Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Annals of Surgical Oncology
Published in: Annals of Surgical Oncology 1/2016

01-01-2016 | Breast Oncology

Early Postoperative Outcomes in Breast Conservation Surgery Versus Simple Mastectomy with Implant Reconstruction: A NSQIP Analysis of 11,645 Patients

Authors: Bryan Pyfer, BS, Abhishek Chatterjee, MD, MBA, Lilian Chen, MD, John Nigriny, MD, Brian Czerniecki, MD, PhD, Julia Tchou, MD, Carla Fisher, MD

Published in: Annals of Surgical Oncology | Issue 1/2016

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Little has been studied that compares early postoperative outcomes between breast conservation surgery (BCS) and simple mastectomy with implant reconstruction (SM). Our goal was to utilize a large-volume database to compare such outcomes in women with early stage breast cancer.

Methods

The National Surgery Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) database was searched for patients who underwent partial or complete mastectomy between 2009 and 2012. Exclusion criteria eliminated potential confounding factors. We compared preoperative comorbidities and postoperative complication rates between each treatment group by Chi square and two-sample t tests; we also determined the odds ratios for the likelihood of adverse events in a number of categories.

Results

A total of 11,645 patients met the study criteria: 9571 underwent BCS and 2074 underwent SM with implant reconstruction. The baseline characteristics of the two groups showed significant differences for age (61.7 years in BCS, 53.5 years in SM), body mass index (29.6 kg/m2 in BCS, 27.0 kg/m2 in SM), and rates of hypertension (47.0 % in BCS, 25.6 % in SM), coronary artery disease (1.3 % in BCS, 0.6 % in SM), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (2.4 % in BCS, 1.0 % in SM), and diabetes (11.7 % in BCS, 5.9 % in SM). Statistical analysis between each treatment modality revealed that the SM with implant group had significantly higher total complication (5.5 vs. 2.1 % in BCS), wound (2.8 vs. 1.4 % in BCS), infection (1.9 vs. 0.4 % in BCS), and bleeding (0.2 vs. 0.05 % in BCS) rates than the BCS group.

Conclusions

BCS has fewer overall early postoperative wound, infectious, and bleeding complications despite a significantly higher rate of preexisting risk factors.
Literature
1.
2.
Collins ED, Moore CP, Clay KF, et al. Can women with early-stage breast cancer make an informed decision for mastectomy? J Clin Oncol. 2009;27:519–25.PubMedCrossRef
3.
Covelli AM, Baxter NN, Fitch MI, et al. “Taking control of cancer”: understanding women’s choice for mastectomy. Ann Surg Oncol. 2015;22:383–91.PubMedCrossRef
4.
Fisher CS, Martin-Dunlap T, Ruppel MB, et al. Fear of recurrence and perceived survival benefit are primary motivators for choosing mastectomy over breast-conservation therapy regardless of age. Ann Surg Oncol. 2012;19:3246–50.PubMedCrossRef
5.
Albornoz CR, Matros E, Lee CN, et al. Bilateral mastectomy versus breast-conserving surgery for early-stage breast cancer: the role of breast reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2015;135:1518–26.PubMedCrossRef
6.
Fisher B, Redmond C, Poisson R, et al. Eight-year results of a randomized clinical trial comparing total mastectomy and lumpectomy with or without irradiation in the treatment of breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 1989;320:822–8.PubMedCrossRef
7.
Veronesi U, Cascinelli N, Mariani L, et al. Twenty-year follow-up of a randomized study comparing breast-conserving surgery with radical mastectomy for early breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2002;347:1227–32.PubMedCrossRef
8.
Clarke M, Collins R, Darby S, et al. Effects of radiotherapy and of differences in the extent of surgery for early breast cancer on local recurrence and 15-year survival: an overview of the randomised trials. Lancet. 2005;366(9503):2087–106.PubMedCrossRef
9.
Fisher B, Anderson S, Bryant J, et al. Twenty-year follow-up of a randomized trial comparing total mastectomy, lumpectomy, and lumpectomy plus irradiation for the treatment of invasive breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2002;347:1233–41.PubMedCrossRef
10.
11.
Albornoz CR, Bach PB, Mehrara BJ, et al. A paradigm shift in US breast reconstruction: increasing implant rates. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2013;131:15–23.PubMedCrossRef
12.
McGuire KP, Santillan AA, Kaur P, et al. Are mastectomies on the rise? A 13-year trend analysis of the selection of mastectomy versus breast conservation therapy in 5865 patients. Ann Surg Oncol. 2009;16:2682–90.PubMedCrossRef
13.
Colwell AS, Damjanovic B, Zahedi B, et al. Retrospective review of 331 consecutive immediate single-stage implant reconstructions with acellular dermal matrix: indications, complications, trends, and costs. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2011;128:1170–8.PubMedCrossRef
14.
15.
Cordeiro PG, McCarthy CM. A single surgeon’s 12-year experience with tissue expander/implant breast reconstruction: Part I. A prospective analysis of early complications. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2006;118:825–31.PubMedCrossRef
16.
McCarthy CM, Mehrara BJ, Riedel E, et al. Predicting complications following expander/implant breast reconstruction: an outcomes analysis based on preoperative clinical risk. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2008;121:1886–92.PubMedCrossRef
17.
Osman F, Saleh F, Jackson TD, et al. Increased postoperative complications in bilateral mastectomy patients compared to unilateral mastectomy: an analysis of the NSQIP database. Ann Surg Oncol. 2013;20:3212–7.PubMedCrossRef
18.
Lyman GH, Khorana AA, Falanga A, et al. American Society of Clinical Oncology guideline: recommendations for venous thromboembolism prophylaxis and treatment in patients with cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25:5490–505.PubMedCrossRef
19.
Pannucci CJ, Bailey SH, Dreszer G, et al. Validation of the Caprini risk assessment model in plastic and reconstructive surgery patients. J Am Coll Surg. 2011;212:105–12.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
20.
21.
Habermann EB, Abbott A, Parsons HM, et al. Are mastectomy rates really increasing in the United States? J Clin Oncol. 2010;28:3437–41.PubMedCrossRef
22.
Tuttle TM, Jarosek S, Habermann EB, et al. Increasing rates of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy among patients with ductal carcinoma in situ. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27:1362–7.PubMedCrossRef
23.
Katipamula R, Degnim AC, Hoskin T, et al. Trends in mastectomy rates at the Mayo Clinic Rochester: effect of surgical year and preoperative magnetic resonance imaging. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27:4082–8.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
24.
25.
Sepucha KR, Ozanne EM, Partridge AH, et al. Is there a role for decision aids in advanced breast cancer? Med Decis Making. 2009;29:475–82.PubMedCrossRef
26.
Waljee JF, Rogers MA, Alderman AK. Decision aids and breast cancer: do they influence choice for surgery and knowledge of treatment options? J Clin Oncol. 2007;25:1067–73.PubMedCrossRef
27.
Obeidat R, Finnell DS, Lally RM. Decision aids for surgical treatment of early stage breast cancer: a narrative review of the literature. Patient Educ Couns. 2011;85:e311–21.PubMedCrossRef
28.
Belkora JK, Loth MK, Volz S, et al. Implementing decision and communication aids to facilitate patient-centered care in breast cancer: a case study. Patient Educ Couns. 2009;77:360–8.PubMedCrossRef
29.
Krishnan NM, Chatterjee A, Van Vliet MM, et al. A comparison of acellular dermal matrix to autologous dermal flaps in single-stage, implant-based immediate breast reconstruction: a cost-effectiveness analysis. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2013;131:953–61.PubMedCrossRef
30.
Chatterjee A, Krishnan NM, Van Vliet MM, et al. A comparison of free autologous breast reconstruction with and without the use of laser-assisted indocyanine green angiography: a cost-effectiveness analysis. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2013;131:693e–701e.PubMedCrossRef
31.
Chatterjee A, Krishnan NM, Rosen JM. Complex ventral hernia repair using components separation with or without synthetic mesh: a cost-utility analysis. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2014;133:137–46.PubMedCrossRef
32.
Chatterjee A, Kosowski T, Pyfer B, et al. A cost-utility analysis comparing the sartorius versus the rectus femoris flap in the treatment of the infected vascular groin graft wound. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2015;135:1707–14.PubMedCrossRef
33.
Chatterjee A, Krishnan NM, Rosen JM. Complex ventral hernia repair using components separation with or without biologic mesh: a cost-utility analysis. Ann Plast Surg. 2015;74:471–8.PubMedCrossRef
34.
Krishnan NM, Chatterjee A, Rosenkranz KM, et al. The cost effectiveness of acellular dermal matrix in expander-implant immediate breast reconstruction. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2014;67(4):468–76.PubMedCrossRef
35.
Eck DL, Koonce SL, Goldberg RF, et al. Breast surgery outcomes as quality measures according to the NSQIP database. Ann Surg Oncol. 2012;19:3212–7.PubMedCrossRef
36.
37.
Ibrahim AM, Shuster M, Koolen PG, et al. Analysis of the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database in 19,100 patients undergoing implant-based breast reconstruction: complication rates with acellular dermal matrix. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2013;132:1057–66.PubMedCrossRef
38.
Hoffman RM, Elmore JG, Fairfield KM, et al. Lack of shared decision making in cancer screening discussions: results from a national survey. Am J Prev Med. 2014;47:251–9.PubMedCrossRef
39.
Stacey D, Legare F, Col NF, et al. Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014;1:CD001431.PubMed
Metadata
Title
Early Postoperative Outcomes in Breast Conservation Surgery Versus Simple Mastectomy with Implant Reconstruction: A NSQIP Analysis of 11,645 Patients
Authors
Bryan Pyfer, BS
Abhishek Chatterjee, MD, MBA
Lilian Chen, MD
John Nigriny, MD
Brian Czerniecki, MD, PhD
Julia Tchou, MD
Carla Fisher, MD
Publication date
01-01-2016
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Annals of Surgical Oncology / Issue 1/2016
Print ISSN: 1068-9265
Electronic ISSN: 1534-4681
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-015-4770-2

Other articles of this Issue 1/2016

Annals of Surgical Oncology 1/2016 Go to the issue

Melanomas

Identification of Patients with Intermediate Thickness Melanoma at Low Risk for Sentinel Lymph Node Positivity

Breast Oncology

Expanding the Indications for Total Skin-Sparing Mastectomy: Is It Safe for Patients with Locally Advanced Disease?

Hepatobiliary Tumors

A Phase I Dose-Escalation Trial of Single-Fraction Stereotactic Radiation Therapy for Liver Metastases

Colorectal Cancer

Treatment-Related Mortality After Cytoreductive Surgery and HIPEC in Patients with Colorectal Peritoneal Carcinomatosis is Underestimated by Conventional Parameters

Breast Oncology

Intraoperative Ultrasound Guidance in Breast-Conserving Surgery Improves Cosmetic Outcomes and Patient Satisfaction: Results of a Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial (COBALT)

Healthcare Policy and Outcomes

Global Cancer Surgery, or Lack Thereof: A Wake-Up Call