Patient-reported aesthetic satisfaction with breast reconstruction during the long-term survivorship period

Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery

Volumn 124, Issue 1, 2009, Pages 1-8

  Hu, Emily S ^b   Pusic, Andrea L ^b   Waljee, Jennifer F ^b   Kuhn, Latoya ^b   Hawley, Sarah T ^b   Wilkins, Edwin ^b   Alderman, Amy K ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN   (United States)

^b NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; AUTOGRAFT; BREAST CANCER; BREAST ENDOPROSTHESIS; BREAST RECONSTRUCTION; CANCER SURVIVAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDY; DEMOGRAPHY; ESTHETICS; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; HARDNESS; HEALTH SURVEY; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MASTECTOMY; ORGAN SIZE; PATIENT SATISFACTION; POSTOPERATIVE PERIOD; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RECTUS ABDOMINIS MUSCLE; SCORING SYSTEM; SELF REPORT; SOCIAL ASPECT; SURVIVAL TIME; TRANSVERSE RECTUS ABDOMINIS MUSCULOCUTANEOUS FLAP; TREATMENT RESPONSE; VALIDATION PROCESS;

ADULT; AGED; BEAUTY; BREAST IMPLANTS; CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDIES; FEMALE; HUMANS; MAMMAPLASTY; MIDDLE AGED; PATIENT SATISFACTION; SURGICAL FLAPS; TIME FACTORS; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 68249091260     PISSN: 00321052     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/PRS.0b013e3181ab10b2     Document Type: Article

References (22)

1. American Cancer Society. Breast Cancer Facts and Figures 2005- 2006, Available at: http://www.cancer.org/downloads/STT/ CAFF2005BrFacspdf2005.pdf Ed. Accessed May 17, 2007.
2. Nano MT, Gill PG, Kollias J, et al. Psychological impact and cosmetic outcome of surgical breast cancer strategies. ANZ J Surg. 2005;75:940-947.
3. Saulis AS, Mustoe TA, Fine NA. A retrospective analysis of patient satisfaction with immediate postmastectomy breast reconstruction: Comparison of three common procedures. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2007;119:1669-1676; discussion 1677-1678.
4. Mosahebi A, Ramakrishnan V, Gittos M, et al. Aesthetic outcome of different techniques of reconstruction following nipple-areola-preserving envelope mastectomy with immediate reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2007;119:796-803.
5. Tykka E, Asko-Seljavaara S, Hietanen H. Patient satisfaction with delayed breast reconstruction: A prospective study. Ann Plast Surg. 2002;49:258-263.
6. Tykka E, Asko-Seljavaara S, Hietanen H. Patients' satisfaction with breast reconstruction and reduction mammaplasty. Scand J Plast Reconstr Surg Hand Surg. 2001;35:399-405.
7. Kovacs L, Papadopulos NA, Ammar SA, et al. Clinical outcome and patients' satisfaction after simultaneous bilateral breast reconstruction with free transverse rectus abdominis muscle (TRAM) flap. Ann Plast Surg. 2004;53:199-204.
8. Ramon Y, Ullmann Y, Moscona R, et al. Aesthetic results and patient satisfaction with immediate breast reconstruction using tissue expansion: A follow-up study. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1997;99:686-691.
9. Simon AM, Bouwense CL, McMillan S, et al. Comparison of unipedicled and bipedicled TRAM flap breast reconstructions: Assessment of physical function and patient satisfaction. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2004;113:136-140.
10. Moscona RA, Holander L, Or D, et al. Patient satisfaction and aesthetic results after pedicled transverse rectus abdominis muscle flap for breast reconstruction. Ann Surg Oncol. 2006; 13:1739-1746.
11. Lantz PM, Janz NK, Fagerlin A, et al. Satisfaction with surgery outcomes and the decision process in a population-based sample of women with breast cancer. Health Serv Res. 2005; 40:745-767.
12. Alderman AK, Wilkins EG, Lowery JC, et al. Determinants of patient satisfaction in postmastectomy breast reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2000;106:769-776.
13. Alderman AK, Kuhn LE, Lowery JC, et al. Does patient satisfaction with breast reconstruction change over time? Twoyear results of the Michigan Breast Reconstruction Outcomes Study. J Am Coll Surg. 2007;204:7-12.
14. Clough KB, O'Donoghue JM, Fitoussi AD, et al. Prospective evaluation of late cosmetic results following breast reconstruction: I. Implant reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2001; 107:1702-1709.
15. Spear SL, Onyewu C. Staged breast reconstruction with saline- filled implants in the irradiated breast: Recent trends and therapeutic implications. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2000;105: 930-942.
16. Clough KB, O'Donoghue JM, Fitoussi AD, et al. Prospective evaluation of late cosmetic results following breast reconstruction: II. TRAM flap reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2001;107:1710-1716.
17. Dillman D. Mail and Telephone Surveys: The Total Design Method. New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc.; 1978.
18. Pusic AL, Chen CM, Cano S, et al. Measuring quality of life in cosmetic and reconstructive breast surgery: A systematic review of patient-reported outcomes instruments. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2007;120:823-837; discussion 838-839.
19. Cano S, Klassen A, Pusic A. The science of quality of life measurement: A primer for plastic surgeons. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2009;123:98e-106e.
20. Pusic AL, Cano S, Klassen A, et al. Measuring Quality of Life in Breast Surgery: Content Development of a New Modular System to Capture Patient-Reported Outcomes (the BREAST-Q). Lisbon, Portugal, International Society of Quality of Life Research Meeting, October 2006.
21. American Society of Plastic Surgeons. 2006 Reconstructive Surgery Procedures, 2006. Available at: http://www.plasticsurgery.org/ Media/Statistics/2006-Statistics.html. Accessed August, 1, 2007.
22. Department of Labor. Women's Health and Cancer Right's Act. Available at: http://www.dol.gov/ebsa/publications/ whcra.html. Accessed May 17, 2007.