Department of Surgery, Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada.
Plast Reconstr Surg. 2010 Mar;125(3):761-71. doi: 10.1097/PRS.0b013e3181cb5cf8.
In recent years, there has been a growing acceptance of the value of breast reconstruction. The majority of women who choose to proceed will undergo alloplastic reconstruction. The primary objective of this study was to determine whether the type of implant used in alloplastic breast reconstruction has an impact on patient-reported satisfaction and quality of life.
Patients were deemed eligible if they had completed alloplastic reconstruction at least 1 year before study initiation. Patients were contacted by mail: two questionnaires [the BREAST-Q and the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire C30 (Br23) (EORTC QLQC30 (Br23))], a contact letter, and an incentive gift card were included. Scores were compared between silicone and saline implant recipients.
Seventy-five silicone implant recipients and 68 saline implant recipients responded, for a response rate of 58 percent. BREAST-Q responses showed silicone implant recipients to have higher scores on all nine subscales. This difference reached statistical significance on four of nine subscales: overall satisfaction (p = 0.008), psychological well-being (p = 0.032), sexual well-being (p = 0.05), and satisfaction with surgeon (p = 0.019). Regression analysis adjusted for follow-up time, timing of surgery, unilateral versus bilateral surgery, radiation, and age. Results from the EORTC QLQC30 (Br23) showed a statistically significant difference on two of 22 subscales: silicone recipients had higher overall physical function, and saline recipients had higher systemic side effects.
This study has shown higher satisfaction with breast reconstruction in silicone gel implant recipients compared with saline recipients using the BREAST-Q. There was no difference in overall global health status between the two patient groups as measured by the EORTC-QLQC30 (Br23).
近年来，人们越来越认可乳房重建的价值。大多数选择进行重建的女性将接受假体重建。本研究的主要目的是确定假体乳房重建中使用的植入物类型是否会影响患者报告的满意度和生活质量。
如果患者在研究开始前至少完成了假体重建 1 年，则认为其符合条件。通过邮件联系患者：包括两份问卷[乳房重建满意度问卷（BREAST-Q）和欧洲癌症研究与治疗组织生活质量问卷核心 30 项（EORTC QLQC30（Br23））]、一封联系信和一张激励礼品卡。比较了硅胶和盐水植入物接受者的分数。
75 名硅胶植入物接受者和 68 名盐水植入物接受者做出了回应，回应率为 58%。BREAST-Q 应答显示，硅胶植入物接受者在所有九个子量表上的得分更高。在九个子量表中的四个上，这种差异具有统计学意义：总体满意度（p = 0.008）、心理幸福感（p = 0.032）、性幸福感（p = 0.05）和对医生的满意度（p = 0.019）。对随访时间、手术时间、单侧与双侧手术、放疗和年龄进行了回归分析。EORTC QLQC30（Br23）的结果显示，在 22 个子量表中有两个有统计学差异：硅胶组的总体身体功能较高，而盐水组的全身副作用较高。
本研究使用 BREAST-Q 显示，与盐水接受者相比，硅胶凝胶植入物接受者对乳房重建的满意度更高。两个患者组在 EORTC-QLQC30（Br23）测量的整体健康状况方面没有差异。
