-
Journal of Gastrointestinal and Liver... Jun 2024Mammoplasty, a common cosmetic procedure involving breast augmentation and reduction surgeries, has gained global popularity. Recently, attention has shifted towards...
BACKGROUND AND AIMS
Mammoplasty, a common cosmetic procedure involving breast augmentation and reduction surgeries, has gained global popularity. Recently, attention has shifted towards understanding the prevalence and significance of gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms following mammoplasty. This systematic review aims to consolidate existing literature to provide a comprehensive overview of the type and frequency of GI problems associated with various mammoplasty procedures.
METHODS
A systematic search of PubMed and Scopus databases was conducted until January 22, 2024, identifying observational and interventional studies examining GI symptoms post-mammoplasty. Inclusion criteria covered human studies, while exclusion criteria ensured specificity. Two independent investigators performed screening, and data extraction included study characteristics, surgical procedures, anesthesia methods, and interventions.
RESULTS
Nineteen studies, involving 2,487 subjects, were included in the review. Breast reconstruction emerged as the most studied procedure, followed by breast reduction, augmentation, mastectomy, and breast cancer surgery. Predominant GI symptoms included nausea and vomiting, with varying rates across mammoplasty types. Anesthesia modality influenced symptomatology, with general, local, and combined anesthesia associated with GI disturbances. Antiemetics, notably ondansetron and droperidol, showed variable efficacy. Non-pharmacological approaches, such as preoperative hypnosis, were explored for symptom management.
CONCLUSIONS
Our systematic review reveals insights into GI symptoms post-mammoplasty, emphasizing the common occurrence of symptoms such as nausea and vomiting, alongside less frequent manifestations such as constipation, dry mouth, retching, abdominal pain, and tightness. Variations in symptom prevalence were noted across diverse mammoplasty surgeries, anesthesia methods, and the use of antiemetics, underscoring the complex nature of post-mammoplasty GI disturbances.
Topics: Humans; Mammaplasty; Female; Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting; Gastrointestinal Diseases; Adult; Prevalence
PubMed: 38944853
DOI: 10.15403/jgld-5598 -
British Journal of Hospital Medicine... Jun 2024Seroma formation is the most common complication following breast surgery. However, there is little evidence on the readability of online patient education materials on... (Review)
Review
Seroma formation is the most common complication following breast surgery. However, there is little evidence on the readability of online patient education materials on this issue. This study aimed to assess the accessibility and readability of the relevant online information. This systematic review of the literature identified 37 relevant websites for further analysis. The readability of each online article was assessed through using a range of readability formulae. The average Flesch-Reading Ease score for all patient education materials was 53.9 (± 21.9) and the average Flesch-Kincaid reading grade level was 7.32 (± 3.1), suggesting they were 'fairly difficult' to read and is higher than the recommended reading level. Online patient education materials regarding post-surgery breast seroma are at a higher-than-recommended reading grade level for the public. Improvement would allow all patients, regardless of literacy level, to access such resources to aid decision-making around undergoing breast surgery.
Topics: Humans; Seroma; Patient Education as Topic; Female; Comprehension; Internet; Health Literacy; Postoperative Complications; Breast Diseases; Mastectomy; Consumer Health Information
PubMed: 38941972
DOI: 10.12968/hmed.2024.0058 -
Journal of Clinical Medicine Jun 2024Research advancing effective treatments for breast cancer is crucial for eradicating the disease, reducing recurrence, and improving survival rates. Nipple-sparing... (Review)
Review
Research advancing effective treatments for breast cancer is crucial for eradicating the disease, reducing recurrence, and improving survival rates. Nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM), a common method for treating breast cancer, often leads to complications requiring re-operation. Despite advancements, the use of hyperbaric oxygen therapy (HBOT) for treating these complications remains underexplored. Therefore, we analyze the efficacy of HBOT in the post-operative care of patients undergoing NSM. A systematic search was conducted using PubMed, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library. Studies were assessed for eligibility using the PICO (Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome) framework and classified based on American Society of Plastic Surgeons (ASPS) levels of evidence. Seven studies, totaling a pool of 63 female patients, met the inclusion criteria. Among these studies, four were categorized as Level III (57.1%), one as Level IV (14.3%), and two as Level V (28.6%). These studies focused on HBOT's role in wound healing, the successful salvage of breast reconstruction, and the optimal timing for HBOT. This review revealed that HBOT indeed has potential for improving tissue oxygenation, vascularization, and, consequently, wound healing. It is noted that HBOT is efficacious for mitigating post-NMS complications, including infections, re-operation, flap loss, seroma, and hematoma. Overall, HBOT could be beneficial in standard post-surgical care protocols for patients undergoing NSM due to its role in mitigating common adverse effects that occur after mastectomy. Despite promising outcomes, the recent literature lacks rigorous clinical trials and well-defined control groups, underscoring the need for further research to establish standardized HBOT protocols.
PubMed: 38930063
DOI: 10.3390/jcm13123535 -
Diseases (Basel, Switzerland) May 2024Breast cancer is the fifth-ranked cancer globally. Despite early diagnosis and advances in treatment, breast cancer mortality is increasing. This meta-analysis aims to... (Review)
Review
Breast cancer is the fifth-ranked cancer globally. Despite early diagnosis and advances in treatment, breast cancer mortality is increasing. This meta-analysis aims to examine all possible prognostic factors that improve/deteriorate breast cancer-specific survival. MEDLINE, PubMed, ScienceDirect, Ovid, and Google Scholar were systematically searched until September 16, 2023. The retrieved studies from 1995 to 2022 accumulated 1,386,663 cases from 30 countries. A total of 13 out of 22 prognostic factors were significantly associated with breast cancer-specific survival. A random-effects model provided a pooled estimate of the top five poorest prognostic factors, including Stage 4 (HR = 12.12; 95% CI: 5.70, 25.76), followed by Stage 3 (HR = 3.42, 95% CI: 2.51, 4.67), a comorbidity index ≥ 3 (HR = 3.29; 95% CI: 4.52, 7.35), the poor differentiation of cancer cell histology (HR = 2.43; 95% CI: 1.79, 3.30), and undifferentiated cancer cell histology (HR = 2.24; 95% CI: 1.66, 3.01). Other survival-reducing factors include positive nodes, age, race, HER2-receptor positivity, and overweight/obesity. The top five best prognostic factors include different types of mastectomies and breast-conserving therapies (HR = 0.56; 95% CI: 0.44, 0.70), medullary histology (HR = 0.62; 95% CI: 0.53, 0.72), higher education (HR = 0.72; 95% CI: 0.68, 0.77), and a positive estrogen receptor status (HR = 0.78; 95% CI: 0.65, 0.94). Heterogeneity was observed in most studies. Data from developing countries are still scarce.
PubMed: 38920543
DOI: 10.3390/diseases12060111 -
Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery Jun 2024The use of post-mastectomy radiation therapy (PMRT) in the setting of immediate two-stage breast reconstruction is becoming increasingly widespread. However, the...
BACKGROUND
The use of post-mastectomy radiation therapy (PMRT) in the setting of immediate two-stage breast reconstruction is becoming increasingly widespread. However, the timeframe of tissue expander exchange for permanent implant placement following PMRT is not well-defined, and it remains unclear what time interval optimizes surgical outcomes and patient satisfaction.
METHODS
A systematic review conducted in accordance with PRISMA 2020 was completed. PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Cochrane databases were searched under keywords pertaining to concepts of tissue expander breast reconstruction and PMRT. Inclusion criteria encompassed primary articles on tissue expander breast reconstruction with adjuvant radiation therapy reporting timing of exchange to permanent implant following radiation and surgical outcomes.
RESULTS
Of the initial 1,259 publications, 15 studies met our inclusion criteria, and 11 studies had granular enough data to use for pooled analysis. Implant exchange less than 6 months after PMRT was found to be associated with increased incidence of wound dehiscence (17.12% vs 3.64%, p<0.001) and hematoma (25% vs 2.59%, p<0.001) compared to exchange after 6 months. There was no significant difference in incidence of SSI, seroma, capsular contracture, and reconstructive failure.
CONCLUSIONS
Expander to implant exchange at less than 6 months is associated with a higher incidence of wound dehiscence and hematoma formation but does not increase the risk of reconstruction failure. The limited research on ideal timing prompts further investigation to optimize surgical outcomes for the increasing patient population undergoing PMRT and immediate two-staged breast reconstruction.
PubMed: 38886886
DOI: 10.1097/PRS.0000000000011588 -
Cureus May 2024Novel hybrid approaches for chest wall irradiation show promising outcomes regarding target coverage and sparing organs at risk (OARs). In this systematic review, we... (Review)
Review
Hybrid Treatment Planning for Chest Wall Irradiation Utilizing Three-Dimensional Conformal Radiotherapy (3DCRT), Intensity-Modulated Radiation Therapy (IMRT), and Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy (VMAT): A Systematic Review.
Novel hybrid approaches for chest wall irradiation show promising outcomes regarding target coverage and sparing organs at risk (OARs). In this systematic review, we compared hybrid volumetric modulated arc therapy (H-VMAT) or hybrid intensity-modulated radiotherapy (H-IMRT) techniques with non-hybrid techniques, such as three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy (3DCRT), field-in-field (FIF), intensity-modulated arc therapy (IMRT), and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT), for breast cancer patients with mastectomy. Our focus was the plan quality and dose distribution to the OARs. Using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) checklist, we performed a systematic review and quality appraisal of primary studies evaluating hybrid therapy to the chest wall and the OARs. An extensive online search of PubMed and Scopus databases was conducted using appropriate keywords. The dose to the OARs (lung, heart, and contralateral breast), planning target volume (PTV), homogeneity index (HI), and conformity index (CI) were extracted. The data were then tabulated and compared for the outcomes between modalities among the studies. Nine studies that met the search criteria were selected to evaluate the PTV coverage and dosimetric results of hybrid and non-hybrid techniques. In terms of 95% PTV coverage, among nine reviewed studies, the largest difference between the two techniques was between VMAT (47.6 Gy) and H-VMAT (48.4 Gy); for the conformity index, the largest difference was noted between 3DCRT (0.58) and H-VMAT (0.79). In both cases, differences were statistically significant ( < 0.005). Two studies showed dose homogeneity improvement within the treatment target in H-VMAT (0.15 and 0.07) compared with 3DCRT (0.41 and 0.12), with a value of <0.001. Two studies did not report on the homogeneity index, and three others observed no statistical difference. Regarding OARs, in the comparison of H-VMAT and VMAT, the largest significant change was in the volume receiving 5 Gy (V) of the ipsilateral lung and the V of the contralateral lung. For the ipsilateral lung, V was 90.7% with VMAT versus 51.45% with H-VMAT. For the contralateral lung, V was 54.9% with VMAT versus 50.5% with H-VMAT. In six studies, the mean dose of the contralateral breast was lower in hybrid techniques than in single modalities: VMAT (4.2%, 6.0%, 1.9%, 7.1%, 4.57%) versus H-VMAT (1.4%, 3.4%, 1.8%, 3.5%, 2.34%) and IMRT (9.1%) versus H-IMRT (4.69%). Although most studies did not report on monitor units and treatment time, those that included them showed that hybrids had lower monitor units and shorter treatment times. Hybrid techniques in radiotherapy, such as combining two modalities, can indeed facilitate lower doses to OARs for patients with a high risk of toxicities. Prospective clinical studies are needed to determine the outcomes of breast cancer treated with hybrid techniques.
PubMed: 38832195
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.59583 -
Asia-Pacific Journal of Clinical... May 2024Metaplastic breast cancer is a rare aggressive subtype of breast cancer for which there are no clear treatment guidelines regarding the optimal surgical approach. This... (Review)
Review
Metaplastic breast cancer is a rare aggressive subtype of breast cancer for which there are no clear treatment guidelines regarding the optimal surgical approach. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate survival outcomes of patients with metaplastic breast cancer undergoing breast conservation compared with mastectomy. We identified studies from MEDLINE, Pubmed, EMBASE, Google Scholar, the Cochrane Library Register of Controlled Trials and the EBM Reviews Register. Studies were deemed suitable for inclusion where they compared breast-conserving surgery to mastectomy with the primary outcome of overall survival. Survival data were pooled using a random-effects model. From the 456 citations screened by our search, three studies were assessed as eligible for inclusion. There were a total of 2995 patients who underwent mastectomy and 1909 who underwent breast conservation. The median follow-up time was 43 months. Meta-analysis demonstrated no significant difference between breast conservation and mastectomy (pooled HR 0.89, 95% CI, 0.56-1.42, p = 0.631). Wide local excision, in conjunction with adjuvant radiation and judicious use of chemotherapy, may be a reasonable alternative to mastectomy as surgical management of metaplastic breast cancer as part of an individualized, multidisciplinary approach.
PubMed: 38808740
DOI: 10.1111/ajco.14089 -
Systematic Reviews May 2024Different guideline panels, and individuals, may make different decisions based in part on their preferences. Preferences for or against an intervention are viewed as a...
BACKGROUND
Different guideline panels, and individuals, may make different decisions based in part on their preferences. Preferences for or against an intervention are viewed as a consequence of the relative importance people place on the expected or experienced health outcomes it incurs. These findings can then be considered as patient input when balancing effect estimates on benefits and harms reported by empirical evidence on the clinical effectiveness of screening programs. This systematic review update examined the relative importance placed by patients on the potential benefits and harms of mammography-based breast cancer screening to inform an update to the 2018 Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care's guideline on screening.
METHODS
We screened all articles from our previous review (search December 2017) and updated our searches to June 19, 2023 in MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and CINAHL. We also screened grey literature, submissions by stakeholders, and reference lists. The target population was cisgender women and other adults assigned female at birth (including transgender men and nonbinary persons) aged ≥ 35 years and at average or moderately increased risk for breast cancer. Studies of patients with breast cancer were eligible for health-state utility data for relevant outcomes. We sought three types of data, directly through (i) disutilities of screening and curative treatment health states (measuring the impact of the outcome on one's health-related quality of life; utilities measured on a scale of 0 [death] to 1 [perfect health]), and (ii) other preference-based data, such as outcome trade-offs, and indirectly through (iii) the relative importance of benefits versus harms inferred from attitudes, intentions, and behaviors towards screening among patients provided with estimates of the magnitudes of benefit(s) and harms(s). For screening, we used machine learning as one of the reviewers after at least 50% of studies had been reviewed in duplicate by humans; full-text selection used independent review by two humans. Data extraction and risk of bias assessments used a single reviewer with verification. Our main analysis for utilities used data from utility-based health-related quality of life tools (e.g., EQ-5D) in patients; a disutility value of about 0.04 can be considered a minimally important value for the Canadian public. When suitable, we pooled utilities and explored heterogeneity. Disutilities were calculated for screening health states and between different treatment states. Non-utility data were grouped into categories, based on outcomes compared (e.g. for trade-off data), participant age, and our judgements of the net benefit of screening portrayed by the studies. Thereafter, we compared and contrasted findings while considering sample sizes, risk of bias, subgroup findings and data on knowledge scores, and created summary statements for each data set. Certainty assessments followed GRADE guidance for patient preferences and used consensus among at least two reviewers.
FINDINGS
Eighty-two studies (38 on utilities) were included. The estimated disutilities were 0.07 for a positive screening result (moderate certainty), 0.03-0.04 for a false positive (FP; "additional testing" resolved as negative for cancer) (low certainty), and 0.08 for untreated screen-detected cancer (moderate certainty) or (low certainty) an interval cancer. At ≤12 months, disutilities of mastectomy (vs. breast-conserving therapy), chemotherapy (vs. none) (low certainty), and radiation therapy (vs. none) (moderate certainty) were 0.02-0.03, 0.02-0.04, and little-to-none, respectively, though in each case findings were somewhat limited in their applicability. Over the longer term, there was moderate certainty for little-to-no disutility from mastectomy versus breast-conserving surgery/lumpectomy with radiation and from radiation. There was moderate certainty that a majority (>50%) and possibly a large majority (>75%) of women probably accept up to six cases of overdiagnosis to prevent one breast-cancer death; there was some uncertainty because of an indication that overdiagnosis was not fully understood by participants in some cases. Low certainty evidence suggested that a large majority may accept that screening may reduce breast-cancer but not all-cause mortality, at least when presented with relatively high rates of breast-cancer mortality reductions (n = 2; 2 and 5 fewer per 1000 screened), and at least a majority accept that to prevent one breast-cancer death at least a few hundred patients will receive a FP result and 10-15 will have a FP resolved through biopsy. An upper limit for an acceptable number of FPs was not evaluated. When using data from studies assessing attitudes, intentions, and screening behaviors, across all age groups but most evident for women in their 40s, preferences reduced as the net benefit presented by study authors decreased in magnitude. In a relatively low net-benefit scenario, a majority of patients in their 40s may not weigh the benefits as greater than the harms from screening whereas for women in their 50s a large majority may prefer screening (low certainty evidence for both ages). There was moderate certainty that a large majority of women 50 years of age and 50 to 69 years of age, who have usually experienced screening, weigh the benefits as greater than the harms from screening in a high net-benefit scenario. A large majority of patients aged 70-71 years who have recently screened probably think the benefits outweigh the harms of continuing to screen. A majority of women in their mid-70s to early 80s may prefer to continue screening.
CONCLUSIONS
Evidence across a range of data sources on how informed patients value the potential outcomes from breast-cancer screening will be useful during decision-making for recommendations. The evidence suggests that all of the outcomes examined have importance to women of any age, that there is at least some and possibly substantial (among those in their 40s) variability across and within age groups about the acceptable magnitude of effects across outcomes, and that provision of easily understandable information on the likelihood of the outcomes may be necessary to enable informed decision making. Although studies came from a wide range of countries, there were limited data from Canada and about whether findings applied well across an ethnographically and socioeconomically diverse population.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
Protocol available at Open Science Framework https://osf.io/xngsu/ .
Topics: Humans; Breast Neoplasms; Early Detection of Cancer; Female; Canada; Patient Preference; Mammography; Practice Guidelines as Topic; Preventive Health Services; Advisory Committees; Quality of Life
PubMed: 38807191
DOI: 10.1186/s13643-024-02539-8 -
Journal of Medical Internet Research May 2024Web-based decision aids have been shown to have a positive effect when used to improve the quality of decision-making for women facing postmastectomy breast... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Web-based decision aids have been shown to have a positive effect when used to improve the quality of decision-making for women facing postmastectomy breast reconstruction (PMBR). However, the existing findings regarding these interventions are still incongruent, and the overall effect is unclear.
OBJECTIVE
We aimed to assess the content of web-based decision aids and its impact on decision-related outcomes (ie, decision conflict, decision regret, informed choice, and knowledge), psychological-related outcomes (ie, satisfaction and anxiety), and surgical decision-making in women facing PMBR.
METHODS
This systematic review and meta-analysis followed the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. A total of 6 databases, PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and Web of Science Core Collection, were searched starting at the time of establishment of the databases to May 2023, and an updated search was conducted on April 1, 2024. MeSH (Medical Subject Headings) terms and text words were used. The Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool for randomized controlled trials was used to assess the risk of bias. The certainty of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach.
RESULTS
In total, 7 studies included 579 women and were published between 2008 and 2023, and the sample size in each study ranged from 26 to 222. The results showed that web-based decision aids used audio and video to present the pros and cons of PMBR versus no PMBR, implants versus flaps, and immediate versus delayed PMBR and the appearance and feel of the PMBR results and the expected recovery time with photographs of actual patients. Web-based decision aids help improve PMBR knowledge, decisional conflict (mean difference [MD]=-5.43, 95% CI -8.87 to -1.99; P=.002), and satisfaction (standardized MD=0.48, 95% CI 0.00 to 0.95; P=.05) but have no effect on informed choice (MD=-2.80, 95% CI -8.54 to 2.94; P=.34), decision regret (MD=-1.55, 95% CI -6.00 to 2.90 P=.49), or anxiety (standardized MD=0.04, 95% CI -0.50 to 0.58; P=.88). The overall Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation quality of the evidence was low.
CONCLUSIONS
The findings suggest that the web-based decision aids provide a modern, low-cost, and high dissemination rate effective method to promote the improved quality of decision-making in women undergoing PMBR.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
PROSPERO CRD42023450496; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=450496.
Topics: Female; Humans; Decision Making; Decision Support Techniques; Internet; Mammaplasty; Mastectomy; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 38801766
DOI: 10.2196/53872 -
Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery.... May 2024Nipple adenomas (NAs) are rare benign proliferative tumors presenting as palpable nodules, erosive lesions, or nipple discharge, mimicking other conditions. This...
BACKGROUND
Nipple adenomas (NAs) are rare benign proliferative tumors presenting as palpable nodules, erosive lesions, or nipple discharge, mimicking other conditions. This systematic review categorizes cases into sole NA (ONA) or co-diagnoses with other conditions (CONA) to enhance clinical recognition, diagnosis, and treatment efficacy.
METHODS
Following PRISMA guidelines, a PubMed search was conducted for NA. Inclusion criteria covered original research, excluding reviews or other breast diseases. Bias risk was assessed through a thorough search, authors independently evaluated studies, and data were synthesized using varied measures. Subgroups ONA and CONA were formed. Analyses were conducted in Excel and R, complemented by a qualitative review due to case report predominance. Biases in case reports were transparently addressed.
RESULTS
Of the 86 studies, 387 cases were analyzed, showing 10.34% with co-diagnoses of malignant or premalignant conditions. Mean age was 44, with a female predominance (97%). ONA (347 cases) and CONA (40 cases) subgroups exhibited variations in symptoms, physical findings, and imaging. Treatment modalities included excision (51.39%), biopsy alone (11.1%), and mastectomy (8.6%). Mean follow-up of 56.73 months revealed recurrence (2.87%) and malignancy development (1.79%), notably in CONA cases (33.33%).
CONCLUSIONS
This study provides insights into the broader age range of NA and its associations. Higher co-diagnosis rates were correlated with older age, highlighting the necessity for thorough investigation, with excision as the primary treatment. Follow-up emphasizes the significance of identifying and monitoring CONA cases, which pose a higher malignancy risk. Recurrence is presumed to be linked to proper lesion excision and co-diagnosis.
PubMed: 38798941
DOI: 10.1097/GOX.0000000000005827