Breast-Conserving Therapy Versus Postmastectomy Breast Reconstruction: Propensity Score-Matched Analysis

被引:2
|
作者
Kim, Minji [1 ]
Tadros, Audree B. [2 ]
Boe, Lillian A. [3 ]
Vingan, Perri [1 ]
Allen, Robert J. [1 ]
Mehrara, Babak J. [1 ]
Morrow, Monica [2 ]
Nelson, Jonas A. [1 ]
机构
[1] Mem Sloan Kettering Canc Ctr, Dept Surg, Plast & Reconstruct Surg Serv, New York, NY 10065 USA
[2] Mem Sloan Kettering Canc Ctr, Dept Surg, Breast Serv, New York, NY USA
[3] Mem Sloan Kettering Canc Ctr, Dept Epidemiol & Biostat, New York, NY USA
关键词
Breast-conserving therapy; Postmastectomy; Breast reconstruction; Propensity match; Breast cancer; Patient-reported outcomes; QUALITY-OF-LIFE; PSYCHOLOGICAL-ASPECTS; PATIENT SATISFACTION; CONSERVATION THERAPY; SPARING MASTECTOMY; CANCER PATIENTS; SURGERY; OUTCOMES; REGRESSION; HEALTH;
D O I
10.1245/s10434-024-15294-w
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
Background. Although studies have compared patient-reported outcomes (PROs) after breast conserving-therapy (BCT) and postmastectomy breast reconstruction (PMBR), they often have been confounded by treatment or other factors that complicate a direct comparison. This study aimed to compare PROs after BCT and PMBR by using propensity score-matching analysis. Methods. Patients who underwent BCT or PMBR between 2010 and 2022 and completed the BREAST-Q were identified. Each BCT patient was matched to a PMBR patient using nearest-neighbor 1:1 matching with replacement for each BREAST-Q time point. Outcomes included all prospectively collected BREAST-Q domains preoperatively, at 6 months, and at 1, 2, and 3 years postoperatively. A 4-point difference was considered clinically meaningful. Results. For this study, 6215 patients (2501 BCT [40.2%] and 3714 PMBR [59.8%] patients) were eligible, and 2616 unique patients were matched. Preoperatively, 463 BCT and 463 PMBR patients were matched for analysis (6 months [443 matched pairs], 1 year [639 matched pairs], 2 years [421 matched pairs], 3 years [254 matched pairs]). At 6 months postoperatively, the BCT patients scored higher on all BREAST-Q domains than the PMBR patients (p < 0.05; differences > 4 points). At 1, 2, and 3 years, the patients who underwent BCT consistently had superior Satisfaction With Breasts, Psychosocial Well-Being, and Sexual Well-Being (p < 0.05), and the differences were clinically meaningful. Conclusion. In this statistically powered study, the BCT patients reported higher quality of life than the PMBR patients in early assessment and also through 3 years of follow-up evaluation. Given the equivalency in survival and recurrence outcomes between BCT and PMBR, patients eligible for either surgery should be counseled regarding the superiority of BCT in terms of PROs.
引用
收藏
页码:8030 / 8039
页数:10
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Cavity Shaving Reduces Involved Margins and Reinterventions Without Increasing Costs in Breast-Conserving Surgery: A Propensity Score-Matched Study
    Corsi, Fabio
    Sorrentino, Luca
    Bonzini, Matteo
    Bossi, Daniela
    Truffi, Marta
    Amadori, Rosella
    Nebuloni, Manuela
    Brillat, Barbara
    Mazzucchelli, Serena
    ANNALS OF SURGICAL ONCOLOGY, 2017, 24 (06) : 1516 - 1524
  • [22] A Propensity Score-Matched Comparison of Perioperative Outcomes in Prepectoral Smooth Versus Textured Tissue Expander Breast Reconstruction
    Perez, Kevin
    Rodnoi, Pope
    Teotia, Sumeet S.
    Haddock, Nicholas T.
    ANNALS OF PLASTIC SURGERY, 2023, 90 (5S) : S242 - S251
  • [23] Breast-conserving therapy is associated with better survival than mastectomy in Early-stage breast cancer: A propensity score analysis
    Ji, Jiali
    Yuan, Shushu
    He, Jiawei
    Liu, Hong
    Yang, Lei
    He, Xuexin
    CANCER MEDICINE, 2022, 11 (07): : 1646 - 1658
  • [24] Comparison of long-term oncological outcomes after central lumpectomy versus nipple-sparing breast-conserving surgery for centrally located breast cancer: a propensity score-matched study
    Hwang, Yung-Huyn
    Yoo, Tae-Kyung
    Lee, Sae Byul
    Kim, Jisun
    Chung, Il Yong
    Ko, Beom Seok
    Kim, Hee Jeong
    Lee, Jong Won
    Son, Byung Ho
    BREAST CANCER RESEARCH AND TREATMENT, 2024, 205 (01) : 117 - 125
  • [25] Comparison of long-term oncological outcomes after central lumpectomy versus nipple-sparing breast-conserving surgery for centrally located breast cancer: a propensity score-matched study
    Yung-Huyn Hwang
    Tae-Kyung Yoo
    Sae Byul Lee
    Jisun Kim
    Il Yong Chung
    Beom Seok Ko
    Hee Jeong Kim
    Jong Won Lee
    Byung Ho Son
    Breast Cancer Research and Treatment, 2024, 205 : 117 - 125
  • [26] Impact of implant surface type on breast cancer relapse after breast reconstruction: a propensity score-matched study
    Ha, Jeong Hyun
    Cheun, Jong-Ho
    Jung, Ji-Jung
    Kim, Hong-Kyu
    Lee, Han-Byoel
    Shin, Hee-Chul
    Moon, Hyeong-Gon
    Han, Wonshik
    Myung, Yujin
    Jeong, Jae Hoon
    Heo, Chan Yeong
    Chang, Hak
    Kim, Eun-Kyu
    Jin, Ung Sik
    BRITISH JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 2023, 110 (10) : 1288 - 1292
  • [27] Breast-conserving Therapy in Breast Cancer: External or intraoperative Boost? A matched-pair Analysis
    Sperk, E.
    Astor, D.
    Welzel, G.
    Keller, A.
    Tuschy, B.
    Gerhardt, A.
    Suetterlin, M.
    Wenz, F.
    STRAHLENTHERAPIE UND ONKOLOGIE, 2015, 191 : S40 - S41
  • [28] Single versus Double Drainage for Immediate Two-Stage Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction: A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis
    Escandon, Joseph M.
    Aristizabal, Alejandra
    Langstein, Howard N.
    Christiano, Jose G.
    Gooch, Jessica C.
    Prieto, Peter A.
    Skinner, Kristin A.
    Weiss, Anna
    Manrique, Oscar J.
    AESTHETIC PLASTIC SURGERY, 2024, 48 (17) : 3304 - 3316
  • [29] Prepectoral versus Subpectoral Tissue Expander Breast Reconstruction: A Historically Controlled, Propensity Score-Matched Comparison of Perioperative Outcomes
    Haddock, Nicholas T.
    Kadakia, Yash
    Liu, Yulun
    Teotia, Sumeet S.
    PLASTIC AND RECONSTRUCTIVE SURGERY, 2021, 148 (01) : 1 - 9
  • [30] Breast-conserving therapy versus mastectomy: Long-term results from a matched pair analysis
    Dian, D.
    Muggendorfer, R.
    Janni, W.
    Friese, K.
    GEBURTSHILFE UND FRAUENHEILKUNDE, 2007, 67 (12) : 1328 - 1333