RESUMO
Despite the positive effects that breast reconstruction (BR) has on quality of life, access to it remains limited for older women. The aim of this study was to identify decision-making determinants for BR in women over 65 years old, using a specifically designed questionnaire. We included in a case-control study 134 patients treated by mastectomy for breast cancer with or without BR in a cancer center performing BR. We showed higher motivation scores and quality of delivered information in the BR group. Surgeons are a key in convincing elderly patients that their age should no longer be an obstacle to BR.
Assuntos
Neoplasias da Mama , Tomada de Decisões , Mamoplastia , Mastectomia , Qualidade de Vida , Cirurgiões , Idoso , Neoplasias da Mama/psicologia , Neoplasias da Mama/cirurgia , Feminino , França , Humanos , Mamoplastia/métodos , Mamoplastia/psicologia , Mastectomia/psicologia , Mastectomia/reabilitação , Participação do Paciente/psicologia , Papel do MédicoRESUMO
OBJECTIVE: To report our experience regarding the use of partially absorbable mesh, evaluating the nature and rate of re-intervention after transvaginal pelvic organ prolapse repair. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively collected data on 269 consecutive patients who underwent partially absorbable mesh repair between January 2009 and January 2011. Data were obtained from our hospital medical records and we phoned patients to check if they had surgery in another hospital since then. RESULTS: 250 patients were included, with a median follow-up duration of 20 months (range 8-34 months). The global rate of re-interventions was 8%. The main indications were mesh exposure (2%), prolapse recurrence (1.2%), and urinary complications such as de novo stress urinary incontinence (4.8%). Afterwards, we compared these data with those previously obtained in our centre with non-absorbable mesh. CONCLUSION: Our study shows that the use of a partially absorbable mesh is efficient and reliable with relatively low rates of re-intervention. According to the available literature data, a partially absorbable mesh does not seem to give advantages in comparison with classic non-absorbable mesh regarding rates of re-intervention.
