Cargando…

Aesthetic Evaluation of Breast Reconstruction with Autologous Fat Transfer vs. Implants

BACKGROUND: Autologous fat transfer (AFT) seems to be a new minimal invasive method for total breast reconstruction, yet how patients, surgeons, and laymen evaluate cosmesis is lacking. The aim of this study was to evaluate the aesthetic outcome of AFT (intervention group) for total breast reconstru...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Wederfoort, Jamilla L. M., Kleeven, Alieske, Hommes, Juliette E., Van Kuijk, Sander M. J., van der Hulst, René R. W. J., Piatkowski, Andrzej
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer US 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10070277/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36100783
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00266-022-03076-2
_version_ 1785018991899574272
author Wederfoort, Jamilla L. M.
Kleeven, Alieske
Hommes, Juliette E.
Van Kuijk, Sander M. J.
van der Hulst, René R. W. J.
Piatkowski, Andrzej
author_facet Wederfoort, Jamilla L. M.
Kleeven, Alieske
Hommes, Juliette E.
Van Kuijk, Sander M. J.
van der Hulst, René R. W. J.
Piatkowski, Andrzej
author_sort Wederfoort, Jamilla L. M.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Autologous fat transfer (AFT) seems to be a new minimal invasive method for total breast reconstruction, yet how patients, surgeons, and laymen evaluate cosmesis is lacking. The aim of this study was to evaluate the aesthetic outcome of AFT (intervention group) for total breast reconstruction post-mastectomy, as compared to implant-based reconstruction (IBR) (control group). METHODS: A random and blinded 3D photographic aesthetic outcome study was performed on a selection of 50 patients, scored by three panels: plastic surgeons, breast cancer patients, and laymen. Secondary outcomes included agreement within groups and possible patient characteristics influencing scoring. RESULTS: Breast cancer patients and plastic surgeons did not differ in the aesthetic scores between the treatment groups. In contrast, the laymen group scored AFT patients lower than IBR patients (− 1.04, p < 0.001). Remarkably, mean given scores were low for all groups and overall agreement within groups was poor (ICC < 0.50). Higher scores were given when subjects underwent a bilateral reconstruction and if a mamilla was present. CONCLUSION: Evaluation of aesthetic outcomes varies greatly. Hence, aesthetic outcome remains a very personal measure and this emphasizes the importance of thorough patient counseling including information on achievable aesthetic results before starting a reconstructive procedure. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE III: 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 .
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10070277
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Springer US
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-100702772023-04-05 Aesthetic Evaluation of Breast Reconstruction with Autologous Fat Transfer vs. Implants Wederfoort, Jamilla L. M. Kleeven, Alieske Hommes, Juliette E. Van Kuijk, Sander M. J. van der Hulst, René R. W. J. Piatkowski, Andrzej Aesthetic Plast Surg Original Article BACKGROUND: Autologous fat transfer (AFT) seems to be a new minimal invasive method for total breast reconstruction, yet how patients, surgeons, and laymen evaluate cosmesis is lacking. The aim of this study was to evaluate the aesthetic outcome of AFT (intervention group) for total breast reconstruction post-mastectomy, as compared to implant-based reconstruction (IBR) (control group). METHODS: A random and blinded 3D photographic aesthetic outcome study was performed on a selection of 50 patients, scored by three panels: plastic surgeons, breast cancer patients, and laymen. Secondary outcomes included agreement within groups and possible patient characteristics influencing scoring. RESULTS: Breast cancer patients and plastic surgeons did not differ in the aesthetic scores between the treatment groups. In contrast, the laymen group scored AFT patients lower than IBR patients (− 1.04, p < 0.001). Remarkably, mean given scores were low for all groups and overall agreement within groups was poor (ICC < 0.50). Higher scores were given when subjects underwent a bilateral reconstruction and if a mamilla was present. CONCLUSION: Evaluation of aesthetic outcomes varies greatly. Hence, aesthetic outcome remains a very personal measure and this emphasizes the importance of thorough patient counseling including information on achievable aesthetic results before starting a reconstructive procedure. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE III: 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 . Springer US 2022-09-13 2023 /pmc/articles/PMC10070277/ /pubmed/36100783 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00266-022-03076-2 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Original Article
Wederfoort, Jamilla L. M.
Kleeven, Alieske
Hommes, Juliette E.
Van Kuijk, Sander M. J.
van der Hulst, René R. W. J.
Piatkowski, Andrzej
Aesthetic Evaluation of Breast Reconstruction with Autologous Fat Transfer vs. Implants
title Aesthetic Evaluation of Breast Reconstruction with Autologous Fat Transfer vs. Implants
title_full Aesthetic Evaluation of Breast Reconstruction with Autologous Fat Transfer vs. Implants
title_fullStr Aesthetic Evaluation of Breast Reconstruction with Autologous Fat Transfer vs. Implants
title_full_unstemmed Aesthetic Evaluation of Breast Reconstruction with Autologous Fat Transfer vs. Implants
title_short Aesthetic Evaluation of Breast Reconstruction with Autologous Fat Transfer vs. Implants
title_sort aesthetic evaluation of breast reconstruction with autologous fat transfer vs. implants
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10070277/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36100783
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00266-022-03076-2
work_keys_str_mv AT wederfoortjamillalm aestheticevaluationofbreastreconstructionwithautologousfattransfervsimplants
AT kleevenalieske aestheticevaluationofbreastreconstructionwithautologousfattransfervsimplants
AT hommesjuliettee aestheticevaluationofbreastreconstructionwithautologousfattransfervsimplants
AT vankuijksandermj aestheticevaluationofbreastreconstructionwithautologousfattransfervsimplants
AT vanderhulstrenerwj aestheticevaluationofbreastreconstructionwithautologousfattransfervsimplants
AT piatkowskiandrzej aestheticevaluationofbreastreconstructionwithautologousfattransfervsimplants
AT aestheticevaluationofbreastreconstructionwithautologousfattransfervsimplants