Top

Aesthetic Plastic Surgery

Published in:

04-08-2022 | Mastectomy | Original Article

Direct-to-Implant Breast Reconstruction After Unilateral and Bilateral Mastectomy: Cross-Sectional Study of Patient Satisfaction and Quality of Life with BREAST-Q

Authors: Annalisa Cogliandro, Rosa Salzillo, Mauro Barone, Stefania Tenna, Barbara Cagli, Paolo Persichetti

Published in: Aesthetic Plastic Surgery | Issue 1/2023

Abstract

Introduction

Immediate single stage breast reconstruction is a challenging procedure with the goal of improving the quality of life of patients with breast cancer. The aim of this study is to evaluate using the BREAST-Q patient satisfaction, body perception and quality of life after direct-to-implant breast reconstruction comparing unilateral and bilateral reconstructions.

Methods

In this study we enrolled 56 women who underwent mastectomy and immediate single-stage direct-to-implant (DTI) breast reconstruction at Campus Bio-Medico University of Rome between 2013 and 2020. One year after surgery they were administered electronically the BREAST-Q post-operative module.

Results

Our two cohorts of patients consisted in 34 women who received unilateral nipple-sparing mastectomy and DTI breast reconstruction and 22 women who underwent bilateral nipple-sparing mastectomy and DTI breast reconstruction. Twenty-four of the 34 patients belonging to the unilateral group responded to the questionnaire (70.5%), while in the bilateral group responders were 16 out of 22 (72.7%). The BREAST-Q scores were compared between the two groups: patients undergoing bilateral mastectomy and breast reconstruction showed higher scores in every BREAST-Q domain compared to patients undergoing unilateral mastectomy and breast reconstruction with a statistically significant difference in the Satisfaction with breast (P = 0.01), Sexual well-being (P = 0.03), and Satisfaction with implants (P = 0.01) domains.

Conclusions

Patients undergoing bilateral DTI breast reconstruction have a favorable postoperative surgical cosmetic outcome with a better patient’s body image perception and a higher post-operative level of satisfaction compared to unilateral DTI reconstruction after nipple-sparing mastectomy.

Level of evidence IV

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 the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266

Siegel RL, Miller KD, Fuchs HE, Jemal A (2021) Cancer Statistics, 2021. CA Cancer J Clin 71(1):7–33. https://doi.org/10.3322/caac.21654 (Epub 2021 Jan 12 PMID: 33433946)CrossRefPubMed

Joseph WJ, Bustos SS, Losee JE, Rubin JP, de La Cruz C (2021) The Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on breast reconstruction practices in the United States. Anticancer Res 41(4):1903–1908. https://doi.org/10.21873/anticanres.14956 (PMID: 33813395)CrossRefPubMed

King CA, Bartholomew AJ, Sosin M, Avila A, Famiglietti AL, Dekker PK, Perez-Alvarez IM, Song DH, Fan KL, Tousimis EA (2021) A critical appraisal of late complications of prepectoral versus subpectoral breast reconstruction following nipple-sparing mastectomy. Ann Surg Oncol 28(13):9150–9158. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-021-10085-z (Epub 2021 Aug 12 PMID: 34386913)CrossRefPubMed

Sgarzani R, Pasquali S, Buggi F, Tognali D, Marongiu F, Mingozzi M, Melandri D, Morselli PG (2021) Curcio a sub-muscular reconstruction after NAC sparing mastectomy: direct to implant breast reconstruction with human ADM versus tissue expander. Aesthetic Plast Surg 45(2):413–420. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00266-020-02007-3 (Epub 2020 Oct 19 PMID: 33078212)CrossRefPubMed

Voineskos SH, Nelson JA, Klassen AF, Pusic AL (2018) Measuring patient-reported outcomes: key metrics in reconstructive surgery. Annu Rev Med 69:467–479. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-med-060116-022831.PMID:29414263ReviewCrossRefPubMed

Chen CM, Cano SJ, Klassen AF, King T, McCarthy C, Cordeiro PG, Morrow M, Pusic AL (2010) Measuring quality of life in oncologic breast surgery: a systematic review of patient-reported outcome measures. Breast J 16(6):587–597. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1524-4741.2010.00983.x (PMID: 21070435)CrossRefPubMed

Cohen WA, Mundy LR, Ballard TN, Klassen A, Cano SJ, Browne J, Pusic AL (2016) The BREAST-Q in surgical research: a review of the literature 2009–2015. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 69(2):149–162. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bjps.2015.11.013 (Epub 2015 Nov 26 PMID: 26740288)CrossRefPubMed

Pusic AL, Klassen AF, Scott AM, Klok JA, Cordeiro PG, Cano SJ (2009) Development of a new patient-reported outcome measure for breast surgery: the BREAST-Q. Plast Reconstr Surg 124(2):345–353. https://doi.org/10.1097/PRS.0b013e3181aee807 (PMID: 19644246)CrossRefPubMed

Rancati A, Angrigiani C, Hammond D, Nava M, Gonzalez E, Rostagno R, Gercovich G (2016) Preoperative digital mammography imaging in conservative mastectomy and immediate reconstruction. Gland Surg 5(1):9–14. https://doi.org/10.3978/j.issn.2227-684X.2015.08.01 (PMID: 26855903)CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

10.

Klassen AF, Kaur MN, Tsangaris E, de Vries CEE, Bordeleau L, Zhong T, Cano SJ, Breitkopf T, Pusic AL (2021) Development and psychometric validation of BREAST-Q scales measuring cancer worry, fatigue, and impact on work. Ann Surg Oncol 28(12):7410–7420. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-021-10090-2 (Epub 2021 May 24 PMID: 34028633)CrossRefPubMed

11.

Sung H, Ferlay J, Siegel RL, Laversanne M, Soerjomataram I, Jemal A, Bray F (2021) Global cancer statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin 71(3):209–249. https://doi.org/10.3322/caac.21660 (Epub 2021 Feb 4 PMID: 33538338)CrossRefPubMed

12.

Chlebowski RT, Aragaki AK, Pan K (2022) Breast cancer prevention and breast cancer mortality. JCO Oncol Pract. https://doi.org/10.1200/OP.22.00091 (PMID: 3531234)CrossRefPubMed

13.

Wild CP, Weiderpass E, Stewart BW, editors (2020). World cancer report: cancer research for cancer prevention. Lyon, France: International agency for research on cancer. Available from: http://publications.iarc.fr/586

14.

Jung H, Lu M, Quan ML, Cheung WY, Kong S, Lupichuk S, Feng Y, Xu Y (2022) New method for determining breast cancer recurrence-free survival using routinely collected real-world health data. BMC Cancer 22(1):281. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12885-022-09333-6 (PMID: 35296284)CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

15.

Pusic AL, Chen CM, Cano S, Klassen A, McCarthy C, Collins ED, Cordeiro PG (2007) Measuring quality of life in cosmetic and reconstructive breast surgery: a systematic review of patient-reported outcomes instruments. Plast Reconstr Surg 120(4):823–837. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.prs.0000278162.82906.81 (PMID: 17805107)CrossRefPubMed

16.

Cano S, Klassen AF, Scott A, Thoma A, Feeny D, Pusic A (2010) Health outcome and economic measurement in breast cancer surgery: challenges and opportunities. Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res 10(5):583–594. https://doi.org/10.1586/erp.10.61 (PMID: 20950073)CrossRefPubMed

17.

Nelson J, Chu J, McCarthy C et al (2022) BREAST-Q REACT: Clinical reference values for the BREAST-Q in post-mastectomy breast reconstruction patients. Ann Surg Oncol, https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-022-11521-4.-DOI-PubMed

18.

Mundy LR, Homa K, Klassen AF, Pusic AL, Kerrigan CL (2017) breast cancer and reconstruction: normative data for interpreting the BREAST-Q. Plast Reconstr Surg 139(5):1046e-e1055.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

19.

Klifto KM, Aravind P, Major M et al (2020) Differences between breast cancer reconstruction and institutionally established normative data using the BREAST-Q reconstruction module: a comparative study. Plast Reconstr Surg 145(6):1371–1379CrossRefPubMed

20.

Chu JJ, Nelson JA (2022) ASO author reflections: patient-reported outcomes for breast reconstruction clinical practice. Ann Surg Oncol. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-022-11527-yCrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

21.

Salgarello M, Visconti G, Barone-Adesi L (2021) Current trends in breast reconstruction. Minerva Surg 76(6):526–537. https://doi.org/10.23736/S2724-5691.21.08987-5 (PMID: 34935321)CrossRefPubMed

22.

Al-Ghazal SK, Sully L, Fallowfield L et al (2000) The psychological impact of immediate rather than delayed breast reconstruction. Eur J Surg Oncol 26(1):17–19CrossRefPubMed

23.

D’Souza N, Darmanin G, Fedorowicz Z (2011) Immediate versus delayed reconstruction following surgery for breast cancer. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 6(7):CD008674

24.

Dean C, Chetty U, Forrest AP (1983) Effects of immediate breast reconstruction on psychosocial morbidity after mastectomy. Lancet 1:459–462CrossRefPubMed

25.

Spear SL, Willey SC, Feldman ED et al (2011) Nipple-sparing mastectomy for prophylactic and therapeutic indications. Plast Reconstr Surg 128:1005–1014CrossRefPubMed

26.

Petit JY, Veronesi U, Rey P et al (2009) Nipple-sparing mastectomy: risk of nipple-areolar recurrences in a series of 579 cases. Breast Cancer Res Treat 114:97–101CrossRefPubMed

27.

Benediktsson KP, Perbeck L (2008) Survival in breast cancer after nipple-sparing subcutaneous mastectomy and immediate reconstruction with implants: a prospective trial with 13 years median follow-up in 216 patients. Eur J Surg Oncol 34:143–148CrossRefPubMed

28.

Rancati AO, Angrigiani CH, Hammond DC, Nava MB, Gonzalez EG, Dorr JC, Gercovich GF, Rocco N, Rostagno RL (2017) Direct to implant reconstruction in nipple sparing mastectomy: patient selection by preoperative digital mammogram. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open 5(6):e1369. https://doi.org/10.1097/GOX.0000000000001369 (eCollection 2017 Jun. PMID: 28740781)CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

29.

Barone M, Cogliandro A, Tambone V, Persichetti P (2017) Analysis of outcomes and patient’s satisfaction following monolateral and bilateral mastectomy using BREAST-Q. Eur J Plast Surg 41(3):311–316CrossRef

30.

Maruccia M, Elia R, Tedeschi P, Gurrado A, Moschetta M, Testini M, Giudice G (2021) Prepectoral breast reconstruction: an ideal approach to bilateral risk-reducing mastectomy. Gland Surg 10(10):2997–3006. https://doi.org/10.21037/gs-21-339CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

31.

Larson DL, Basir Z, Bruce T (2011) Is oncologic safety compatible with a predictably viable mastectomy skin flap? Plast Reconstr Surg 127:27–33CrossRefPubMed

32.

Caputo GG, Vigato E, Rampino Cordaro E, Parodi PC, Governa M (2021) Comparative study of patient outcomes between direct to implant and two-stage implant-based breast reconstruction after mastectomy. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 74(10):2573–2579. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bjps.2021.03.058 (Epub 2021 Mar 30)CrossRefPubMed

Title: Direct-to-Implant Breast Reconstruction After Unilateral and Bilateral Mastectomy: Cross-Sectional Study of Patient Satisfaction and Quality of Life with BREAST-Q
Authors: Annalisa Cogliandro
Rosa Salzillo
Mauro Barone
Stefania Tenna
Barbara Cagli
Paolo Persichetti
Publication date: 04-08-2022
Publisher: Springer US
Keywords: Mastectomy
Breast Cancer
Breast Cancer
Published in: Aesthetic Plastic Surgery / Issue 1/2023
Print ISSN: 0364-216X
Electronic ISSN: 1432-5241
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00266-022-02986-5

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

Springer Medicine

Direct-to-Implant Breast Reconstruction After Unilateral and Bilateral Mastectomy: Cross-Sectional Study of Patient Satisfaction and Quality of Life with BREAST-Q

Abstract

Introduction

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Level of evidence IV

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Introduction

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Level of evidence IV

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 1/2023

A descriptive comparison of satisfaction and well-being between expander-based and direct-to-implant breast reconstruction after Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy

Body Self-Perception After Breast Reconstruction in Young Female Patients Affected by Poland Syndrome

Complications Associated with Autologous Costal Cartilage Used in Rhinoplasty: An Updated Meta-Analysis

Ultrasound-Assisted Liposuction (UAL) Arm Contouring in Non-Post-Bariatric Patients: No Rush for Brachioplasty

Analgesic Efficacy of Pectoral Nerve Blocks in Implant-Based Mammoplasty: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Cosmetic Revision Surgeries after Transfeminine Vaginoplasty