DOI 10.1097/sap.0000000000003648
Complication Rates in Therapeutic Versus Prophylactic Bilateral Mastectomies: Insights From a National Database.
Аннотация
BACKGROUND
The "Jolie effect" and other media focus on prophylactic treatments have resulted in unilateral breast cancer patients increasingly undergoing contralateral prophylactic mastectomy. Little is known, however, regarding outcomes following therapeutic versus prophylactic mastectomy. In this study, we compared complication rates of unilateral breast cancer patients undergoing contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (BM-TP) to patients undergoing bilateral prophylactic mastectomy (BM-P).
METHODS
The BM-TP and BM-P patients from 2015 to 2019 were identified in Optum Clinformatics DataMart. Six-month outcomes were assessed and included wound complications, infection, hematoma/seroma, breast pain, fat necrosis, flap failure, implant failure/removal, other flap/implant complications, and other complications. Multivariable regression models adjusted for age, residence, insurance, race, and Charlson Comorbidity Index score.
RESULTS
Of 9319 women, 7114 (76.3%) underwent BM-TP, and 2205 (23.7%) underwent BM-P. In multivariable analysis, BM-TP had higher odds of overall complications (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.35; P < 0.0001), but no difference was observed among patients who had autologous ( P = 0.1448) or no breast reconstruction ( P = 0.1530). Higher odds of overall complications persisted even after controlling for radiation therapy (aOR, 1.25; P = 0.0048) and chemotherapy (aOR, 1.28; P = 0.0047), but not after controlling for lymph node surgery ( P = 0.7765).
CONCLUSION
The BM-TP (vs BM-P) patients face higher odds of overall complications but without any difference in certain reconstructive modalities or after controlling for lymph node surgery.
Предметные рубрики MeSH
Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.