Search

Background: Breast-conserving treatment (BCT) for breast cancer can lead to deformation of the treated breast, resulting in patient dissatisfaction with the final cosmetic outcome. Currently, literature on the specific information needs of patients concerning the cosmetic effects of BCT is lacking. The aim of the present study was to investigate the information needs of breast cancer patients regarding the long-term cosmetic outcome after BCT., Subjects, Materials, and Methods: The data from 115 women who had undergone BCT in a general teaching hospital breast cancer unit in The Netherlands were studied. Structured questionnaires and semi-structured interviews were conducted between October 2012 and April 2013. A mixed model of quantitative and qualitative research was used to explore patient-reported information needs. A phenomenological approach was used to analyze the qualitative data., Results: This study shows that women undergoing BCT want to discuss long-term cosmetic effects. Most patients appreciate such information immediately after the diagnosis. Patients indicated that it is also important to pay attention to the cosmetic effects during the follow-up visits, because deformation of the breast can also occur at a later stage. Furthermore, half the patients indicated that they would not likely raise the subject of cosmetic effects of the treatment themselves., Conclusion: Breast cancer patients have a need for long-term attention for cosmetic outcome of BCT, which should be tailored during the treatment and follow-up process., Implications for Practice: Currently, no literature exists concerning patients' needs for information regarding the cosmetic effects of breast-conserving therapy (BCT). Bringing up the cosmetic effects of BCT by health care professionals does not appear to be a standard part of treatment and follow-up. It is expected that the quality of care and life will be improved by providing information and guidance regarding the cosmetic outcome of BCT within the existing structure of the breast cancer pathway. Discussion and visualization of the cosmetic effects prior to treatment will lead to more realistic expectations, and as a result, secondary interventions, such as partial prostheses and plastic surgery, may be easier to discuss and accept., Competing Interests: Disclosures of potential conflicts of interest may be found at the end of this article., (© AlphaMed Press 2018.)

Background: In the present study, we set out to compare patient-reported outcomes with professional judgment about cosmesis after breast-conserving therapy (bct) and to evaluate which items (position of the nipple, color, scar, size, shape, and firmness) correlate best with subjective outcome., Methods: Dutch patients treated with bct between 2008 and 2009 were analyzed. Exclusion criteria were prior amputation or bct of the contralateral breast, metastatic disease, local recurrence, or any prior cosmetic breast surgery. Structured questionnaires and standardized six-view photographs were obtained with a minimum of 3 years' follow-up. Cosmetic outcome was judged by the patients and, based on photographs, by 5 different medical professionals using 3 different scoring systems: the Harvard scale, the Sneeuw questionnaire, and a numeric rating scale. Agreement was scored using the intraclass correlation coefficient (icc). The association between items of the Sneeuw questionnaire and a fair-poor Harvard score was estimated using logistic regression analysis., Results: The study included 108 female patients (age: 40-91 years). Based on the Harvard scale, agreement on cosmetic outcome between the professionals was good (icc: 0.78). In contrast, agreement between professionals as a group compared with the patients was found to be fair to moderate (icc range: 0.38-0.50). The items "size" and "shape" were identified as the strongest determinants of cosmetic outcome., Conclusions: Cosmetic outcome was scored differently by patients and professionals. Agreement was greater between the professionals than between the patients and the professionals as a group. In general, size and shape were the most prominent items on which cosmetic outcome was judged by patients and professionals alike., Competing Interests: CONFLICT OF INTEREST DISCLOSURES We have read and understood Current Oncology’s policy on disclosing conflicts of interest, and we declare that we have none.

Background: To achieve radical tumour excision in non-palpable breast cancer accurate tumour localization is essential. Historically, this has been achieved by wire localization (WL). Recently, new techniques like Iodine-125 seeds (IL) have become available. The aim of this study was to determine whether the results in case of IL are better than when WL is used., Method: A consecutive series of patients operated on because of non-palpable breast cancer was analysed. Between January 2007 and April 2011 WL was method of choice. From April 2011 till January 2013 IL was introduced and became the standard procedure. PRIMARY OUTCOMES WERE: success rate of (peri-) operative localization and radicality of the excision. Secondary outcomes were duration of operation and volumes of the excised tissue specimen., Results: A total of 236 women were included; 149 women underwent WL and 87 women IL. The overall success rate for WL was 93.3%. In 10 patients (6.7%) WL failed because of peri-operative dislocation of the wire compared to only one failure to locate the seed in de postoperative specimen in the IL-group (1.1%, p = 0.098). Radical resection was obtained in 126/149 (84.6%) of the WL-patients, in comparison with 81/87 (93.1%) in the IL-group (p = 0.054). Median operation time and volume of the specimen was not significantly different between both groups., Conclusion: Localization of non-palpable breast cancer using Iodine-125 seeds is, at least, as good as the standard wire localization procedure., (Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)