Logo: to the web site of Uppsala University

Introduction

As breast cancer survival rates improve, the long-term quality of life (QoL) has become increasingly important. With a significant number of patients still undergoing mastectomy and experiencing its well-known negative impacts on QoL, breast reconstruction aims to mitigate this by restoring body integrity. This study aimed to evaluate the changes in QoL and satisfaction in patients after breast reconstruction and influence of various patient-related factors.

Methods

Patients who underwent delayed unilateral deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) breast reconstruction at a single institution between January 2016 and April 2019 were surveyed. QoL was assessed using the BREAST-Q questionnaire preoperatively and one year postoperatively. Scores were compared between the time points, and regression analysis was conducted to identify the influence of age, body mass index, economic status, education level, and relationship status on QoL.

Results

Among the 93 patients, 55 completed the preoperative and one-year postoperative BREAST-Q questionnaires (response rate: 59%). Postoperative QoL scores significantly increased for the domains “satisfaction with breasts,” physical well-being chest,” “sexual well-being,” and “psychosocial well-being” (p<0.001). The scores for the domain “physical well-being abdomen” remained unchanged one year postoperatively. Higher education correlated with greater satisfaction with the breasts. Lack of an intimate partnership was identified as a significant negative factor for poorer psychosocial well-being.

Conclusions

Delayed unilateral DIEP breast reconstruction significantly enhances QoL and breast satisfaction one year postoperatively without causing long-term physical discomfort at the donor site. Education level and relationship status significantly affect the postoperative outcomes. Tailored preoperative counseling and psychosocial support are essential to maximize patient satisfaction and well-being following reconstruction.

Background: 

Breast cancer–related lymphedema is a common complication lacking medical treatment. Lymfactin is an adenovirus type 5–based gene therapy and prolymphangiogenic growth factor vector that induces vascular endothelial growth factor C expression. The authors’ aim was to evaluate the therapeutic effect of Lymfactin with vascularized lymph node transfer (VLNT).

Methods: 

This phase II, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized, multicenter study evaluated the efficacy and safety of Lymfactin in combination with VLNT. The primary endpoints were edema volume, quality of life, and lymphoscintigraphy. All adverse events were recorded. A mixed model of repeated measures analysis of covariance was performed. This study was a continuation of a previous phase I Lymfactin study.

Results: 

Thirty-nine patients with breast cancer–related lymphedema were recruited between June of 2018 and December of 2019 and randomized to receive either Lymfactin (n = 20) or placebo (n = 19). The primary endpoints showed a positive effect of VLNT in both groups compared with the baseline, but without statistical differences between groups at 12 months. In addition, greater improvements were observed in the tissue dielectric constant ratios measuring skin interstitial fluid levels in the Lymfactin group compared with the placebo group (P = 0.020). No differences in adverse events were detected between the groups.

Conclusions: 

This study was one of the few studies to objectively show a positive effect of VLNT in a prospective, clinical, multicenter setting. It was also the first-ever randomized prospective clinical study showing a quantitatively positive effect of a medical therapy on the edema of lymphedema but failed to show differences between groups in primary outcome measures.

Introduction Up to one-fifth of breast cancer survivors will develop chronic breast cancer-related lymphoedema (BCRL). To date, complex physical decongestion therapy (CDT) is the gold standard of treatment. However, it is mainly symptomatic and often ineffective in preventing BCRL progression. Lymphovenous anastomosis (LVA) and vascularised lymph node transfer (VLNT) are microsurgical techniques that aim to restore lymphatic drainage. This international randomised trial aims to evaluate advantages of microsurgical interventions plus CDT versus CDT alone for BCRL treatment. Methods and analysis The effectiveness of LVA and/or VLNT in combination with CDT, which may be combined with liposuction, versus CDT alone will be evaluated in routine practice across the globe. Patients with BCRL will be randomly allocated to either surgical or conservative therapy. The primary end point of this trial is the patient-reported quality of life (QoL) outcome 'lymphoedema-specific QoL', which will be assessed 15 months after randomisation. Secondary end points are further patient-reported outcomes (PROs), arm volume measurements, economic evaluations and imaging at different time points. A long-term follow-up will be conducted up to 10 years after randomisation. A total of 280 patients will be recruited in over 20 sites worldwide. Ethics and dissemination This study will be conducted in compliance with the Declaration of Helsinki and the International Council for Harmonisation-Good Clinical Practice (ICH-GCP) E6 guideline. Ethical approval has been obtained by the lead ethics committee 'Ethikkommission Nordwest- und Zentralschweiz' (2023-00733, 22 May 2023). Ethical approval from local authorities will be sought for all participating sites. Regardless of outcomes, the findings will be published in a peer-reviewed medical journal. Metadata detailing the dataset's type, size and content will be made available, along with the full study protocol and case report forms, in public repositories in compliance with the Findability, Accessibility, Interoperability and Reuse principles. Trial registration number NCT05890677.

Background: The study examined long-term lip appearance after Skoog's lip repair in unilateral cleft, lip, and palate (UCLP) patients. To include different views, three different panels respectively, rated level of lip appearance and desire for improvement. The secondary aim was to investigate the correlation between the self-reported satisfaction of UCLP patients and controls with the panel assessments.

Methods: Cropped frontal photographs of the lips of 74 UCLP-treated individuals and 61 non-cleft individuals were assessed twice by three panels of five cleft surgeons (Professional panel), nine laymen (Layman panel), and five individuals with CLP (Cleft panel) using a web-based platform, at a mean follow-up of 37 years post-lip surgery.

Results: All three panels rated the lip appearance of UCLP patients worse than that of the controls (p < 0.001). The Professional panel reported higher satisfaction levels and less desire to change lip appearance than the Layman and Cleft panels. Intra-rater agreements were, in general, moderate in the Professional panel ICC (0.57-0.82) and Laymen panel ICC (0.63-0.73) and poor in the Cleft panel ICC (0.21-0.36). The inter-rater agreement was, in general, poor in all panels. No significant correlation was found between the patient's Self-assessments and any of the panel assessments.

Conclusions: All panels' rated lip appearance of adults born with UCLP treated with Skoog's technique as worse than that of non-cleft controls. The study highlights a significant discrepancy between the Professional panel's more favorable assessment and the more critical views of the laymen and cleft panels, contradicting the initial hypothesis of uniform perception across panels. The lack of correlation between patient self-assessment and panel assessments underscores the subjective nature of lip satisfaction, emphasizing the need for personalized patient care strategies in CLP treatment outcomes. Level of evidenceNot gradable.

Background: Perioperative management in autologous breast reconstruction has gained focus in recent years. This study compares two pain management protocols in patients undergoing abdominal-based free flap breast reconstruction: a past protocol (PP) and a current protocol (CP)-both intended to reduce opioid consumption postoperatively. The PP entails use of a pain catheter in the abdominal wound and the CP consists of an intraoperative nerve block in addition to refinements in the oral pain management. We hypothesize that the CP reduces opioid consumption compared to PP.

Methods: From December 2017 to January 2020, 102 patients underwent breast reconstruction with an abdominal-based free flap. Two postoperative pain management strategies were used during the period; from December 2017 to September 2018, the PP was used which entailed the use of a pain catheter with ropivacaine applied in the abdominal wound with continuous distribution postoperatively in addition to paracetamol orally and oxycodone orally pro re nata (PRN). From October 2018 to January 2020, the CP was used. This protocol included a combination of intraoperative subfascial nerve block and a postoperative oral pain management regime that consisted of paracetamol, celecoxib, and gabapentin as well as oxycodone PRN.

Results: The CP group ( n = 63) had lower opioid consumption compared to the PP group ( n = 39) when examining all aspects of opioid consumption, including daily opioid usage in morphine milligram equivalents and total opioid usage during the stay ( p < 0.001). The CP group had shorter length of hospital stay (LOS).

Conclusion: Introduction of the CP reduced opioid use and LOS was shorter.

Background: Vascularized lymph node transfer (VLNT) is one option among other surgical treatments in the management of breast cancer-related lymphedema (BCRL). The cause of concern regarding VLNT harvested from the groin has been the potential development of secondary lower-extremity lymphedema. This study explored the risks associated with donor-site morbidity following groin VLNT, with or without concomitant breast reconstruction. Method: The cohort comprised data from the Lymfactin (R) Phase I and II trials, conducted from 2016 to 2019, that used perioperative reverse lymphatic mapping. The volume of the lower extremities was measured preoperatively and at 3, 6, and 12 months postoperative, and the adverse events were documented during study visits. Results: Altogether, 51 women with a mean age of 55.5 years were recruited. The mean duration of BCRL was 31.8 months. Among these, 25 (49%) underwent VLNT (VLNT-group) and 26 (51%) underwent VLNT in combination with breast reconstruction (VLNT-BR group). The groups were similar in terms of age, (p = 0.766), BMI (p = 0.316), and duration of BCRL (p = 0.994). Across a period of one year, the volume difference between the lower extremities changed by 22.6 ml (range: -813 to 860.2 ml) (p = 0.067). None of the patients had lower-extremity volume difference exceeding 10% at the 12-month follow-up visit. The most frequent adverse events were postoperative pain (17.7%), wound healing issues (11.8%), and seroma formation (11.8%). Most adverse events (64.6%) were classified as minor. Conclusions: This prospective study demonstrated that groin VLNT with reverse lymphatic mapping appears safe and does not increase the risk of secondary donor-site lymphedema within one year postoperatively. (c) 2024 British Association of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Ltd.

Background: Numerous papers have been published evaluating the clinical benefits of robot-assisted microsurgery. In this study, we describe the incorporation of the MUSA-2 robot (Microsure, Eindhoven, The Netherlands) into a plastic surgery unit outside of its development centre. We aimed to assess robot implementation timeframes, areas of future development, and key learning points for centres considering the establishment of a robot-assisted microsurgery service.

Methods: We identified 12 female patients with upper limb lymphoedema secondary to breast cancer treatment, who consented to have a robotic-assisted lymphaticovenous anastomosis (LVA) from September 2022 to March 2023. All patients had at least one robot-assisted LVA. Post operatively, a surgical evaluation of the robot's performance and of the surgeon's intraoperative workload was measured. Each patient completed a postoperative Likert scale, which measured their surgical experience.

Results: The mean robot time per case was 60.25 min. The mean time taken for the first robot-assisted anastomosis was 32 min. The second robot anastomoses was 30% faster than the first, taking a mean of 22.5 min. The average anastomosis had 4.5 sutures placed robotically. Initial mean scores in the workload survey completed by the surgeon were highest for frustration and effort, both reduced with increasing volume of cases. In 91% of cases, physical intraoperative discomfort was reported by the surgeon but completely resolved following repositioning.

Conclusions: The current technology can be readily incorporated into a microsurgical unit. We developed four key learning points from the implementation of robot-assisted LVA in our microsurgical unit.

Background: 

Current knowledge about patients’ perceptions of the donor site following abdominal-based breast reconstruction and its effect on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) several years after breast reconstruction is limited. This study aimed to assess the long-term effects of deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flap breast reconstruction on HRQoL, specifically focusing on the abdomen and donor site aspects.

Methods: 

This retrospective cohort study compared 66 women who underwent DIEP breast reconstruction between 2000 and 2007 with a matched control cohort of 114 women who underwent therapeutic mastectomies without reconstruction in the year 2005. The DIEP cohort of patients completed the BREAST-Q Reconstruction module during an outpatient visit in 2015–2016. The control cohort completed the same questionnaire online in 2016.

Results: 

The follow-up time was at least 8 years (mean 11.4 ± 1.6 years) postreconstruction for the DIEP cohort and 10 years postmastectomy (mean 11.0 ± 0.3 years) for the control cohort. In the DIEP cohort, 93% reported no donor site pain, 89% had no difficulty sitting up, and 91% had no activity limitations 2 weeks before completing the survey. Patients undergoing DIEP were more satisfied with their abdominal appearance than the control group (adjusted OR, 5.7; 95% confidence interval 1.8–17.6).

Conclusions: 

A decade postoperatively, DIEP breast reconstruction yields high abdominal donor site satisfaction, with comparable abdominal physical well-being to nonreconstructed women.

Background: The Swedish Breast Reconstruction Outcome Study (SweBRO) initiative is a nationwide study with the primary aim of assessing long-term outcomes after mastectomy with and without breast reconstruction (BR). The current part (SweBRO 2) is designed to evaluate health-related quality of life (HRQoL), with the hypothesis that BR has a positive impact on patient-reported HRQoL in the long-term.

Methods: Women who underwent mastectomy in Sweden in 2000, 2005, or 2010 and were alive at the time of the survey were identified through the National Breast Cancer Registry. Eligible participants received formal invitation letters to take part in a survey evaluating their HRQoL at 5 , 10, or 15 years post-mastectomy. The EORTC QLQ-C30, EORTC QLQ-BR23, and EQ-5D-3L questionnaires were employed.

Results: Of 2904 respondents (50% of 5853 invited), 895 (31%) had received BR. Among them, 516 (58%) were reconstructed with implants and 281 (31%) with autologous tissue. Women with BR scored significantly better in the EORCT QLQ-C30 physical functioning domain (mean 90 versus 81 points), fatigue (mean 21 versus 25), and dyspnoea (mean 16 versus 22) compared to non-reconstructed women. The EORTC QLQ-BR23 revealed that women with BR experienced favourable sexual functioning compared with non-reconstructed women (mean 26 versus 14). The EQ-5D-3L visual analogue scale score was similar between groups.

Conclusion: The current study underscores the benefits of BR for long-term well-being, for example, in terms of physical and sexual functioning. These underline the importance of informing women undergoing mastectomy about BR alternatives and its potential benefits in enhancing long-term well-being. The Swedish Breast Reconstruction Outcome Study (SweBRO) initiative is a nationwide study with the primary aim of assessing long-term outcomes after mastectomy with and without breast reconstruction (BR). Women who had undergone mastectomy in Sweden in 2000, 2005, or 2010 and were alive at the time of the survey were identified through the National Breast Cancer Registry. The current study underscores the benefits of BR for long-term well-being, for example, in terms of physical and sexual functioning.

Background

There is conflicting evidence regarding whether postoperative complications after breast cancer surgery are associated with worse oncological outcome. This study aimed to assess the risk of systemic breast cancer recurrence after surgical site infection and also the impact of surgical site infection on locoregional recurrence, breast cancer-specific survival and overall survival.

Methods

This nationwide cohort study included patients who underwent surgery for primary breast cancer in Sweden between January 2008 and September 2019. The study cohort was identified in the Breast Cancer Database Sweden 3.0, a database linking the National Breast Cancer Quality Register to national population-based healthcare registers held by the National Board of Health and Welfare and Statistics Sweden. The primary exposure was surgical site infection within 90 days from surgery, and the primary outcome was systemic recurrence of breast cancer. Secondary outcomes included locoregional recurrence, overall survival and breast cancer-specific survival. Multivariable Cox regression analysis was performed to assess the association between exposure, predictors and outcomes.

Results

Of 82 102 patients included in the study, 15.7% experienced a surgical site infection within 90 days of surgery. Surgical site infection was not significantly associated with systemic recurrence, locoregional recurrence or breast cancer-specific survival after adjustment for confounding variables. Surgical site infection was significantly associated with worse overall survival, but the significant association disappeared in a sensitivity analysis excluding all patients with any kind of malignancy before breast cancer diagnosis.

Conclusion

Surgical site infection after breast cancer surgery does not significantly increase the risk of systemic recurrence. All possible actions should nevertheless be taken to reduce complication rates.