Cargando…

Comparison of outcomes between immediate implant-based and autologous reconstruction: 15-year, single-center experience in a propensity score-matched Chinese cohort

OBJECTIVE: The number of immediate breast reconstruction (IBR) procedures has been increasing in China. This study aimed to investigate the oncological safety of IBR, and to compare the survival and surgical outcomes between implant-based and autologous reconstruction. METHODS: Data from patients di...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: He, Shanshan, Ding, Bowen, Li, Gang, Huang, Yubei, Han, Chunyong, Sun, Jingyan, Huang, Qingfeng, Liu, Jing, Yin, Zhuming, Wang, Shu, Yin, Jian
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Compuscript 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9500225/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34846109
http://dx.doi.org/10.20892/j.issn.2095-3941.2021.0368
_version_ 1784795170227617792
author He, Shanshan
Ding, Bowen
Li, Gang
Huang, Yubei
Han, Chunyong
Sun, Jingyan
Huang, Qingfeng
Liu, Jing
Yin, Zhuming
Wang, Shu
Yin, Jian
author_facet He, Shanshan
Ding, Bowen
Li, Gang
Huang, Yubei
Han, Chunyong
Sun, Jingyan
Huang, Qingfeng
Liu, Jing
Yin, Zhuming
Wang, Shu
Yin, Jian
author_sort He, Shanshan
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: The number of immediate breast reconstruction (IBR) procedures has been increasing in China. This study aimed to investigate the oncological safety of IBR, and to compare the survival and surgical outcomes between implant-based and autologous reconstruction. METHODS: Data from patients diagnosed with invasive breast cancer who underwent immediate total breast reconstruction between 2001 and 2016 were retrospectively reviewed. Long-term breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS), disease-free survival (DFS), and locoregional recurrence-free survival (LRFS) were evaluated. Patient satisfaction with the breast was compared between the implant-based and autologous groups. BCSS, DFS, and LRFS were compared between groups after propensity score matching (PSM). RESULTS: A total of 784 IBR procedures were identified, of which 584 were performed on patients with invasive breast cancer (implant-based, n = 288; autologous, n = 296). With a median follow-up of 71.3 months, the 10-year estimates of BCSS, DFS, and LRFS were 88.9% [95% confidence interval (CI) (85.1%–93.0%)], 79.6% [95% CI (74.7%–84.8%)], and 94.0% [95% CI (90.3%–97.8%)], respectively. A total of 124 patients completed the Breast-Q questionnaire, and no statistically significant differences were noted between groups (P = 0.823). After PSM with 27 variables, no statistically significant differences in BCSS, DFS, and LRFS were found between the implant-based (n = 177) and autologous (n = 177) groups. Further stratification according to staging, histological grade, lymph node status, and lymph-venous invasion status revealed no significant survival differences between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Both immediate implant-based and autologous reconstruction were reasonable choices with similar long-term oncological outcomes and patient-reported satisfaction among patients with invasive breast cancer in China.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9500225
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Compuscript
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-95002252022-10-21 Comparison of outcomes between immediate implant-based and autologous reconstruction: 15-year, single-center experience in a propensity score-matched Chinese cohort He, Shanshan Ding, Bowen Li, Gang Huang, Yubei Han, Chunyong Sun, Jingyan Huang, Qingfeng Liu, Jing Yin, Zhuming Wang, Shu Yin, Jian Cancer Biol Med Original Article OBJECTIVE: The number of immediate breast reconstruction (IBR) procedures has been increasing in China. This study aimed to investigate the oncological safety of IBR, and to compare the survival and surgical outcomes between implant-based and autologous reconstruction. METHODS: Data from patients diagnosed with invasive breast cancer who underwent immediate total breast reconstruction between 2001 and 2016 were retrospectively reviewed. Long-term breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS), disease-free survival (DFS), and locoregional recurrence-free survival (LRFS) were evaluated. Patient satisfaction with the breast was compared between the implant-based and autologous groups. BCSS, DFS, and LRFS were compared between groups after propensity score matching (PSM). RESULTS: A total of 784 IBR procedures were identified, of which 584 were performed on patients with invasive breast cancer (implant-based, n = 288; autologous, n = 296). With a median follow-up of 71.3 months, the 10-year estimates of BCSS, DFS, and LRFS were 88.9% [95% confidence interval (CI) (85.1%–93.0%)], 79.6% [95% CI (74.7%–84.8%)], and 94.0% [95% CI (90.3%–97.8%)], respectively. A total of 124 patients completed the Breast-Q questionnaire, and no statistically significant differences were noted between groups (P = 0.823). After PSM with 27 variables, no statistically significant differences in BCSS, DFS, and LRFS were found between the implant-based (n = 177) and autologous (n = 177) groups. Further stratification according to staging, histological grade, lymph node status, and lymph-venous invasion status revealed no significant survival differences between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Both immediate implant-based and autologous reconstruction were reasonable choices with similar long-term oncological outcomes and patient-reported satisfaction among patients with invasive breast cancer in China. Compuscript 2022-09-15 2021-12-01 /pmc/articles/PMC9500225/ /pubmed/34846109 http://dx.doi.org/10.20892/j.issn.2095-3941.2021.0368 Text en Copyright: © 2022, Cancer Biology & Medicine https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY) 4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Original Article
He, Shanshan
Ding, Bowen
Li, Gang
Huang, Yubei
Han, Chunyong
Sun, Jingyan
Huang, Qingfeng
Liu, Jing
Yin, Zhuming
Wang, Shu
Yin, Jian
Comparison of outcomes between immediate implant-based and autologous reconstruction: 15-year, single-center experience in a propensity score-matched Chinese cohort
title Comparison of outcomes between immediate implant-based and autologous reconstruction: 15-year, single-center experience in a propensity score-matched Chinese cohort
title_full Comparison of outcomes between immediate implant-based and autologous reconstruction: 15-year, single-center experience in a propensity score-matched Chinese cohort
title_fullStr Comparison of outcomes between immediate implant-based and autologous reconstruction: 15-year, single-center experience in a propensity score-matched Chinese cohort
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of outcomes between immediate implant-based and autologous reconstruction: 15-year, single-center experience in a propensity score-matched Chinese cohort
title_short Comparison of outcomes between immediate implant-based and autologous reconstruction: 15-year, single-center experience in a propensity score-matched Chinese cohort
title_sort comparison of outcomes between immediate implant-based and autologous reconstruction: 15-year, single-center experience in a propensity score-matched chinese cohort
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9500225/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34846109
http://dx.doi.org/10.20892/j.issn.2095-3941.2021.0368
work_keys_str_mv AT heshanshan comparisonofoutcomesbetweenimmediateimplantbasedandautologousreconstruction15yearsinglecenterexperienceinapropensityscorematchedchinesecohort
AT dingbowen comparisonofoutcomesbetweenimmediateimplantbasedandautologousreconstruction15yearsinglecenterexperienceinapropensityscorematchedchinesecohort
AT ligang comparisonofoutcomesbetweenimmediateimplantbasedandautologousreconstruction15yearsinglecenterexperienceinapropensityscorematchedchinesecohort
AT huangyubei comparisonofoutcomesbetweenimmediateimplantbasedandautologousreconstruction15yearsinglecenterexperienceinapropensityscorematchedchinesecohort
AT hanchunyong comparisonofoutcomesbetweenimmediateimplantbasedandautologousreconstruction15yearsinglecenterexperienceinapropensityscorematchedchinesecohort
AT sunjingyan comparisonofoutcomesbetweenimmediateimplantbasedandautologousreconstruction15yearsinglecenterexperienceinapropensityscorematchedchinesecohort
AT huangqingfeng comparisonofoutcomesbetweenimmediateimplantbasedandautologousreconstruction15yearsinglecenterexperienceinapropensityscorematchedchinesecohort
AT liujing comparisonofoutcomesbetweenimmediateimplantbasedandautologousreconstruction15yearsinglecenterexperienceinapropensityscorematchedchinesecohort
AT yinzhuming comparisonofoutcomesbetweenimmediateimplantbasedandautologousreconstruction15yearsinglecenterexperienceinapropensityscorematchedchinesecohort
AT wangshu comparisonofoutcomesbetweenimmediateimplantbasedandautologousreconstruction15yearsinglecenterexperienceinapropensityscorematchedchinesecohort
AT yinjian comparisonofoutcomesbetweenimmediateimplantbasedandautologousreconstruction15yearsinglecenterexperienceinapropensityscorematchedchinesecohort