Abstract

A wide range of surgical techniques has been described for breast conservation treatment (Oncoplasty) based on breast size and shape, as well as tumor size and location. However, there is a lack of standardization regarding the indications for oncoplastic reconstruction. This study aims to identify the presurgical parameters associated with poor cosmetic outcomes post-breast conserving treatment. We hope this preoperative model can assist in evaluating whether there is a need for oncoplastic intervention. The study group involved 136-adult females (age 35-77) who previously undergone breast conserving surgery and radiation, without oncoplastic intervention between 2007 and 2017. Patient demographics, medical and physical parameters were collected, and each patient filled Breast-QTM-questionnaire and six angles' photographs were taken. Patients' photographs were evaluated by 15 board-certified plastic surgeons. Both univariate and multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed to identify potential confounders for poor outcome in each of the experts' and patients' average-grades. Our analysis identified several variables correlated with poor surgical outcome: high BMI, high chest-wall-circumference, high breast-width and larger volume-removed. The general-aesthetic-result as evaluated by our experts was favorably influenced by an upper lateral quadrant tumor while the breast shape was negatively influenced by a lower medial quadrant tumor. Interestingly, no correlation was found between the patients' and panel's evaluations, nor did we find any clinically significant parameter related to the patients' reported well-being. Patients with high BMI, high chest-wall-circumference, large breast-width and larger inferomedial tumors could benefit from early plastic surgery evaluation and intervention. Patient's psychosocial well-being as well as sexual well-being are independent from positive surgical outcome evaluated by plastic surgeons. This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call