• 2019-07
  • 2019-08
  • 2019-09
  • 2019-10
  • 2019-11
  • 2020-03
  • 2020-07
  • 2020-08
  • 2021-03
  • br Conclusion Problems with body


    Conclusion: Problems with body image appeared to persist long time post-RRM. No differences in HRQoL were found at the long-term follow-up between women with and without previous breast cancer. The results of this BMS 986120 investigation might be of use in improving future counselling before risk-reducing surgery for women in the decision-making process.
    © 2019 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (
    1. Introduction
    Risk-reducing breast/ovarian surgery is offered to women with increased hereditary risk of breast/ovarian cancer or confirmed BRCA1/BRCA2 mutation. The demands on outcome after risk-reducing mastectomy (RRM) with immediate breast reconstruc-tion (IBR) are equally high for asymptomatic individuals as for
    * Corresponding author.
    [email protected] (H. Johansson), [email protected] (K. Sandelin),
    [email protected], [email protected] (M. Wickman), [email protected] (Y. Brandberg). 
    those with previous breast cancer diagnosis. RRM should fulfil the goals of safety, retained body image, and health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Though bilateral RRM shows a risk-reduction of approximately 90% for developing breast cancer in asymptomatic individuals [1e4], the need for reoperations, due to postoperative complications and/or revisions to achieve satisfying cosmetic re-sults after implant-based reconstruction, still exists [5,6]. r> Previous prospective short-term follow-up studies have shown high overall cosmetic satisfaction six months and one year post-RRM, corresponding to the women's expectations, and no nega-tive impact on anxiety/depressive symptoms, or HRQoL [7,8]. Body image and sexuality were negatively affected the first years after surgery [9e12]. Long-term effects of risk-reducing surgery have
    been studied retrospectively, indicating high procedure satisfac-tion, but decreased levels of satisfaction with the physical appear-ance [13e17]. There is, however, a lack of long-term prospective psychosocial follow-up studies [17].
    This prospective follow-up study aimed to investigate women's perceptions of the cosmetic outcome of their breast reconstruction, body image, sexuality, anxiety/depressive symptoms, and HRQoL, 6e20 years post-RRM. Differences between women with or without previous breast cancer at follow-up, as well as changes over time from the one-year assessment to follow-up, were evaluated.
    2. Material and methods
    2.1. Patients and procedure
    Between March 1997 and September 2010, 298 women under-went RRM at Karolinska University Hospital in Stockholm, Sweden due to increased hereditary risk for breast cancer. Individual risk for breast cancer was based on BRCA tests/family history of breast cancer. A total of 188 (63%) ‘women without cancer’ underwent bilateral RRM, while 110 (37%) ‘women with (previous breast) cancer’ underwent complementary/contralateral RRM (depending on if they previously had breast conservation or mastectomy). No women underwent risk-reducing surgery concomitantly with their cancer surgery. The RRM was performed at a mean time of 56 (range 16e254) months after breast cancer surgery. Ninety-five percent had IBR with expandable or permanent implants, placed under total muscular cover. At the time of surgery, the most com-mon procedure was removal of the nipples and subsequent regrafting or with other techniques. Surgical details have been described in our previous studies [10,11,18].
    We started a prospective psychosocial follow-up study in connection to RRM in 1997, and short-term results have been published [8e10]. No power calculations were made since carpels was not planned in the initial study design in 1997. The previously collected psychosocial questionnaire data from the same in-struments used in the current study were available in a database, including the responses of the eligible 200 women. Women declining future participation in data collection, and those diag-nosed with breast/other cancer(s) after RRM were excluded from the present study.
    An information letter regarding the current follow-up study was sent to the women's home addresses during NovembereDecember 2016. An informed consent form asking for permission to review medical records in order to investigate clinical aspects post-RRM, the questionnaires, and a prepaid return envelope were also attached. One reminder was sent if no answer was obtained after one month, the last were sent January 2017. Questionnaire-data collection proceeded until May 31, 2017. After completion, the participants sent questionnaires and consent forms via the prepaid envelope to the study coordinator (LB) at the Department of Oncology-Pathology, Karolinska Institutet.