Saldanha Ian J, Broyles Justin M, Adam Gaelen P, Cao Wangnan, Bhuma Monika Reddy, Mehta Shivani, Pusic Andrea L, Dominici Laura S, Balk Ethan M
Center for Evidence Synthesis in Health, Department of Health Services, Policy, and Practice, Brown University School of Public Health, Providence, R.I.
Department of Epidemiology, Brown University School of Public Health, Providence, R.I.
Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open. 2022 Mar 18;10(3):e4179. doi: 10.1097/GOX.0000000000004179. eCollection 2022 Mar.
Women undergoing implant-based reconstruction (IBR) after mastectomy for breast cancer have numerous options, including timing of IBR relative to radiation and chemotherapy, implant materials, anatomic planes, and use of human acellular dermal matrices. We conducted a systematic review to evaluate these options.
We searched Medline, Embase, Cochrane CENTRAL, CINAHL, and ClinicalTrials.gov for studies, from inception to March 23, 2021, without language restriction. We assessed risk of bias and strength of evidence (SoE) using standard methods.
We screened 15,936 citations. Thirty-six mostly high or moderate risk of bias studies (48,419 patients) met criteria. Timing of IBR before or after radiation may result in comparable physical, psychosocial, and sexual well-being, and satisfaction with breasts (all low SoE), and probably comparable risks of implant failure/loss or explantation (moderate SoE). No studies addressed timing relative to chemotherapy. Silicone and saline implants may result in clinically comparable satisfaction with breasts (low SoE). Whether the implant is in the prepectoral or total submuscular plane may not impact risk of infections (low SoE). Acellular dermal matrix use probably increases the risk of implant failure/loss or need for explant surgery (moderate SoE) and may increase the risk of infections (low SoE). Risks of seroma and unplanned repeat surgeries for revision are probably comparable (moderate SoE), and risk of necrosis may be comparable with or without human acellular dermal matrices (low SoE).
Evidence regarding IBR options is mostly of low SoE. New high-quality research is needed, especially for timing, implant materials, and anatomic planes of implant placement.
乳腺癌乳房切除术后接受植入式乳房重建(IBR)的女性有多种选择,包括IBR相对于放疗和化疗的时机、植入材料、解剖层面以及人脱细胞真皮基质的使用。我们进行了一项系统评价以评估这些选择。
我们检索了Medline、Embase、Cochrane CENTRAL、CINAHL和ClinicalTrials.gov,检索时间从建库至2021年3月23日,无语言限制。我们使用标准方法评估偏倚风险和证据强度(SoE)。
我们筛选了15936条文献。36项大多为高或中度偏倚风险的研究(48419例患者)符合标准。IBR在放疗前或放疗后进行,可能在身体、心理社会和性功能方面以及对乳房的满意度方面产生相似的结果(证据强度均低),并且植入物失败/丢失或取出的风险可能相似(证据强度中等)。没有研究涉及相对于化疗的时机。硅胶和盐水植入物在临床上对乳房的满意度可能相似(证据强度低)。植入物位于胸肌前或全肌下平面可能不影响感染风险(证据强度低)。使用脱细胞真皮基质可能会增加植入物失败/丢失或需要取出手术的风险(证据强度中等),并且可能会增加感染风险(证据强度低)。血清肿和计划外再次手术翻修的风险可能相似(证据强度中等),有或无人脱细胞真皮基质时坏死风险可能相似(证据强度低)。
关于IBR选择的证据大多证据强度低。需要新的高质量研究,特别是关于时机、植入材料和植入物放置的解剖层面。