-
- J C Mennie, P-N Mohanna, J M O'Donoghue, R Rainsbury, and D A Cromwell.
- Clinical Effectiveness Unit, Royal College of Surgeons of England, 35-43 Lincoln's Inn Fields, London, WC2A 3PE, UK; Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, St Thomas Hospital, Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, Westminster Bridge Road, London, SE1 7EH, UK. Electronic address: jomennie@doctors.org.uk.
- Eur J Surg Oncol. 2017 Jan 1; 43 (1): 52-61.
IntroductionLittle is known about post-mastectomy reconstruction procedural trends in women diagnosed with breast cancer in England. Our aim was to examine patterns of immediate and delayed reconstruction procedures over time and within regions.MethodsWomen with breast cancer who underwent unilateral index immediate or delayed post-mastectomy reconstruction between 2007 and 2014 were identified using the National Hospital Episode Statistics database. Women were grouped into categories based on the type of reconstruction procedure. Adjusted rates of implant and free flap reconstructions were then calculated across regional Cancer Networks using a regression model to adjust for age, disease, comorbidities, ethnicity, and deprivation.ResultsBetween 2007 and 2014, 21 862 women underwent immediate reconstruction and 8653 delayed reconstruction. Immediate implant reconstruction increased from 30% to 54%, and immediate free flap reconstruction from 17% to 21%. Adjusted immediate implant and free flap proportions ranged from 17 to 68% and 9-63%, respectively, across regions. Free flaps became more common in the delayed setting, rising from 25% to 42%. However, adjusted rates ranged from 23% to 74% across regions. Networks with high/low rates of free flaps for immediate tended to have high/low rates for delayed reconstruction.ConclusionThere has been a substantial increase in the use of immediate implant reconstruction in England. In comparison, there has been an increasing use of autologous free flap reconstruction for delayed procedures. Significant regional variation exists in the type of reconstruction performed, and these patterns need to be examined to determine if variation is related to service provision and/or capacity barriers.Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Ltd, BASO ~ The Association for Cancer Surgery, and the European Society of Surgical Oncology. All rights reserved.
Notes
Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
- Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as
*italics*
,_underline_
or**bold**
. - Superscript can be denoted by
<sup>text</sup>
and subscript<sub>text</sub>
. - Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines
1. 2. 3.
, hyphens-
or asterisks*
. - Links can be included with:
[my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
- Images can be included with:
![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
- For footnotes use
[^1](This is a footnote.)
inline. - Or use an inline reference
[^1]
to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document[^1]: This is a long footnote.
.