The use of Patient Reported Outcome Measures in assessing patient outcomes when comparing autologous to alloplastic breast reconstruction: a systematic review
Breast reconstruction surgery after mastectomy has demonstrated positive psychological benefits, and is reflected in the number of patients undergoing the procedure, rising from 26.94% of patients after mastectomy in 2005, to 43.30% in 2014. Most of this is attributable to implant and expander-based reconstruction, with the rate of free flaps only increasing from 1.25% to 3.96% in this time period. Increasingly, breast cancer patients have higher survival rates. There is now an emphasis on Value Based Health Care (VBHC), which focusses on outcomes, and that can be measured by Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs). To date, there has been no systematic review to analyse PROMs between those undergoing autologous or alloplastic reconstruction, using validated measurement tools, to determine if there is a preferred technique from the patient’s perspective. We performed a systematic search on EMBASE, and together with bibliographic linkage, identified 146 articles. After screening and assessment of articles through abstract, and full article appraisal, 13 were identified suitable for inclusion in this systematic review. Using BREAST-Q, satisfaction of breast and psychosocial well-being were rated highly by the autologous group when compared to implant-based reconstruction. Physical well-being was less significant, with the least significant difference noted for sexual well-being. EORTC-QLQ-BR23/C30 PROMs noted similar trends. SF-36 however, noted virtually no difference between the two methods of reconstruction regarding similar PROM quality of life (QoL) domains. From the patient perspective, autologous reconstruction is either equal to or superior to implant-based reconstruction, and should be offered to all patients.