Immediate Breast Reconstruction using ADM and Implant: 5 year experience!
Association of Breast Surgery ePoster Library. Apte A. 05/15/17; 166306; P171
Ms. Anuradha Apte
REGULAR CONTENT
Login now to access Regular content available to all registered users.
Abstract
Rate & Comment (0)
Introduction:
With more frequent use of ADM & pre-pectoral biomesh in Immediate Breast Reconstruction (IBR), debate is still on to measure the outcomes of using sub-pectoral implants and ADMs. Aim of our study is to share our experience and PROMS data in single-stage IBR using ADM and implant.
Methods:
In this prospective study, consecutive patients undergoing single-stage-IBR with fixed-volume-implant and ADM from Feb. 2012 - Sept. 2016 received a standardised questionnaire, 6 weeks post surgery. This included pre-operative, operative and post-operative outcomes, complications, patient satisfaction, cosmesis and return to activities.
Results:
67 patients (73 Procedures-6 bilateral) underwent reconstruction. 98.4% patients felt that adequate information was given including non-availability of long-term data on ADMs.
Tumour biology: IDC-37, ILC-12, Mixed-6, DCIS-11, ER+ve-52, HER2+ve-12, Average NPI- 3.9 (range 2.1-7).
12 patients had neo-adjuvant chemotherapy, 19 chemotherapy, 11 Herceptin and 20 had radiotherapy.
Average hospital-stay: 1.66 days (range 1-5).
Return to light activities: 2.55 weeks (range 0-6) & normal activities: 5.4weeks (range 1-12)
Implant loss-4 patients (3 smokers). One red-breast-syndrome. 98.4% would recommend reconstruction.
Conclusion:
IBR using ADM and implant is an acceptable option in selected group as suggested by this PROMs and outcome data. However, IBR with ADMs can be fraught with problems and therefore appropriate patient selection with realistic expectations is essential for an acceptable outcome.
With more frequent use of ADM & pre-pectoral biomesh in Immediate Breast Reconstruction (IBR), debate is still on to measure the outcomes of using sub-pectoral implants and ADMs. Aim of our study is to share our experience and PROMS data in single-stage IBR using ADM and implant.
Methods:
In this prospective study, consecutive patients undergoing single-stage-IBR with fixed-volume-implant and ADM from Feb. 2012 - Sept. 2016 received a standardised questionnaire, 6 weeks post surgery. This included pre-operative, operative and post-operative outcomes, complications, patient satisfaction, cosmesis and return to activities.
Results:
67 patients (73 Procedures-6 bilateral) underwent reconstruction. 98.4% patients felt that adequate information was given including non-availability of long-term data on ADMs.
Tumour biology: IDC-37, ILC-12, Mixed-6, DCIS-11, ER+ve-52, HER2+ve-12, Average NPI- 3.9 (range 2.1-7).
12 patients had neo-adjuvant chemotherapy, 19 chemotherapy, 11 Herceptin and 20 had radiotherapy.
Average hospital-stay: 1.66 days (range 1-5).
Return to light activities: 2.55 weeks (range 0-6) & normal activities: 5.4weeks (range 1-12)
Implant loss-4 patients (3 smokers). One red-breast-syndrome. 98.4% would recommend reconstruction.
Conclusion:
IBR using ADM and implant is an acceptable option in selected group as suggested by this PROMs and outcome data. However, IBR with ADMs can be fraught with problems and therefore appropriate patient selection with realistic expectations is essential for an acceptable outcome.
Introduction:
With more frequent use of ADM & pre-pectoral biomesh in Immediate Breast Reconstruction (IBR), debate is still on to measure the outcomes of using sub-pectoral implants and ADMs. Aim of our study is to share our experience and PROMS data in single-stage IBR using ADM and implant.
Methods:
In this prospective study, consecutive patients undergoing single-stage-IBR with fixed-volume-implant and ADM from Feb. 2012 - Sept. 2016 received a standardised questionnaire, 6 weeks post surgery. This included pre-operative, operative and post-operative outcomes, complications, patient satisfaction, cosmesis and return to activities.
Results:
67 patients (73 Procedures-6 bilateral) underwent reconstruction. 98.4% patients felt that adequate information was given including non-availability of long-term data on ADMs.
Tumour biology: IDC-37, ILC-12, Mixed-6, DCIS-11, ER+ve-52, HER2+ve-12, Average NPI- 3.9 (range 2.1-7).
12 patients had neo-adjuvant chemotherapy, 19 chemotherapy, 11 Herceptin and 20 had radiotherapy.
Average hospital-stay: 1.66 days (range 1-5).
Return to light activities: 2.55 weeks (range 0-6) & normal activities: 5.4weeks (range 1-12)
Implant loss-4 patients (3 smokers). One red-breast-syndrome. 98.4% would recommend reconstruction.
Conclusion:
IBR using ADM and implant is an acceptable option in selected group as suggested by this PROMs and outcome data. However, IBR with ADMs can be fraught with problems and therefore appropriate patient selection with realistic expectations is essential for an acceptable outcome.
With more frequent use of ADM & pre-pectoral biomesh in Immediate Breast Reconstruction (IBR), debate is still on to measure the outcomes of using sub-pectoral implants and ADMs. Aim of our study is to share our experience and PROMS data in single-stage IBR using ADM and implant.
Methods:
In this prospective study, consecutive patients undergoing single-stage-IBR with fixed-volume-implant and ADM from Feb. 2012 - Sept. 2016 received a standardised questionnaire, 6 weeks post surgery. This included pre-operative, operative and post-operative outcomes, complications, patient satisfaction, cosmesis and return to activities.
Results:
67 patients (73 Procedures-6 bilateral) underwent reconstruction. 98.4% patients felt that adequate information was given including non-availability of long-term data on ADMs.
Tumour biology: IDC-37, ILC-12, Mixed-6, DCIS-11, ER+ve-52, HER2+ve-12, Average NPI- 3.9 (range 2.1-7).
12 patients had neo-adjuvant chemotherapy, 19 chemotherapy, 11 Herceptin and 20 had radiotherapy.
Average hospital-stay: 1.66 days (range 1-5).
Return to light activities: 2.55 weeks (range 0-6) & normal activities: 5.4weeks (range 1-12)
Implant loss-4 patients (3 smokers). One red-breast-syndrome. 98.4% would recommend reconstruction.
Conclusion:
IBR using ADM and implant is an acceptable option in selected group as suggested by this PROMs and outcome data. However, IBR with ADMs can be fraught with problems and therefore appropriate patient selection with realistic expectations is essential for an acceptable outcome.
Code of conduct/disclaimer available in General Terms & Conditions
{{ help_message }}
{{filter}}