He, Shanshan;
Ding, Bowen;
Li, Gang;
Huang, Yubei;
Han, Chunyong;
Sun, Jingyan;
Huang, Qingfeng;
... Yin, Jian; + view all
(2022)
Comparison of outcomes between immediate implant-based and autologous reconstruction: 15-year, single-center experience in a propensity score-matched Chinese cohort.
Cancer, Biology & Medicine
, 19
(9)
, Article 20210368. 10.20892/j.issn.2095-3941.2021.0368.
Preview |
PDF
Comparison of outcomes between immediate implantbased and autologous reconstruction 15-year, single-center experience in a p.pdf - Published Version Download (628kB) | Preview |
Abstract
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.
| Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Title: | Comparison of outcomes between immediate implant-based and autologous reconstruction: 15-year, single-center experience in a propensity score-matched Chinese cohort |
| Location: | China |
| Open access status: | An open access version is available from UCL Discovery |
| DOI: | 10.20892/j.issn.2095-3941.2021.0368 |
| Publisher version: | https://doi.org/10.20892/j.issn.2095-3941.2021.036... |
| Language: | English |
| Additional information: | This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. The images or other third-party material in this article are included in the Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in the credit line; if the material is not included under the Creative Commons license, users will need to obtain permission from the license holder to reproduce the material. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ |
| Keywords: | Science & Technology, Life Sciences & Biomedicine, Oncology, Medicine, Research & Experimental, Research & Experimental Medicine, Ontological safety, immediate breast reconstruction, implant-based, autologous, Chinese, propensity-score matched, PATHOLOGICAL PROGNOSTIC-FACTORS, BREAST-CANCER PATIENTS, MASTECTOMY, RECURRENCE, SURVIVAL, PATTERNS, SAFETY |
| UCL classification: | UCL UCL > Provost and Vice Provost Offices > School of Life and Medical Sciences UCL > Provost and Vice Provost Offices > School of Life and Medical Sciences > Faculty of Life Sciences UCL > Provost and Vice Provost Offices > School of Life and Medical Sciences > Faculty of Life Sciences > UCL School of Pharmacy |
| URI: | https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10165545 |
Archive Staff Only
 |
View Item |
