Comparison of Patient-Reported Quality of Life Following Direct-to-Implant Prepectoral and Subpectoral Breast Reconstruction Using BREAST-Q: A Randomized Controlled Trial

<b>Background</b> Direct-to-implant breast reconstruction (DIR) is becoming more and more accepted. There is a lack of high-quality studies assessing differences in patient-reported quality of life (QoL) between different implant placement methods. The aim of this randomized controlled (clinical) trial was to compare QoL between women reconstructed by sub- or prepectoral implant placement. <b>Methods</b> We included women over 18 years eligible for DIR. Patients were randomly assigned to reconstruction by subpectoral or prepectoral implant placement. Assessment of QoL and patient satisfaction was made using the BREAST-Q questionnaire for postmastectomy breast reconstruction and compared between the sub- and prepectoral reconstructed groups preoperatively and after 3 and 12 months of follow-up. <b>Results</b> A total of 42 women were allocated to sub- or prepectoral reconstruction with 21 patients in each group. There were no differences in patient characteristics between groups. Regarding all the selected BREAST-Q scales: (1) satisfaction with the reconstructed breast, (2) satisfaction with the breast implant, (3) satisfaction with the overall outcome, (4) psychosocial well-being, (5) sexual well-being, and (6) physical well-being-we found no significant differences between the two groups. Assessing each group independently we found, that in both groups sexual well-being improved after surgery postoperatively compared to the preoperative scores. <b>Conclusion</b> We found high satisfaction and QoL following both sub- and prepectoral breast reconstruction. We found no significant differences between groups suggesting both methods for DIR can be used. Despite our high-quality data, a larger sample size and longer postoperative follow-up are needed to further investigate the differences in QoL between sub- and prepectoral breast reconstruction.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Archives of Plastic Surgery
Published
2024-09-02
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2407-9183
Citations
2
Primary Topic
Breast Implant and Reconstruction
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
1.15
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Comparison of Patient-Reported Quality of Life Following Direct-to-Implant Prepectoral and Subpectoral Breast Reconstruction Using BREAST-Q: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Farima Dalaei, Camilla Bille, Martin Sollie, Diana Lydia Dyrberg et al.
2 citations
Archives of Plastic Surgery
Breast Implant and Reconstruction
1.15
article

Comparison of Patient-Reported Quality of Life Following Direct-to-Implant Prepectoral and Subpectoral Breast Reconstruction Using BREAST-Q: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Farima Dalaei, Camilla Bille, Martin Sollie, Diana Lydia Dyrberg, Jens Ahm Sørensen, Vibeke Koudahl, Jørn Bo Thomsen
article en
2 citations

Abstract

<b>Background</b> Direct-to-implant breast reconstruction (DIR) is becoming more and more accepted. There is a lack of high-quality studies assessing differences in patient-reported quality of life (QoL) between different implant placement methods. The aim of this randomized controlled (clinical) trial was to compare QoL between women reconstructed by sub- or prepectoral implant placement. <b>Methods</b> We included women over 18 years eligible for DIR. Patients were randomly assigned to reconstruction by subpectoral or prepectoral implant placement. Assessment of QoL and patient satisfaction was made using the BREAST-Q questionnaire for postmastectomy breast reconstruction and compared between the sub- and prepectoral reconstructed groups preoperatively and after 3 and 12 months of follow-up. <b>Results</b> A total of 42 women were allocated to sub- or prepectoral reconstruction with 21 patients in each group. There were no differences in patient characteristics between groups. Regarding all the selected BREAST-Q scales: (1) satisfaction with the reconstructed breast, (2) satisfaction with the breast implant, (3) satisfaction with the overall outcome, (4) psychosocial well-being, (5) sexual well-being, and (6) physical well-being-we found no significant differences between the two groups. Assessing each group independently we found, that in both groups sexual well-being improved after surgery postoperatively compared to the preoperative scores. <b>Conclusion</b> We found high satisfaction and QoL following both sub- and prepectoral breast reconstruction. We found no significant differences between groups suggesting both methods for DIR can be used. Despite our high-quality data, a larger sample size and longer postoperative follow-up are needed to further investigate the differences in QoL between sub- and prepectoral breast reconstruction.

Archives of Plastic SurgeryVol. 51(06)
Odense University Hospital (DK), Vejle Sygehus (DK)
Gender equality
Openalex Percentile: Top 21%
Breast Implant and Reconstruction
1.15
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.