Dataset Information

Breast reconstruction following prophylactic or therapeutic mastectomy for breast cancer: Recommendations from an evidence-based provincial guideline.

ABSTRACT: The side effects of mastectomy can be significant. Breast reconstruction may alleviate some distress; however, there are currently no provincial recommendations regarding the integration of reconstruction with breast cancer therapy. The purpose of the present article is to provide evidence-based strategies for the management of patients who are candidates for reconstruction. A systematic review of meta-analyses, guidelines, clinical trials and comparative studies published between 1980 and 2013 was conducted using the PubMed and EMBASE databases. Reference lists of publications were manually searched for additional literature. The National Guidelines Clearinghouse and SAGE directory, as well as guideline developers' websites, were also searched. Recommendations were developed based on the available evidence. Reconstruction consultation should be made available for patients undergoing mastectomy. Tumour characteristics, cancer therapy, patient comorbidities, body habitus and smoking history may affect reconstruction outcomes. Although immediate reconstruction should be considered whenever possible, delayed reconstruction is acceptable when immediate is not available or appropriate. The integration of reconstruction and postmastectomy radiotherapy should be addressed in a multidisciplinary setting. The decision as to which type of procedure to perform (autologous or alloplastic with or without acellular dermal matrices) should be left to the discretion of the surgeons and the patient after providing counselling. Skin-sparing mastectomy is safe and appropriate. Nipple-sparing is generally not recommended for patients with malignancy, but could be considered for carefully selected patients. Immediate reconstruction requires resources to coordinate operating room time between the general and plastic surgeons, to provide supplies including acellular dermal matrices, and to develop the infrastructure needed to facilitate multidisciplinary discussions.

SUBMITTER: Shea-Budgell M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4116309 | biostudies-literature | 2014

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Breast reconstruction following prophylactic or therapeutic mastectomy for breast cancer: Recommendations from an evidence-based provincial guideline.

Shea-Budgell Melissa M Quan May Lynn ML Mehling Blair B Temple-Oberle Claire C

Plastic surgery (Oakville, Ont.) 20140101 2

The side effects of mastectomy can be significant. Breast reconstruction may alleviate some distress; however, there are currently no provincial recommendations regarding the integration of reconstruction with breast cancer therapy. The purpose of the present article is to provide evidence-based strategies for the management of patients who are candidates for reconstruction. A systematic review of meta-analyses, guidelines, clinical trials and comparative studies published between 1980 and 2013 ...[more]

PMID: 25114623

Similar Datasets

Project description:Importance:Guidelines assert that contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM) should be discouraged in patients without an elevated risk for a second primary breast cancer. However, little is known about the impact of surgeons discouraging CPM on patient care satisfaction or decisions to seek treatment from another clinician. Objective:To examine the association between patient report of first-surgeon recommendation against CPM and the extent of discussion about it with 3 outcomes: patient satisfaction with surgery decisions, receipt of a second opinion, and receipt of surgery by a second surgeon. Design, Setting, and Participants:This population-based survey study was conducted in Georgia and California. We identified 3880 women with stages 0 to II breast cancer treated in 2013-2014 through the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results registries of Georgia and Los Angeles County. Surveys were sent approximately 2 months after surgery (71% response rate, n?=?2578). In this analysis conducted from February to May 2016, we included patients with unilateral breast cancer who considered CPM (n?=?1140). Patients were selected between July 2013 and September 2014. Main Outcomes and Measures:We examined report of surgeon recommendations, level of discussion about CPM, satisfaction with surgical decision making, receipt of second surgical opinion, and surgery from a second surgeon. Results:The mean (SD) age of patients included in this study was 56 (10.6) years. About one-quarter of patients (26.7%; n?=?304) reported that their first surgeon recommended against CPM and 30.1% (n?=?343) reported no substantial discussion about CPM. Dissatisfaction with surgery decision was uncommon (7.6%; n?=?130), controlling for clinical and demographic characteristics. One-fifth of patients (20.6%; n?=?304) had a second opinion about surgical options and 9.8% (n?=?158) had surgery performed by a second surgeon. Dissatisfaction was very low (3.9%; n?=?42) among patients who reported that their surgeon did not recommend against CPM but discussed it. Dissatisfaction was substantively higher for those whose surgeon recommended against CPM with no substantive discussion (14.5%; n?=?37). Women who received a recommendation against CPM were not more likely to seek a second opinion (17.1% among patients with recommendation against CPM vs 15.1% of others; P?=?.52) nor to receive surgery by a second surgeon (7.9% among patients with recommendation against CPM vs 8.3% of others; P?=?.88). Conclusions and Relevance:Most patients are satisfied with surgical decision making. First-surgeon recommendation against CPM does not appear to substantively increase patient dissatisfaction, use of second opinions, or loss of the patient to a second surgeon.

Project description:INTRODUCTION:Current evidence suggests that patients who have latissimus dorsi (LD) breast reconstruction following mastectomy for breast cancer can experience long-term shoulder dysfunction. However, as there is no standardised assessment or follow-up period within the literature, findings are conflicting. This research aimed to investigate the impact on daily living of immediate and delayed LD breast reconstruction in women following mastectomy for breast cancer. METHODS:Both qualitative and quantitative methods of enquiry were used. A focus group study explored the musculoskeletal consequences of surgery as perceived by the women (n = 15) and their healthcare professionals (n = 11). A questionnaire survey was administered (n = 159), including a range of outcome measures to quantify both the physical and psychosocial impact of LD breast reconstruction. Dyad interviews were also conducted in order to determine the impact of surgery on function and activities of daily living (ADL) from the woman's perspective and that of her significant other (n = 8). RESULTS:The qualitative studies highlighted a lack of preparedness and unrealistic expectations regarding functional recovery among women and their significant others'. Post-surgery it was apparent that women weighed up reduced shoulder function against survival, demonstrating resilience in their approach to coping with this adaptive way of living. The survey identified low to moderate effect on the outcomes assessed (n = 159), however, node removal significantly impacted certain aspects of quality of life (p<0.05) and disability (p = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS:Breast reconstruction using the LD had an impact on shoulder function and some ADL, which impacted not only on the women but also family and significant others. Despite the functional implications associated with surgery, findings would suggest that shoulder dysfunction is not their main concern. This work identified that women and their significant other require further information to clarify expectation regarding recovery, highlighting the changing priorities of women throughout their journey from diagnosis into long-term recovery.

Project description:Gene expression in histologically normal epithelium from breast cancer patients and cancer-free prophylactic mastectomy patients share a similar profile Introduction: We hypothesized that gene expression in histologically normal epithelium (NlEpi) would differ in breast cancer patients (HN) compared to usual-risk controls undergoing reduction mammoplasty (RM), and that gene expression in NlEpi from cancer-free prophylactic mastectomies from high-risk women (PM), would resemble HN gene expression. Methods: We analyzed gene expression in 73 NlEpi samples microdissected from frozen tissue. In 42 cases, we used Affymetrix HU133A microarrays to compare gene expression in 18 RM vs 18 age-matched HN (9 ER+, 9 ER-) and 6 PM. Data were validated with qPCR in 31 independent NlEpi samples (8 RM, 17 HN, 6 PM). Results: 98 probesets (86 genes) were differentially expressed between RM and HN samples. Perfoming supervised hierarchical analysis with these 98 probesets, PM and HN samples clustered together, away from RM samples. qPCR validation of independent samples was high (84%) and uniform in RM vs HN, and lower (58%), but more heterogeneous, in RM vs PM. The 86 genes were implicated in many processes including transcription and the MAPK pathway. Conclusion: Gene expression differs between NlEpi of cancer cases and controls. The cancer cases' profile can be discerned in high-risk NlEpi. This suggests that the profile is not an effect of the tumor, but may mark increased risk and reveal breast cancer's earliest genomic changes. We determined that 98 probesets significantly differed between reduction mammoplasty and histologically normal epithelium from breast cancer patients. We also found that the histologically normal epithelium from prophylactic mastectomy patients' gene expression was more similar to histologically normal epithelium from breast cancer patients' than to reduction mammoplasty patients' gene expression. These results demonstrate that gene expression differs between NlEpi of cancer cases and controls. The cancer cases’ profile can be discerned in high-risk NlEpi. This suggests that the profile is not an effect of the tumor, but may mark increased risk and reveal breast cancer's earliest genomic changes.

Project description:PurposeThe goal of this study was to explore the perspectives and practice of radiation oncologists who treat breast cancer patients who have had breast reconstruction.MethodsIn 2010, an original electronic survey was sent to all physician members of the American Society of Radiation Oncology, National Cancer Research Institute-Breast Cancer Studies Group in the United Kingdom, Thai Society of Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology, Swiss Society of Radiation Oncology, and Turkish Radiation Oncology Society. We identified factors associated with radiation oncologists who treat breast cancer patients with reconstruction performed prior to radiation and obtained information regarding radiation management of the breast reconstruction.Results358 radiation oncologists responded, and 60% of the physicians were from the United States. While 64% of participants agree or strongly agree that breast image affects a woman's quality of life during radiation, 57% feel that reconstruction challenges their ability to deliver effective breast radiation. Compared with other countries, treatment within the United States was associated with a high reconstruction rate (>/= 50% of mastectomy patients) prior to radiation (p < 0.05). Delayed-immediate reconstruction with a temporary tissue expander was more common in the United States than in other countries (52% vs. 23%, p = 0.01). Among physicians who treat patients with tissue expanders, the majority (60%) prefer a moderately inflated implant with 150-250 cc of fluid rather than a completely deflated (13%) or inflated expander (28%) during radiation. Among radiation oncologists who treat reconstructions, 49% never use bolus and 40% never boost a breast reconstruction. United States physicians were more likely than physicians from other countries to boost or bolus the reconstruction irrespective of the type of reconstruction seen in their clinic patients (p < 0.01).ConclusionsGreat variation in practice is evident from our study of radiation treatment for breast cancer patients with reconstruction. Further research on the impact and delivery of radiation to a reconstructed breast may validate some of the observed practices, highlight the variability in treatment practice, and help create a treatment consensus.

Dataset Information

Breast reconstruction following prophylactic or therapeutic mastectomy for breast cancer: Recommendations from an evidence-based provincial guideline.

Publications

Breast reconstruction following prophylactic or therapeutic mastectomy for breast cancer: Recommendations from an evidence-based provincial guideline.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure