{"title":"Effects of Elective Revision after Breast Reconstruction on Patient-Reported Outcomes.","authors":"Amanda M Zong, Kayla E Leibl, Katie E Weichman","doi":"10.1055/a-2332-0359","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong> There has been increasing emphasis on patient-reported satisfaction as a measure of surgical outcomes. While previous research has investigated factors influencing patient satisfaction following breast reconstruction, there are few studies on how patient satisfaction is impacted by revision procedures. The purpose of this study was to investigate whether elective revisions following breast reconstruction are significantly associated with changes in patient-reported outcomes and quality of life.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong> A retrospective review was conducted of patients who underwent immediate autologous or alloplastic breast reconstruction at a single institution from 2015 to 2021. Patients were included if they had completed BREAST-Q preoperatively, post-initial reconstruction, and post-revision procedures. Patients were excluded if they received adjuvant radiation or if they had previously undergone breast reconstruction procedures. The primary outcome measures were BREAST-Q domains. Demographic, clinical, and surgical variables were also analyzed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong> Of the 123 patients included for analysis, 61 underwent autologous breast reconstruction and 62 underwent alloplastic reconstruction. Mean age was 49.31 ± 11.58 years and body mass index (BMI) was 29.55 ± 5.63 kg/m<sup>2</sup>. Forty-eight patients underwent no revision procedures and 75 patients underwent at least one revision. Between these two groups, there were no differences in age, BMI, complication rates, socioeconomic status, or preoperative BREAST-Q scores. Patients reported significantly higher satisfaction with outcome after their first revision compared with after initial reconstruction alone (<i>p</i> = 0.04). Autologous reconstruction patients who had at least one revision had significantly higher satisfaction with outcome (<i>p</i> = 0.02) and satisfaction with surgeon (<i>p</i> = 0.05) in the 2-year follow-up period compared with patients who had no revisions.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong> Revision procedures following autologous breast reconstruction are associated with higher patient satisfaction with outcome. Further research should explore specific factors influencing patient decision-making regarding whether to undergo revisions.</p>","PeriodicalId":16949,"journal":{"name":"Journal of reconstructive microsurgery","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of reconstructive microsurgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2332-0359","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: There has been increasing emphasis on patient-reported satisfaction as a measure of surgical outcomes. While previous research has investigated factors influencing patient satisfaction following breast reconstruction, there are few studies on how patient satisfaction is impacted by revision procedures. The purpose of this study was to investigate whether elective revisions following breast reconstruction are significantly associated with changes in patient-reported outcomes and quality of life.
Methods: A retrospective review was conducted of patients who underwent immediate autologous or alloplastic breast reconstruction at a single institution from 2015 to 2021. Patients were included if they had completed BREAST-Q preoperatively, post-initial reconstruction, and post-revision procedures. Patients were excluded if they received adjuvant radiation or if they had previously undergone breast reconstruction procedures. The primary outcome measures were BREAST-Q domains. Demographic, clinical, and surgical variables were also analyzed.
Results: Of the 123 patients included for analysis, 61 underwent autologous breast reconstruction and 62 underwent alloplastic reconstruction. Mean age was 49.31 ± 11.58 years and body mass index (BMI) was 29.55 ± 5.63 kg/m2. Forty-eight patients underwent no revision procedures and 75 patients underwent at least one revision. Between these two groups, there were no differences in age, BMI, complication rates, socioeconomic status, or preoperative BREAST-Q scores. Patients reported significantly higher satisfaction with outcome after their first revision compared with after initial reconstruction alone (p = 0.04). Autologous reconstruction patients who had at least one revision had significantly higher satisfaction with outcome (p = 0.02) and satisfaction with surgeon (p = 0.05) in the 2-year follow-up period compared with patients who had no revisions.
Conclusion: Revision procedures following autologous breast reconstruction are associated with higher patient satisfaction with outcome. Further research should explore specific factors influencing patient decision-making regarding whether to undergo revisions.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Reconstructive Microsurgery is a peer-reviewed, indexed journal that provides an international forum for the publication of articles focusing on reconstructive microsurgery and complex reconstructive surgery. The journal was originally established in 1984 for the microsurgical community to publish and share academic papers.
The Journal of Reconstructive Microsurgery provides the latest in original research spanning basic laboratory, translational, and clinical investigations. Review papers cover current topics in complex reconstruction and microsurgery. In addition, special sections discuss new technologies, innovations, materials, and significant problem cases.
The journal welcomes controversial topics, editorial comments, book reviews, and letters to the Editor, in order to complete the balanced spectrum of information available in the Journal of Reconstructive Microsurgery. All articles undergo stringent peer review by international experts in the specialty.