Predictors of women's sexual outcomes after implant-based breast reconstruction

Objective: Although breast reconstruction has become an important treatment modality following mastectomy, few studies assessed predictors of postoperative sexual outcomes after breast reconstruction. Therefore, we aimed to study three sexual outcomes following implant-based breast reconstruction (IBBR), and associate multiple biopsychosocial factors with these outcomes. Methods: Data collection was part of a multicenter prospective study on IBBR. A predictive model was tested including medical, background and psychological predictors, partner relationship factors and physical sexual function. Data collection included clinical and questionnaire data (preoperatively and 1 year following reconstruction) using the BREAST-Q Sexual well-being scale (BQ5), and questions regarding sexual dysfunction and sexual satisfaction questions (Female Sexual Function Index). Results: The study sample consisted of 88 women who underwent mastectomy and IBBR. Mean postoperative BQ5 scores were lower than before surgery (M = 58 [SD = 18] vs 65 [SD = 20]; P =.01, Wilks' Lamdba =.88). Sexual dysfunctions were related strongest to orgasm inability and vaginal lubrication issues. The tested models predicted 37%-46% of the sexual outcomes: sexual outcomes were mostly predicted by psychosocial well-being, physical sexual function and partner support. Preoperative sexual and psychosocial well-being were positively associated with postoperative sexual well-being (r = 0.45 and r = 0.47). Conclusions: Although moderately positive sexual outcomes were reported after IBBR, some women reported issues with vaginal lubrication, breast sensation and orgasm. Sexual dysfunctions were predicted by vaginal lubrication and medical treatments, while sexual well-being and satisfaction were more predicted by psychosocial well-being and partner support. We advocate supportive care that includes partners and psychosocial functioning to optimize sexual outcomes after IBBR

The aesthetic items scale: A tool for the evaluation of aesthetic outcome after breast reconstruction

__Background:__ Valid tools to assess aesthetic outcomes after breast reconstructive surgery are scarce. Previously a professional aesthetic assessment scale was introduced, the Aesthetic Items Scale (AIS). We aim to determine if this method is a valid and reliable tool to assess aesthetic outcome after breast reconstructive surgery. __Methods:__ The study population was consenting women who underwent prophylactic mastectomy with subsequent implant-based breast reconstruction. The aesthetic outcome with regard to breast volume, shape, symmetry, scars, and nipple areola complex was rated on a 5-point scale using standardized photographs to give a summed total score. Photographs were evaluated by the patient, 5 plastic surgeons, and 3 mammography nurses. An overall rating of aesthetic outcome on a 1-10 scale was given separately. We determined the intraclass correlation coefficient and assessed interobserver agreement. To assess validity, we calculated the correlation between total score and overall rating of aesthetic outcome. __Results:__ Interobserver reliability was highest between plastic surgeons for the subitem and overall scores and ranged between 0.56 and 0.82. The summed score of the AIS correlates strongly with the overall rating in professionals but not in patients. __Conclusions:__ The AIS is a valid and reliable method for evaluating aesthetic outcome of breast reconstruction by plastic surgeons. The results indicate that patients judge aesthetic outcome differently, taking into account factors that are not represented in the AIS. Professionals can use this method to evaluate surgical results, but other measurements are needed to map satisfaction of the patient with her breasts

Short-term cost-effectiveness of one-stage implant-based breast reconstruction with an acellular dermal matrix versus two-stage expander-implant reconstruction from a multicentre randomized clinical trial

Background: Implant-based breast reconstruction (IBBR) is the most commonly performed reconstructive procedure and its economic impact is significant. This study aimed to analyse whether a direct one-stage IBBR with use of an acellular dermal matrix (ADM) is more cost-effective than two-stage (expander-implant) breast reconstruction. Methods: The BRIOS (Breast Reconstruction In One Stage) study was an open-label multicentre RCT in which women scheduled for skin-sparing mastectomy and immediate IBBR were randomized between one-stage IBBR with ADM or two-stage IBBR. Duration of surgery and hospital stay, and visits for the primary surgery, unplanned and cosmetic procedures were recorded. Costs were estimated at an institutional level. Health status was assessed by means of the EuroQol Five Dimensions 5L questionnaire. Results: Fifty-nine patients (91 breasts) underwent one-stage IBBR with ADM and 62 patients (92 breasts) two-stage IBBR. The mean(s.d.) duration of surgery in the one-stage group was significantly longer than that for two-stage IBBR for unilateral (2⋅52(0⋅55) versus 2⋅02(0⋅35) h; P < 0⋅001) and bilateral (4⋅03(1⋅00) versus 3⋅25(0⋅58) h; P = 0⋅017) reconstructions. Costs were higher for one-stage compared with two-stage IBBR for both unilateral (€12 448 (95 per cent c.i. 10 722 to 14 387) versus €9871 (9373 to 10 445) respectively; P = 0⋅025) and bilateral (€16 939 (14 887 to 19 360) versus €13 383 (12 414 to 14 669); P = 0⋅002) reconstructions. This was partly related to the use of relatively expensive ADM. There was no difference in postoperative health status between the groups. Conclusion: One-stage IBBR with ADM was associated with higher costs, but similar health status, compared with conventional two-stage IBBR. Registration number: NTR5446 (http://www .trialregister.nl)

Predictors of complications after direct-to-implant breast reconstruction with an acellular dermal matrix from a multicentre randomized clinical trial

Background: In the multicentre randomized trial BRIOS (Breast Reconstruction In One Stage), direct-to-implant (DTI) breast reconstruction with an acellular dermal matrix (ADM) was associated with a markedly higher postoperative complication rate compared with two-stage tissue expander/implant breast reconstruction. This study aimed to identify factors that contribute to the occurrence of complications after DTI ADM-assisted breast reconstruction. Methods: Data were obtained from the BRIOS study, including all patients treated with DTI ADM-assisted breast reconstruction. Logistic regression analyses were performed to identify factors predictive of postoperative complications. Results: Fifty-nine patients (91 breasts) were included, of whom 27 (35 breasts) developed a surgical complication. Reoperations were performed in 29 breasts (32 per cent), with prosthesis removal in 22 (24 per cent). In multivariable analyses, mastectomy weight was associated with complications (odds ratio (OR) 1·94, 95 per cent c.i. 1·33 to 2·83), reoperations (OR 1·70, 1·12 to 2·59) and removal of the implant (OR 1·55, 1·11 to 2·17). Younger patients (OR 1·07, 1·01 to 1·13) and those who received adjuvant chemotherapy (OR 4·83, 1·15 to 20·24) more frequently required reoperation. In univariable analyses, adjuvant radiotherapy showed a trend towards more complications (OR 7·23, 0·75 to 69·95) and removal of the implant (OR 5·12, 0·76 to 34·44), without reaching statistical significance. Conclusion: Breast size appeared to be the most significant predictor of complications in DTI ADM-assisted breast reconstruction. The technique should preferably be performed in patients with small to moderate sized breasts. Registration number: NTR5446 (http://www.trialregister.nl)

Skin Distress Screening: Validation of an Efficient One-question Tool.

Skin diseases are often accompanied by physical, emotional and social problems, which may negatively impact health-related quality of life and result in skin-related distress. It is essential to identify patients with skin-related distress within the short time-window of an outpatient dermatological visit. Therefore the one-question screening tool, the Distress Thermometer adjusted for skin conditions, was validated in a cross-sectional questionnaire study. In 2 medical centres in Amsterdam, 214 patients with a chronic skin disease were invited to complete the Distress Thermometer and additional health-related quality of life questionnaires. To validate the Distress Thermometer, the Skindex29 was used as gold standard. To test test-retest reliability, the questionnaires were answered at 2 different time-points. Severely impaired health-related quality of life was present in 30% of respondents according to the Skindex29 using a cut-off score of 44. Receiver operating characteristic curve analyses yielded an area under the curve of 0.813 (standard error 0.04, 95% confidence interval 0.74-0.89). A cut-off score ≥ 4 on the Distress Thermometer provided the optimal ratio of sensitivity (90.7%) to specificity (56.1%). Therefore, for general practice, a cut-off score of ≥ 4 on the Distress Thermometer is advised. The Distress Thermometer seems to be a rapid, valid and reliable screening tool for identifying skin-related distress in patients with a chronic skin disease in the outpatient dermatology setting