Patient-reported outcomes of mesh in minimally invasive (laparoscopic/robot-assisted) immediate subpectoral prosthesis breast reconstruction : a retrospective study
© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to The Japanese Breast Cancer Society..
BACKGROUND: Although there is increasing interest in minimally invasive prosthesis breast reconstruction (PBR), whether meshes application in minimally invasive PBR can improve complications and cosmetic effects remains controversial. The author retrospectively analyzed postoperative complications and evaluated patient-reported quality-of-life outcomes in minimally invasive PBR with and without mesh.
METHODS: This study enrolled patients who underwent minimally invasive nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) followed by PBR. We used the TiLOOP bra for the mesh-assisted procedure. Patient demographics and postoperative complications data were compared between the procedures. Patient-reported outcomes were evaluated with the Breast-Q.
RESULTS: A total of 158 patients underwent 160 minimally invasive NSM-PBR (with mesh, n = 64; without, n = 94). Postoperative complications were comparable in the mesh-assisted (5 [7.7%]) and non-mesh-assisted (5 [5.3%]) groups (p = 0.533). The most common complication in non-mesh-assisted group was infection, with four (4.2%) cases. In mesh-assisted group, implant exposure occurred in two (3.1%) patients. Removal of prosthesis was uncommon, with two (3.1%) and three (3.2%) cases in the mesh-assisted and non-mesh groups, respectively (p = 0.977). The BREAST-Q questionnaire was completed by 52 (81.3%) patients in the mesh-assisted group and 68 (72.3%) in the non-mesh-assisted group. Comparing the non-mesh group, patients in mesh-assisted group had improved scores on the BREAST-Q Satisfaction with breast (66.0) (p < 0.05), Physical Well-being (80.0), and Sexual Well-being (56.0).
CONCLUSIONS: Mesh-assisted minimally invasive NSM-PBR has good aesthetic outcomes and high patient satisfaction. There were no significant differences in complication rates between the mesh-assisted and non-mesh-assisted groups.
| Medienart: |
E-Artikel |
|---|
| Erscheinungsjahr: |
2024 |
|---|---|
| Erschienen: |
2024 |
| Enthalten in: |
Zur Gesamtaufnahme - volume:31 |
|---|---|
| Enthalten in: |
Breast cancer (Tokyo, Japan) - 31(2024), 2 vom: 27. März, Seite 243-251 |
| Sprache: |
Englisch |
|---|
| Beteiligte Personen: |
Wu, Xin [VerfasserIn] |
|---|
| Links: |
|---|
| Themen: |
Breast reconstruction |
|---|
| Anmerkungen: |
Date Completed 01.03.2024 Date Revised 01.03.2024 published: Print-Electronic Citation Status MEDLINE |
|---|
| doi: |
10.1007/s12282-023-01529-3 |
|---|
| funding: |
|
|---|---|
| Förderinstitution / Projekttitel: |
|
| PPN (Katalog-ID): |
NLM367953633 |
|---|
| LEADER | 01000caa a22002652 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | NLM367953633 | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20240301232438.0 | ||
| 007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
| 008 | 240202s2024 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.1007/s12282-023-01529-3 |2 doi | |
| 028 | 5 | 2 | |a pubmed24n1313.xml |
| 035 | |a (DE-627)NLM367953633 | ||
| 035 | |a (NLM)38306013 | ||
| 040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
| 041 | |a eng | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Wu, Xin |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Patient-reported outcomes of mesh in minimally invasive (laparoscopic/robot-assisted) immediate subpectoral prosthesis breast reconstruction |b a retrospective study |
| 264 | 1 | |c 2024 | |
| 336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a ƒaComputermedien |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a ƒa Online-Ressource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 500 | |a Date Completed 01.03.2024 | ||
| 500 | |a Date Revised 01.03.2024 | ||
| 500 | |a published: Print-Electronic | ||
| 500 | |a Citation Status MEDLINE | ||
| 520 | |a © 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to The Japanese Breast Cancer Society. | ||
| 520 | |a BACKGROUND: Although there is increasing interest in minimally invasive prosthesis breast reconstruction (PBR), whether meshes application in minimally invasive PBR can improve complications and cosmetic effects remains controversial. The author retrospectively analyzed postoperative complications and evaluated patient-reported quality-of-life outcomes in minimally invasive PBR with and without mesh | ||
| 520 | |a METHODS: This study enrolled patients who underwent minimally invasive nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) followed by PBR. We used the TiLOOP bra for the mesh-assisted procedure. Patient demographics and postoperative complications data were compared between the procedures. Patient-reported outcomes were evaluated with the Breast-Q | ||
| 520 | |a RESULTS: A total of 158 patients underwent 160 minimally invasive NSM-PBR (with mesh, n = 64; without, n = 94). Postoperative complications were comparable in the mesh-assisted (5 [7.7%]) and non-mesh-assisted (5 [5.3%]) groups (p = 0.533). The most common complication in non-mesh-assisted group was infection, with four (4.2%) cases. In mesh-assisted group, implant exposure occurred in two (3.1%) patients. Removal of prosthesis was uncommon, with two (3.1%) and three (3.2%) cases in the mesh-assisted and non-mesh groups, respectively (p = 0.977). The BREAST-Q questionnaire was completed by 52 (81.3%) patients in the mesh-assisted group and 68 (72.3%) in the non-mesh-assisted group. Comparing the non-mesh group, patients in mesh-assisted group had improved scores on the BREAST-Q Satisfaction with breast (66.0) (p < 0.05), Physical Well-being (80.0), and Sexual Well-being (56.0) | ||
| 520 | |a CONCLUSIONS: Mesh-assisted minimally invasive NSM-PBR has good aesthetic outcomes and high patient satisfaction. There were no significant differences in complication rates between the mesh-assisted and non-mesh-assisted groups | ||
| 650 | 4 | |a Journal Article | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Breast reconstruction | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Breast-Q | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Mesh | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Minimally invasive NSM | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Patient satisfaction | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Gui, Yu |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Liu, Jing |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Li, Shichao |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Yang, Xi |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Zeng, Zhen |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Zhang, Yi |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Fan, Linjun |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Jiang, Jun |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Chen, Li |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |t Breast cancer (Tokyo, Japan) |d 1994 |g 31(2024), 2 vom: 27. März, Seite 243-251 |w (DE-627)NLM109487133 |x 1880-4233 |7 nnns |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:31 |g year:2024 |g number:2 |g day:27 |g month:03 |g pages:243-251 |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12282-023-01529-3 |3 Volltext |
| 912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_A | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_NLM | ||
| 951 | |a AR | ||
| 952 | |d 31 |j 2024 |e 2 |b 27 |c 03 |h 243-251 | ||