The added value of immediate breast reconstruction to health-related quality of life of breast cancer patients

Background: Postmastectomy immediate breast reconstruction (IBR) may improve the quality of life (QoL) of breast cancer patients. Guidelines recommend to discuss the option IBR with all patients undergoing mastectomy. However, substantial hospital variation in IBR-rates was previously observed in the Netherlands, influenced by patient, tumour and hospital factors and clinicians’ believes. Information provision about IBR may have a positive effect on receiving IBR and therefore QoL. This study investigated patient-reported QoL of patients treated with mastectomy with and without IBR. Methods: An online survey, encompassing the validated BREAST-Q questionnaire, was distributed to a representative sample of 1218 breast cancer patients treated with mastectomy. BREAST-Q scores were compared between patients who had undergone mastectomy either with or without IBR. Results: A total of 445 patients were included for analyses: 281 patients with and 164 without IBR. Patients who had received IBR showed significantly higher BREAST-Q scores on “psychosocial well-being” (75 versus 67, p < 0.001), “sexual well-being” (62 versus 52, p < 0.001) and “physical well-being” (77 versus 74, p = 0.021) compared to patients without IBR. No statistically significant difference was found for “satisfaction with breasts” (64 versus 62, p = 0.21). Similar results were found after multivariate regression analyses, revealing IBR to be an independent factor for a better patient-reported QoL. Conclusions: Patients diagnosed with breast cancer with IBR following mastectomy report a better QoL on important psychosocial, sexual and physical well-being domains. This further supports the recommendation to discuss the option of IBR with all patients with an indication for mastectomy and to enable shared decision-making

Reconstruction of Partial Hypopharyngeal Defects following Total Laryngectomy:A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background: Various operative techniques exist to reconstruct partial hypopharyngeal defects following total laryngectomy. The current study aimed to investigate and compare complications and functional results following commonly used reconstructive techniques. Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed using studies that investigated outcomes after the reconstruction of a partial hypopharyngeal defect. The outcomes of interest were fistulas, strictures, flap failure, swallowing function and postoperative speech. Results: Of the 4035 studies identified, 23 were included in this review. Four common reconstructive techniques were reported, with a total of 794 patients: (1) pectoralis major myocutaneous and (2) myofascial flap, (3) anterolateral thigh free flap and (4) radial forearm free flap. Fistulas occurred significantly more often than pectoralis major myocutaneous flaps (34%, 95% CI 23–47%) compared with other flaps (p &lt; 0.001). No significant differences in the rates of strictures or flap failure were observed. Pectoralis major myofascial flaps were non-inferior to free-flap reconstructions. Insufficient data were available to assess speech results between flap types. Conclusion: Pectoralis myocutaneous flaps should not be the preferred method of reconstruction for most patients, considering their significantly higher rate of fistulas. In contrast, pectoralis major myofascial flaps yield promising results compared to free-flap reconstructions, warranting further investigation.</p

Reconstruction of Partial Hypopharyngeal Defects following Total Laryngectomy:A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background: Various operative techniques exist to reconstruct partial hypopharyngeal defects following total laryngectomy. The current study aimed to investigate and compare complications and functional results following commonly used reconstructive techniques. Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed using studies that investigated outcomes after the reconstruction of a partial hypopharyngeal defect. The outcomes of interest were fistulas, strictures, flap failure, swallowing function and postoperative speech. Results: Of the 4035 studies identified, 23 were included in this review. Four common reconstructive techniques were reported, with a total of 794 patients: (1) pectoralis major myocutaneous and (2) myofascial flap, (3) anterolateral thigh free flap and (4) radial forearm free flap. Fistulas occurred significantly more often than pectoralis major myocutaneous flaps (34%, 95% CI 23–47%) compared with other flaps (p &lt; 0.001). No significant differences in the rates of strictures or flap failure were observed. Pectoralis major myofascial flaps were non-inferior to free-flap reconstructions. Insufficient data were available to assess speech results between flap types. Conclusion: Pectoralis myocutaneous flaps should not be the preferred method of reconstruction for most patients, considering their significantly higher rate of fistulas. In contrast, pectoralis major myofascial flaps yield promising results compared to free-flap reconstructions, warranting further investigation.</p

Complex skin cancer treatment requiring reconstructive plastic surgery: an interview study on the experiences and needs of patients

To provide patient-centered care, it is essential to explore what patients consider important and to adjust care accordingly. This may specifically be relevant for patients with complex skin cancer, for whom the care process is often more complicated and psychological and social problems may play a larger role. The objective was to explore the experiences and needs of patients who had undergone surgical treatment by a dermatologist for a complex skin cancer with a subsequent reconstruction by a plastic surgeon. An interview study was conducted among 16 patients who had undergone surgical treatment by a dermatologist and reconstruction by a plastic surgeon for basal cell carcinoma, cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma, or lentigo maligna. The interviews focused on patients’ experiences and needs regarding care using a predefined topic list. All interviews were audio-taped, transcribed verbatim and inductively analyzed using Atlas.ti. Patients reported a need for a skilled and friendly physician who tailors information and communication to their individual situation. A need for continuity of care and improved collaboration between healthcare providers was also emphasized. Furthermore, patients experienced complications and unmet expectations and expressed a need for shared decision-making at various steps throughout the treatment process (depending on age). Patients also considered completeness of tumor removal, follow-up visits with multiple specialists to be planned the same day and recognition of the psychological impact of the disease on the partner important. To improve patient-centered care for complex skin cancer patients, more efforts should be directed towards improving continuity of care and collaboration. Furthermore, it is advocated for physicians to be sensitive to the individual needs of patients and their partner and adjust information, communication and (supportive) care accordingly

Patient-Reported Outcome Measures may optimize shared decision-making for cancer risk management in BRCA mutation carriers

Purpose: The aim of this study was to compare patient-reported outcomes (PROs) of BRCA1/2 mutation carriers, either after bilateral prophylactic mastectomy (BPM) or during breast surveillance, to improve shared decision-making in their cancer risk management. Methods: Unaffected BRCA1/2 mutation carriers at least one year after BPM followed by immediate breast reconstruction (BPM-IBR) or one year under surveillance were eligible. After informed consent, the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) and BREAST-Q were administered and compared between the different strategies. PROs were also compared to available normative data. Results: Ninety-six participants were analyzed in this study and showed significant differences between strategies in age, age at genetic testing, and time since BPM or starting breast surveillance. All HADS scores were below 8 suggesting no signs of anxiety or depression in both groups. Higher mean ‘Q-physical well-being’ scores were reported by the surveillance group (81.78 [CI 76.99–86.57]) than the BPM group (76.96 [CI 73.16 – 80.75]; p = 0.011). Overall, for both questionnaires better scores were seen when compared to age-matched normative data. Conclusions: No signs of anxiety or depression were seen in the surveillance or BPM-IBR group. Slightly better mean BREAST-Q scores were seen for the surveillance group in comparison to BPM-IBR, except for ‘Q-psychological well-being’. The difference in ‘Q-physical well-being’ was significantly worse for BPM-IBR. Approaches to obtain longitudinal PROs and reference values should be explored in the future, which could add value to shared decision-making in regards to breast cancer risk management in this specific patient population

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

Selective Deposition and Alignment of Single-Walled Carbon Nanotubes Assisted by Dielectrophoresis: From Thin Films to Individual Nanotubes

Dielectrophoresis has been used in the controlled deposition of single-walled carbon nanotubes (SWNTs) with the focus on the alignment of nanotube thin films and their applications in the last decade. In this paper, we extend the research from the selective deposition of SWNT thin films to the alignment of small nanotube bundles and individual nanotubes. Electrodes with “teeth”-like patterns are fabricated to study the influence of the electrode width on the deposition and alignment of SWNTs. The entire fabrication process is compatible with optical lithography-based techniques. Therefore, the fabrication cost is low, and the resulting devices are inexpensive. A series of SWNT solutions is prepared with concentrations ranging from 0.0125 to 0.2 mg/ml. The alignment of SWNT thin films, small bundles, and individual nanotubes is achieved under the optimized experimental conditions. The electrical properties of these samples are characterized; the linear current–voltage plots prove that the aligned SWNTs are mainly metallic nanotubes. The microscopy inspection of the samples demonstrates that the alignment of small nanotube bundles and individual nanotubes can only be achieved using narrow electrodes and low-concentration solutions. Our investigation shows that it is possible to deposit a controlled amount of SWNTs in desirable locations using dielectrophoresis

Defining Quality Indicators for Breast Device Surgery: Using Registries for Global Benchmarking

Background: Breast device registries monitor devices encompassing breast implants, tissue expanders and dermal matrices, and the quality of care and patient outcomes for breast device surgery. Defining a standard set of quality indicators and risk adjustment factors will enable consistency and adjustment for case-mix in benchmarking quality of care across breast implant registries. This study aimed to develop a set of quality indicators to enable assessment and reporting of quality of care for breast device surgery which can be applied globally. Methods: A scoping literature review was undertaken, and potential quality indicators were identified. Consensus on the final list of quality indicators was obtained using a modified Delphi approach. This process involved a series of online surveys, and teleconferences over 6 months. The Delphi panel included participants from various countries and representation from surgical specialty groups including breast and general surgeons, plastic and reconstructive surgeons, cosmetic surgeons, a breast-care nurse, a consumer, a devices regulator (Therapeutic Goods Administration), and a biostatistician. A total of 12 candidate indicators were proposed: Intraoperative antibiotic wash, intraoperative antiseptic wash, preoperative antibiotics, nipple shields, surgical plane, volume of implant, funnels, immediate versus delayed reconstruction, time to revision, reoperation due to complications, patient satisfaction, and volume of activity. Results: Three of the 12 proposed indicators were endorsed by the panel: preoperative intravenous antibiotics, reoperation due to complication, and patient reported outcome measures. Conclusion: The 3 endorsed quality indicator measures will enable breast device registries to standardize benchmarking of care internationally for patients undergoing breast device surgery