QUALITY OF LIFE OUTCOMES FOLLOWING ULTRASONIC DISSECTOR-ASSISTED VS. ELECTROCAUTERY DISSECTION IN MODIFIED RADICAL MASTECTOMY: PROSPECTIVE OBSERVATIONAL COHORT

Background: Breast cancer is one of the most common malignancies worldwide, with significant implications for patient quality of life (QoL). As survival rates improve, assessing the long-term effects of treatment has become crucial. Conventional electrocautery has been widely used for axillary lymph node dissection (ALND), but recent studies suggest that ultrasonic dissectors (ULDs) may offer advantages by reducing tissue trauma and postoperative complications. This study evaluates the impact of ALND using ULDs versus electrocautery on QoL in breast cancer patients. Methods: An observational study was conducted involving 73 female breast cancer patients (aged 18–80 years) undergoing modified radical mastectomy with ALND. Patients were divided into two groups: an intervention cohort (n=35) treated with the Söring Sonoca 300 ultrasonic dissector and a control cohort (n=38) treated with conventional electrocautery. QoL was assessed using the EORTC QLQ-C30 and QLQ-BR45 questionnaires at baseline, 3-, 6-, and 9-months post-treatment. Statistical analysis included chi-square tests for categorical variables and independent t-tests for continuous variables, with p<0.05 significancy. Results: At baseline, no significant differences were observed between the groups. However, at three months, the intervention group demonstrated significantly higher functional scores (66.3±8.2 vs. 59.0±6.7; p<0.001), lower symptom scores (41.7±4.0 vs. 46.3±5.6; p<0.001), and superior global health status (64.2±9.9 vs. 51.4±10.8; p<0.001). These improvements persisted at six months, with the intervention group maintaining better functional scores (76.2±10.2 vs. 57.5±7.3; p<0.001), lower symptom scores (37.9±7.8 vs. 44.9±9.6; p<0.001), and higher global health status (66.5±10.4 vs. 52.6±13.1; p<0.001). By nine months, the intervention group continued to exhibit superior outcomes: functional scale (79.5±11.1 vs. 64.8±9.9; p<0.001), symptom scale (38.3±7.8 vs. 45.4±7.0; p<0.001), and global health status (71.5±6.6 vs. 56.3±8.2; p<0.001). Conclusion: Reduced thermal damage and improved healing contribute to better functional outcomes and lower symptom burden. These findings support the integration of ULDs into surgical oncology practice to optimize patient recovery.