Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

The Impact of Reconstructive Modality and Postoperative Complications on Decision Regret and Patient-Reported Outcomes following Breast Reconstruction

  • Original Article
  • Breast Surgery
  • Published:
Aesthetic Plastic Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Shared decision-making gives patients greater autonomy in their healthcare decisions; however, decisions that result in negative outcomes may lead to decision regret. The complexity of reconstructive options makes post-mastectomy breast reconstruction particularly prone to decision regret. This study’s purpose was to explore the relationship between breast reconstruction modalities and degree of postoperative decision regret. Patients who had undergone either implant-based or autologous breast reconstruction with a minimum of 12 months of follow-up were invited to complete the Decision Regret Scale and the BREAST-Q Satisfaction with Breasts module. The impact of reconstructive modality and occurrence of postoperative complications on decision regret and satisfaction with breasts was examined. Sixty-three patients completed the questionnaires–25 patients with implant-based reconstruction and 38 patients with autologous reconstruction. The average Decision Regret score was 84.6 ± 23.6; thirty-one patients experienced no decision regret. The average score for the BREAST-Q module was 81.9 ± 18.8. Neither satisfaction with breasts nor decision regret were impacted by the reconstructive modality. The occurrence of postoperative complications was strongly correlated with lower Decision Regret scores (91.6 vs. 74.6, p=0.004) but was not correlated with lower Satisfaction with Breasts scores (84.6 vs. 78.2, p=0.18). Patients had relatively low levels of decision regret and relatively high levels of satisfaction with breasts, irrespective of reconstructive modality. Having a postoperative complication led to significantly greater levels of decision regret without impacting satisfaction with breasts. Patients may benefit from additional preoperative education on possible complications to mitigate decision regret.

Level of evidence IV

This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Street W. Breast cancer facts and figures 2019-2020. 44

  2. Plastic surgery statistics report. (2018) Plastic surgery 25 332.

  3. Zhong T et al (2012) Patient satisfaction and health-related quality of life after autologous tissue breast reconstruction: a prospective analysis of early postoperative outcomes. Cancer 118:1701–1709

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Dean C, Chetty U, Forrest AP (1983) Effects of immediate breast reconstruction on psychosocial morbidity after mastectomy. Lancet 1:459–462

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Elder EE et al (2005) Quality of life and patient satisfaction in breast cancer patients after immediate breast reconstruction: a prospective study. Breast 14:201–208

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Metcalfe KA, Semple JL, Narod SA (2004) Satisfaction with breast reconstruction in women with bilateral prophylactic mastectomy: a descriptive study. Plast Reconstr Surg 114:360–366

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Momeni A, Remington AC, Wan DC, Nguyen D, Gurtner GC (2019) A matched-pair analysis of prepectoral with subpectoral breast reconstruction: is there a difference in postoperative complication rate? Plast Reconstr Surg 144:801–807

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Momeni A, Kim RY, Heier M, Bannasch H, Stark GB (2010) Abdominal wall strength: a matched-pair analysis comparing muscle-sparing TRAM flap donor-site morbidity with the effects of abdominoplasty. Plast Reconstr Surg 126:1454–1459

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Momeni A, Kanchwala S (2018) Hybrid prepectoral breast reconstruction: a surgical approach that combines the benefits of autologous and implant-based reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg 142:1109–1115

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Chu MW, Samra F, Kanchwala SK, Momeni A (2017) Treatment options for bilateral autologous breast reconstruction in patients with inadequate donor-site volume. J Reconstr Microsurg 33:305–311

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Momeni A, Kanchwala SK (2018) Improved pocket control in immediate microsurgical breast reconstruction with simultaneous implant placement through the use of mesh. Microsurgery 38:450–457

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Charles C, Gafni A, Whelan T (1997) Shared decision-making in the medical encounter: what does it mean? (or it takes at least two to tango). Soc Sci Med 44:681–692

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Brehaut JC et al (2003) Validation of a decision regret scale. Med Decis Making 23:281–292

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Clark JA, Wray NP, Ashton CM (2001) Living with treatment decisions: regrets and quality of life among men treated for metastatic prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol 19:72–80

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Zhong T et al (2013) Decision regret following breast reconstruction: the role of self-efficacy and satisfaction with information in the preoperative period. Plast Reconstr Surg 132:724e–734e

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Sheehan J, Sherman KA, Lam T, Boyages J (2008) Regret associated with the decision for breast reconstruction: the association of negative body image, distress and surgery characteristics with decision regret. Psychol Health 23:207–219

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Pusic AL et al (2009) Development of a new patient-reported outcome measure for breast surgery: the BREAST-Q. Plast Reconstr Surg 124:345–353

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Momeni A, Kanchwala S, Sbitany H (2020) Oncoplastic procedures in preparation for nipple-sparing mastectomy and autologous breast reconstruction: controlling the breast envelope. Plast Reconstr Surg 145:914–920

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Momeni A et al (2009) Correlation between complication rate and patient satisfaction in abdominoplasty. Ann Plast Surg 62:5–6

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Golden-Kreutz DM, Andersen BL (2004) Depressive symptoms after breast cancer surgery: relationships with global, cancer-related, and life event stress. Psychooncology 13:211–220

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. van Heeringen C, Van Moffaert M, de Cuypere G (1989) Depression after surgery for breast cancer. Comparison of mastectomy and lumpectomy. Psychother Psychosom 51:175–179

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Burwell SR, Case LD, Kaelin C, Avis NE (2006) Sexual problems in younger women after breast cancer surgery. J Clin Oncol 24:2815–2821

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Young-McCaughan S (1996) Sexual functioning in women with breast cancer after treatment with adjuvant therapy. Cancer Nurs 19:308–319

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Erić M, Mihić N, Krivokuća D (2009) Breast reconstruction following mastectomy; patient’s satisfaction. Acta Chir Belg 109:159–166

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Fang S-Y, Shu B-C, Chang Y-J (2013) The effect of breast reconstruction surgery on body image among women after mastectomy: a meta-analysis. Breast Cancer Res Treat 137:13–21

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Henn D, Momeni A (2020) A standardized patient education class as a vehicle to improving shared decision-making and increasing access to breast reconstruction. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bjps.2020.02.032

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Hu ES et al (2009) Patient-reported aesthetic satisfaction with breast reconstruction during the long-term survivorship period. Plast Reconstr Surg 124:1–8

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

None

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Arash Momeni.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

None.

Ethical approval

Institutional review board approval obtained.

Informed consent

Study participants provided consent.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Cai, L., Momeni, A. The Impact of Reconstructive Modality and Postoperative Complications on Decision Regret and Patient-Reported Outcomes following Breast Reconstruction. Aesth Plast Surg 46, 655–660 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00266-021-02660-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00266-021-02660-2

Keywords

Navigation