Comparison of Patient-Reported Quality of Life Following Direct-to-Implant Prepectoral and Subpectoral Breast Reconstruction Using BREAST-Q: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

IF 1.3 Q3 SURGERY
Archives of Plastic Surgery-APS Pub Date : 2024-11-13 eCollection Date: 2024-11-01 DOI:10.1055/a-2407-9183
Diana L Dyrberg, Farima Dalaei, Martin Sollie, Camilla Bille, Vibeke Koudahl, Jens A Sørensen, Jørn B Thomsen
{"title":"Comparison of Patient-Reported Quality of Life Following Direct-to-Implant Prepectoral and Subpectoral Breast Reconstruction Using BREAST-Q: A Randomized Controlled Trial.","authors":"Diana L Dyrberg, Farima Dalaei, Martin Sollie, Camilla Bille, Vibeke Koudahl, Jens A Sørensen, Jørn B Thomsen","doi":"10.1055/a-2407-9183","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Background</b>  Direct-to-implant breast reconstruction (DIR) is becoming more and more accepted. There is a lack of high-quality studies assessing differences in patient-reported quality of life (QoL) between different implant placement methods. The aim of this randomized controlled (clinical) trial was to compare QoL between women reconstructed by sub- or prepectoral implant placement. <b>Methods</b>  We included women over 18 years eligible for DIR. Patients were randomly assigned to reconstruction by subpectoral or prepectoral implant placement. Assessment of QoL and patient satisfaction was made using the BREAST-Q questionnaire for postmastectomy breast reconstruction and compared between the sub- and prepectoral reconstructed groups preoperatively and after 3 and 12 months of follow-up. <b>Results</b>  A total of 42 women were allocated to sub- or prepectoral reconstruction with 21 patients in each group. There were no differences in patient characteristics between groups. Regarding all the selected BREAST-Q scales: (1) satisfaction with the reconstructed breast, (2) satisfaction with the breast implant, (3) satisfaction with the overall outcome, (4) psychosocial well-being, (5) sexual well-being, and (6) physical well-being-we found no significant differences between the two groups. Assessing each group independently we found, that in both groups sexual well-being improved after surgery postoperatively compared to the preoperative scores. <b>Conclusion</b>  We found high satisfaction and QoL following both sub- and prepectoral breast reconstruction. We found no significant differences between groups suggesting both methods for DIR can be used. Despite our high-quality data, a larger sample size and longer postoperative follow-up are needed to further investigate the differences in QoL between sub- and prepectoral breast reconstruction.</p>","PeriodicalId":47543,"journal":{"name":"Archives of Plastic Surgery-APS","volume":"51 6","pages":"542-548"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11560329/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Archives of Plastic Surgery-APS","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2407-9183","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/11/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background  Direct-to-implant breast reconstruction (DIR) is becoming more and more accepted. There is a lack of high-quality studies assessing differences in patient-reported quality of life (QoL) between different implant placement methods. The aim of this randomized controlled (clinical) trial was to compare QoL between women reconstructed by sub- or prepectoral implant placement. Methods  We included women over 18 years eligible for DIR. Patients were randomly assigned to reconstruction by subpectoral or prepectoral implant placement. Assessment of QoL and patient satisfaction was made using the BREAST-Q questionnaire for postmastectomy breast reconstruction and compared between the sub- and prepectoral reconstructed groups preoperatively and after 3 and 12 months of follow-up. Results  A total of 42 women were allocated to sub- or prepectoral reconstruction with 21 patients in each group. There were no differences in patient characteristics between groups. Regarding all the selected BREAST-Q scales: (1) satisfaction with the reconstructed breast, (2) satisfaction with the breast implant, (3) satisfaction with the overall outcome, (4) psychosocial well-being, (5) sexual well-being, and (6) physical well-being-we found no significant differences between the two groups. Assessing each group independently we found, that in both groups sexual well-being improved after surgery postoperatively compared to the preoperative scores. Conclusion  We found high satisfaction and QoL following both sub- and prepectoral breast reconstruction. We found no significant differences between groups suggesting both methods for DIR can be used. Despite our high-quality data, a larger sample size and longer postoperative follow-up are needed to further investigate the differences in QoL between sub- and prepectoral breast reconstruction.

使用 BREAST-Q 对直接植入胸大肌前乳房重建术和胸大肌下乳房重建术后患者报告的生活质量进行比较:随机对照试验。
背景 直接植入乳房重建术(DIR)正被越来越多的人接受。目前还缺乏高质量的研究来评估不同植入方法在患者报告的生活质量(QoL)方面的差异。这项随机对照(临床)试验的目的是比较采用胸大肌下或胸大肌前植入假体进行重建的女性的 QoL。方法 我们纳入了符合 DIR 条件的 18 岁以上女性。患者被随机分配到胸骨下或胸骨前植入物重建。使用乳房切除术后乳房重建 BREAST-Q 问卷对患者的生活质量和满意度进行评估,并对胸骨下重建组和胸骨前重建组在术前、术后 3 个月和 12 个月的随访情况进行比较。结果 共有42名妇女被分配到胸骨下或胸骨前重建组,每组21人。各组患者的特征没有差异。在所有选定的 BREAST-Q 量表中:(1) 对重建乳房的满意度;(2) 对乳房假体的满意度;(3) 对整体效果的满意度;(4) 社会心理健康;(5) 性健康;(6) 身体健康,我们发现两组之间没有显著差异。在对每组患者进行独立评估时,我们发现两组患者术后的性生活质量都比术前有所提高。结论 我们发现,胸骨下和胸骨前乳房重建术后的满意度和 QoL 都很高。我们发现两组之间没有明显差异,这表明两种 DIR 方法都可以使用。尽管我们获得了高质量的数据,但仍需要更大的样本量和更长时间的术后随访,以进一步研究胸骨下和胸骨前乳房重建在 QoL 方面的差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.10
自引率
6.70%
发文量
131
审稿时长
10 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信