This Article  • Full text  • PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal  Topic Collections  • Breast Cancer  • Surgical Oncology  • Women's Health  • Women's Health, Other  • Alert me on articles by topic  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Navin K. Singh, MD

Arch Surg. 2005;140:1160-1161.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings.

Studies from the United States demonstrate that postmastectomy immediate and early reconstruction is underutilized, with overall reconstruction rates of approximately 15% of mastectomies, with a significant regional variation. This represents a 147% increase from 1992, which is partly attributable to the Women’s Health and Cancer Rights Act of 1998 that mandates insurance coverage for reconstruction.¹ The Canadian experience, representing a disparate health care outlook and financing model, yields comparably low reconstruction rates of approximately 8%.^2-3 In many patients, autologous tissue such as TRAM [transverse rectus abdominis myocutaneous], free TRAM, or DIEP [muscle sparing, using the superficial epigastric artery or the inferior epigastric artery] flaps may afford superior results in the long term.⁴ However, based on patient preference or unsuitability for autologous tissue reconstruction, about 24% of these patients undergo implant-based reconstruction with saline, silicone, or dual-chambered implants. Countless studies demonstrate excellent outcomes in terms of patient . . . [Full Text of this Article]

AUTHOR INFORMATION


CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?