AbstractObjective:The controversy remains as to whether immediate prosthetic breast reconstruction with postmastectomy radiation therapy (PMRT) is associated with acceptable complications and aesthetic outcomes. The aim of this meta-analysis was to provide a pooled analysis of comparative clinical studies that evaluated breast cancer patients who were treated with a mastectomy and an immediate prosthetic breast reconstruction to compare the complications and satisfaction of those who underwent or did not undergo PMRT.Methods:According to the recommendations of the Cochrane Collaboration, we established a rigorous study protocol. We performed a systematic electronic search of the PubMed and Embase databases to identify articles for inclusion in our meta-analysis. Reconstruction failure, overall complications, capsular contracture, and patient satisfaction were analyzed individually.Results:Fifteen controlled trials were included, comprising 5314 patients (1069 PMRT vs 4245 non-PMRT). Primary outcomes revealed a statistically significant increase in overall complications [odds ratio (OR) 3.45; 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 2.62–4.54; P < .00001], reconstruction failure (OR: 2.59; 95% CI 1.46–4.62; P = .001), and capsular contracture (OR: 5.26, 95% CI: 2.73–10.13, P < .00001) after receiving PMRT.Conclusion:Our review found that PMRT for patients who underwent immediate implant-based breast reconstruction led to higher risks of reconstruction failure, overall complications, and capsular contracture. However, it is still the standard adjuvant therapy for mastectomy patients who have opted for immediate implant-based breast reconstruction.
Medicine – Wolters Kluwer Health
Published: Feb 1, 2018
It’s your single place to instantly
discover and read the research
that matters to you.
Enjoy affordable access to
over 12 million articles from more than
10,000 peer-reviewed journals.
All for just $49/month
It’s easy to organize your research with our built-in tools.
All the latest content is available, no embargo periods.
“Whoa! It’s like Spotify but for academic articles.”@Phil_Robichaud