Table 1 Reconstruction rates in various countries
Author | Country | Type of study sample size | Mastectomy rate | Reconstruction rate |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Reaby et al. (1998) | Australia | Questionnaire N = 95 | – | 10% |
Baxter et al. (2005) | Canada | Retrospective N = 27 718 | 42.9% | 7.9% |
Yu et al.(2007) | China | Retrospective N = 5887 | 93.7% | 5% |
Hvilsom et al. (2011) | Denmark | National registry N = 13 379 | 37% | 25% |
Meyer-Marcotty et al. (2007) | Germany | Retrospective N = 4335 | 34% | 13% |
Fallbjork et al. (2010) | Sweden | Questionnaire N = 149 | 40% | 25% |
Al-Allak et al.(2010) | United Kingdom | Retrospective N = 272 | – | 46% |
Al-Ghazal et al. (2000) | United Kingdom | Retrospective N = 577 | 35% | 21% |
Harcourt et al. (2003) | United Kingdom | Prospective N = 103 | – | 46% |
Jeevan et al. (2010) | United Kingdom | Registry N = 44 837 | 40% | 16% |
Christian et al. (2006) | United States | National registry N = 2174 | 42% | 42% |
Joslyn (2005) | United States | National registry N = 27 703 | – | 17% |
Kruper et al. (2011) | United States | State registry N = 11 019 | 42% | 25-29% |
Morrow et al. (2001) | United States | National registry N = 68 348 | – | 8.3% |
Rowland et al. (2000) | United States | Retrospective N = 1957 | 43% | 17% |
Our study Héquet et al. | France | Retrospective N = 1937 Questionnaire N = 132 | 26% | 32.1% |