale. Certainty of evidence for the outcomes above is low (GRADE ⊕ ⊕). Although four studies reported significantly improved physical function, the effect is uncertain (very low certainty of evidence, GRADE ⊕). None of the included studies reported data regarding work ability or sick leave. Three case series reported a 30-day mortality of zero. Reported major complications after breast reduction ranged from 2.4 to 14% and minor complications from 2.4 to 69%.
CONCLUSION
There is a lack of high-quality studies evaluating the results of breast reduction. A breast reduction may have positive psychological and physical effects for women, but it is unclear which women benefit the most and which women should be offered a breast reduction in the public healthcare system. Several priorities for further research have been identified.
PRE-REGISTRATION
The study is based on a Health Technology Assessment report, pre-registered and then published on the website of The Regional HTA Centre of Region Västra Götaland, Sweden.
Topics: Anxiety; Delivery of Health Care; Female; Humans; Mammaplasty; Quality of Life; Risk Assessment
PubMed: 34511096
DOI: 10.1186/s12893-021-01336-7 -
Journal of Clinical Nursing Apr 2023To systematically evaluate the effects of decision aids for women facing breast reconstruction decision on decision conflict, decision regret, knowledge, satisfaction,... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
AIMS AND OBJECTIVES
To systematically evaluate the effects of decision aids for women facing breast reconstruction decision on decision conflict, decision regret, knowledge, satisfaction, anxiety and depression.
BACKGROUND
Breast reconstruction decision is not good or bad and should be guided by clinical evidence and patient preferences. Decision aids can increase the patient's decision-making enthusiasm and ability, improve the quality of decision and promote shared decision-making between patients and medical staff.
DESIGN
Systematic review and meta-analysis.
METHODS
Eight databases were conducted from the establishment of the database until October 2021. The PRISMA checklist was selected for analysis in this paper. The meta-analysis was conducted in Review Manager 5.3. The quality of the studies was assessed using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool. The result is decision conflict, decision regret, knowledge and other secondary outcomes. Sensitivity analysis and subgroup analysis were also conducted.
RESULTS
A total of twelve randomised controlled trials (RCTs) were included in the systematic review and meta-analysis. Meta-analysis revealed that decision aids could significantly reduce decision conflict and decision regret, improve knowledge, satisfaction and depression and had no influence on anxiety.
CONCLUSIONS
The results of the systematic review and meta-analysis reviewed the positive effect of decision aids on the decision-making of women facing postmastectomy breast reconstruction. In the future, more well-designed RCTs are needed to confirm the effects of decision aids on the decision-making of breast reconstruction and nurses should be encouraged to take part in the development of decision aids in accordance with strict standards and apply them to breast cancer patients considering postmastectomy breast reconstruction.
RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE
Our study provides evidence for the effectiveness of decision aids on breast reconstruction and points to the important role of healthcare providers in the use of decision aids and in facilitating shared decision-making.
Topics: Female; Humans; Anxiety; Emotions; Anxiety Disorders; Mammaplasty; Decision Support Techniques; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 35460127
DOI: 10.1111/jocn.16328 -
Journal of Plastic, Reconstructive &... Nov 2023Animal-derived acellular dermal matrices (ADMs) are increasingly being used in prepectoral direct-to-implant (DTI) breast reconstruction. However, the indications and... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Animal-derived acellular dermal matrices (ADMs) are increasingly being used in prepectoral direct-to-implant (DTI) breast reconstruction. However, the indications and complication profile associated with this type of reconstruction remain unclear. This study aimed to perform a systematic review of the available literature on the use of animal-derived ADM in prepectoral DTI breast reconstruction.
METHODS
Three different literature databases, namely, PubMed, Web of Sciences, and Embase were screened using the following keywords: "immediate" AND "pre-pectoral" OR "prepectoral" AND "ADM breast reconstruction." Animal-derived ADM used (porcine - Braxon® and non-Braxon® - and bovine - Surgimend®) anthropometric information, clinical data, and complications profile were considered.
RESULTS
A total of 340 articles were initially identified, of which only 45 articles (5089 patients and 6598 reconstructed breasts) satisfied our inclusion criteria. The most widely used ADM was Braxon® in the context of conservative mastectomies. In most studies, a subcutaneous layer > 1 cm and lack of previous radiotherapy were considered prerequisites for this type of reconstruction. An increased risk of complications was found in smokers, patients who underwent radiation treatment, patients with high breast volumes, and patients with cancers requiring axillary dissection. Data related to the role of diabetes, high body mass index, and breast implant size on surgical outcomes were instead inconcludent. Age was not directly proportional to the complications.
CONCLUSION
The complications associated with different animal-derived ADMs are generally comparable. The profile of patients required for eligibility for this type of reconstruction appears to have been identified and is in line with current recommendations.
Topics: Humans; Animals; Cattle; Swine; Female; Mastectomy; Acellular Dermis; Breast Neoplasms; Mammaplasty; Breast Implantation; Breast Implants; Retrospective Studies
PubMed: 37716255
DOI: 10.1016/j.bjps.2023.08.020 -
Aesthetic Plastic Surgery Aug 2021Women with macromastia experienced constitutional and psychosocial symptoms which could be improved by vertical scar or Inverted-T scar reduction mammaplasty. The... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Women with macromastia experienced constitutional and psychosocial symptoms which could be improved by vertical scar or Inverted-T scar reduction mammaplasty. The authors conducted the first systematic review and meta-analysis in an attempt to declare the differences of the vertical scar versus the Inverted-T scar reduction technique by comparing the postoperative complications and aesthetic effects.
METHODS
PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, Scopus and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases for clinical studies were searched through June 30, 2019. Cumulative analysis was conducted using the Review Manager Version 5.3 software. The summary odds ratio (OR) was estimated using random effect models at 95% confidence intervals (CIs), statistical heterogeneity was tested using the Chi-square test and risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Handbook 5.1.0 and the Newcastle-Ottawa scale (NOS).
RESULTS
Two randomized controlled trials (RCT) and nine observational comparative studies were included. The vertical scar method was significantly lower than the Inverted-T scar method in overall incidence of complications (OR: 2.06; 95%CI, 1.15 to 3.70; P: 0.002) and wound dehiscence (OR: 4.62; 95%CI, 2.33 to 9.16; P<0.00001). No significant differences in seroma, hematoma, nipple necrosis, fat necrosis and reoperation were noted.
CONCLUSIONS
Both two breast reduction techniques are equally safe, while the vertical scar approach resulted in a statistically lower rate of overall complications and wound dehiscence.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE III
This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine Ratings, please refer to Table of Contents or online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .
Topics: Cicatrix; Esthetics; Female; Follow-Up Studies; Humans; Hypertrophy; Mammaplasty; Retrospective Studies; Seroma; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 33649925
DOI: 10.1007/s00266-021-02167-w -
Journal of Plastic, Reconstructive &... Oct 2023Recent studies have successfully employed perioperative protocols and Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocols to promote and increase the range of breast... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Recent studies have successfully employed perioperative protocols and Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocols to promote and increase the range of breast reconstruction procedures performed in ambulatory settings. This systematic review aims to identify the common perioperative protocol items associated with successful ambulatory breast reconstruction.
METHODS
A systematic review of electronic databases (Ovid Medline, EMBASE, and Cochrane) was conducted. Studies that described the perioperative care protocol for postmastectomy breast reconstruction in ambulatory settings (discharge within 24 h) were included. Two reviewers independently screened the literature and extracted the data. Risk of bias was assessed with the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute quality tool. The perioperative protocol details, type of reconstruction, information regarding patient selection criteria, successful discharge rates, and complication rates were extracted.
RESULTS
Twelve studies were included in the systematic review, with 1484 patients undergoing ambulatory breast reconstruction with a well-defined perioperative protocol. Sixteen perioperative items were identified. The most discussed items were preoperative counseling (11/12), preoperative and intraoperative multimodal analgesia (11/12), and postoperative analgesia (10/12). Our recommendation includes two new items and seven modified items compared to previous ERAS guidelines. Overall, the mean number of items was 9.22 in same-day discharge and 6.75 in 24-h discharge (P = 0.169). 78.4% of the patients (1123 of 1433) were successfully discharged within 24 h. No studies identified an increase in readmission or complications with ambulatory discharge.
CONCLUSION
Sixteen core items were defined for a successful perioperative ERAS protocol for 24-h discharge breast reconstruction. Implementing perioperative protocols can facilitate under-24-h discharge for alloplastic and autologous surgery.
Topics: Female; Humans; Breast Neoplasms; Enhanced Recovery After Surgery; Length of Stay; Mammaplasty; Mastectomy; Perioperative Care
PubMed: 37536192
DOI: 10.1016/j.bjps.2023.06.075