<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim">
 <record>
  <leader>     caa a22        4500</leader>
  <controlfield tag="001">445310243</controlfield>
  <controlfield tag="003">CHVBK</controlfield>
  <controlfield tag="005">20180317142627.0</controlfield>
  <controlfield tag="007">cr unu---uuuuu</controlfield>
  <controlfield tag="008">170323e20110901xx      s     000 0 eng  </controlfield>
  <datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2="0">
   <subfield code="a">10.1007/s00404-010-1721-9</subfield>
   <subfield code="2">doi</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="a">(NATIONALLICENCE)springer-10.1007/s00404-010-1721-9</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="a">Al-Benna</subfield>
   <subfield code="D">Sammy</subfield>
   <subfield code="u">Department of Plastic Surgery, St. Bartholomew's Hospital, West Smithfield, EC1A 7BE, London, UK</subfield>
   <subfield code="4">aut</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0">
   <subfield code="a">Female plastic and reconstructive surgeons' personal decision making for breast cancer treatment and reconstruction</subfield>
   <subfield code="h">[Elektronische Daten]</subfield>
   <subfield code="c">[Sammy Al-Benna]</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="520" ind1="3" ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="a">Introduction: No original articles have been published exploring female surgeons' preferences for breast cancer treatment and reconstruction if they were to be diagnosed with breast cancer. Materials and methods: 107 female breast plastic and reconstructive surgeons were surveyed as to the methods of breast cancer treatment and reconstruction they would opt for if they were diagnosed with a 2cm invasive breast carcinoma. Results: 75% stated that they would opt for mastectomy rather than undergo breast conserving surgery and radiation (21%). Most (95%) of those choosing a mastectomy would opt for reconstruction. For reconstruction choices, 50% of those surveyed would have autologous breast reconstruction with abdominal tissue (38% deep inferior epigastric perforator flap; 12% transverse rectus abdominis muscle flap). 26% would choose tissue expansion with implant and 19% would opt for a latissimus dorsi flap. For those choosing tissue expansion with implant reconstruction 64% would choose a silicone implant, 9% would choose a saline implant and 27% felt either type of implant would be acceptable. For those choosing latissimus dorsi flap with implant reconstruction, 69% would choose a silicone implant, 13% would choose a saline implant and 19% felt either type of implant would be acceptable. Discussion: Female surgeons offer an exclusive insight into surgical outcomes following breast cancer therapy and reconstruction. This study suggests that due to their clinical experiences they have knowledge as to outcomes and consequences of breast cancer treatment and reconstruction and their choices do not always adhere to current guidelines.</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="540" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="a">Springer-Verlag, 2010</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="690" ind1=" " ind2="7">
   <subfield code="a">Breast cancer</subfield>
   <subfield code="2">nationallicence</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="690" ind1=" " ind2="7">
   <subfield code="a">Ablative surgery</subfield>
   <subfield code="2">nationallicence</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="690" ind1=" " ind2="7">
   <subfield code="a">Reconstructive surgery</subfield>
   <subfield code="2">nationallicence</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="t">Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics</subfield>
   <subfield code="d">Springer-Verlag</subfield>
   <subfield code="g">284/3(2011-09-01), 737-741</subfield>
   <subfield code="x">0932-0067</subfield>
   <subfield code="q">284:3&lt;737</subfield>
   <subfield code="1">2011</subfield>
   <subfield code="2">284</subfield>
   <subfield code="o">404</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0">
   <subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-010-1721-9</subfield>
   <subfield code="q">text/html</subfield>
   <subfield code="z">Onlinezugriff via DOI</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="908" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="D">1</subfield>
   <subfield code="a">research-article</subfield>
   <subfield code="2">jats</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="950" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="B">NATIONALLICENCE</subfield>
   <subfield code="P">856</subfield>
   <subfield code="E">40</subfield>
   <subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-010-1721-9</subfield>
   <subfield code="q">text/html</subfield>
   <subfield code="z">Onlinezugriff via DOI</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="950" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="B">NATIONALLICENCE</subfield>
   <subfield code="P">100</subfield>
   <subfield code="E">1-</subfield>
   <subfield code="a">Al-Benna</subfield>
   <subfield code="D">Sammy</subfield>
   <subfield code="u">Department of Plastic Surgery, St. Bartholomew's Hospital, West Smithfield, EC1A 7BE, London, UK</subfield>
   <subfield code="4">aut</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="950" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="B">NATIONALLICENCE</subfield>
   <subfield code="P">773</subfield>
   <subfield code="E">0-</subfield>
   <subfield code="t">Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics</subfield>
   <subfield code="d">Springer-Verlag</subfield>
   <subfield code="g">284/3(2011-09-01), 737-741</subfield>
   <subfield code="x">0932-0067</subfield>
   <subfield code="q">284:3&lt;737</subfield>
   <subfield code="1">2011</subfield>
   <subfield code="2">284</subfield>
   <subfield code="o">404</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="900" ind1=" " ind2="7">
   <subfield code="a">Metadata rights reserved</subfield>
   <subfield code="b">Springer special CC-BY-NC licence</subfield>
   <subfield code="2">nationallicence</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="898" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="a">BK010053</subfield>
   <subfield code="b">XK010053</subfield>
   <subfield code="c">XK010000</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="949" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="B">NATIONALLICENCE</subfield>
   <subfield code="F">NATIONALLICENCE</subfield>
   <subfield code="b">NL-springer</subfield>
  </datafield>
 </record>
</collection>
