Patient-reported outcomes of mesh in minimally invasive (laparoscopic/robot-assisted) immediate subpectoral prosthesis breast reconstruction: a retrospective study
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 - 31(2024), 2 vom: 02. Feb., Seite 243-251 |
| Sprache: |
Englisch |
|---|
| Beteiligte Personen: |
Wu, Xin [VerfasserIn] |
|---|
| Links: |
Volltext [lizenzpflichtig] |
|---|
| Themen: |
Breast reconstruction |
|---|
| Anmerkungen: |
© The Author(s), under exclusive licence to The Japanese Breast Cancer Society 2024. Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law. |
|---|
| doi: |
10.1007/s12282-023-01529-3 |
|---|
| funding: |
|
|---|---|
| Förderinstitution / Projekttitel: |
|
| PPN (Katalog-ID): |
SPR054952107 |
|---|
| LEADER | 01000naa a22002652 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | SPR054952107 | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20240229064710.0 | ||
| 007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
| 008 | 240229s2024 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.1007/s12282-023-01529-3 |2 doi | |
| 035 | |a (DE-627)SPR054952107 | ||
| 035 | |a (SPR)s12282-023-01529-3-e | ||
| 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: a retrospective study |
| 264 | 1 | |c 2024 | |
| 336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a Computermedien |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a Online-Ressource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 500 | |a © The Author(s), under exclusive licence to The Japanese Breast Cancer Society 2024. Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law. | ||
| 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. 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. | ||
| 650 | 4 | |a Minimally invasive NSM |7 (dpeaa)DE-He213 | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Breast reconstruction |7 (dpeaa)DE-He213 | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Mesh |7 (dpeaa)DE-He213 | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Patient satisfaction |7 (dpeaa)DE-He213 | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Breast-Q |7 (dpeaa)DE-He213 | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Gui, Yu |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Liu, Jing |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Li, Shichao |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Yang, Xi |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Zeng, Zhen |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Zhang, Yi |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Fan, Linjun |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Jiang, Jun |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Chen, Li |4 aut | |
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |t Breast cancer |d Berlin : Springer, 1994 |g 31(2024), 2 vom: 02. Feb., Seite 243-251 |w (DE-627)SPR024761486 |w (DE-600)2394259-9 |x 1880-4233 |7 nnns |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:31 |g year:2024 |g number:2 |g day:02 |g month:02 |g pages:243-251 |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12282-023-01529-3 |z lizenzpflichtig |3 Volltext |
| 912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_A | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_SPRINGER | ||
| 951 | |a AR | ||
| 952 | |d 31 |j 2024 |e 2 |b 02 |c 02 |h 243-251 | ||