This prospective trial was designed to assess aesthetic outcomes of oncoplastic surgery. Standardized photographs were taken of 45 breast cancer patients undergoing oncoplastic surgery, preoperatively and 6 and 12 months postoperatively (oncoplastic group), and of 45 patients treated by conservative surgery without breast reconstruction (control group). Photographs were assessed by senior male and female physicians, 2 breast surgeons and 2 plastic surgeons. Aesthetic outcomes were evaluated using patients' own assessments (rated 0 to 10) and scoring by panelists (using 0 to 10 global rating scales and a subscales system). Patients in both groups scored the aesthetic outcomes better than physicians did. Panelists and patients considered aesthetic outcomes of oncoplastic group better than control group outcomes. Patients and plastic surgeons attributed progressively higher grades to outcomes of oncoplastic group at 6 and 12 months postoperatively; breast surgeons did not. Overall, female physicians and breast surgeons scored better the aesthetic outcomes of both groups.
OBJECTIVES: to compare the impact of mastectomy and conservative surgery on the quality of life of patients with breast cancer. METHODS: an assessment was made of the quality of life of patients undergoing mastectomy or segmentary mastectomy, at the Pouso Alegre Clinical Hospital, in the Brazilian State of Minas Gerais, using SF-36. The patients were grouped by age (<50 years and >50 years) and years of schooling (<8 years and >8 years). The Mann-Whitney test was used to compare the groups with regard to the age and schooling domains of SF-36. RESULTS: a significant difference between the two groups was found in the domains of "physical functioning" (p=0.04) and "pain" (p=0.01): with the patients undergoing a mastectomy registering the worst scores. Young patients who had undergone a mastectomy displayed the worst quality of life in terms of "physical functioning" (p=0.03), "pain" (p=0.01) and "social functioning" (p=0.01); those undergoing conservative surgery aged over 50 years scored worst on "role emotional" (p=0.05). Patients undergoing a mastectomy with lower levels of schooling scored lower in "physical functioning" (p=0.01), "role physical" (p=0.05) and "pain" (p=0.05). Among those who had attended school for more than eight years, those having undergone a mastectomy scored less in the "pain" domain (p=0.04). CONCLUSIONS: patients who had undergone a mastectomy had worse results in the physical component of the evaluation of quality of life and this negative impact was more strongly felt among younger patients and those with lower levels of schooling.
Purpose
To assess the effect of antibiotic prophylaxis on surgical site infection
(SSI) rates in women undergoing breast cancer surgery in two tertiary
hospitals in Brazil.
Methods
This was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group
clinical trial. A total of 124 women without independent risk factors for
SSI were randomly assigned to receive either cefazolin (antibiotic group, n
= 62) or placebo (control group, n = 62) as preoperative prophylaxis. After
surgery, all surgical wounds were examined once a week, for four weeks,
according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention definitions and
classifications for SSI.
Results
Baseline characteristics were homogeneous between the two groups. Only one
patient in the antibiotic group developed SSI, which was classified as
superficial incisional. The overall SSI rate was low, with no significant
difference between groups.
Conclusion
Antibiotic prophylaxis had no significant effect on reducing SSI rates in
women without independent risk factors for SSI undergoing breast cancer
surgery.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.