Top

Published in:

01-10-2013 | Breast Oncology

Should Re-excision Lumpectomy Rates Be a Quality Measure in Breast-Conserving Surgery?

Authors: Theresa Schwartz, Amy C. Degnim, Jeffrey Landercasper

Published in: Annals of Surgical Oncology | Issue 10/2013

Excerpt

In response to recognition of variation in the quality of national healthcare, physicians and their professional societies have emphasized the need for quality measurement and improvement.1 Multiple organizations have now developed breast-specific quality measures (QM) to aid quality improvement (QI).2‐6 Many of these QM have been incorporated into national quality initiatives that provide peer performance comparison and some level of transparency. In addition, during the last decade, the American Society of Breast Surgeons (ASBS), the National Accreditation Program for Breast Centers (NAPBC), and the National Consortium of Breast Centers (NCBC) have defined and endorsed multiple breast-specific quality measures.2‐4 …

Kaufman CS, Landercasper J. Can we measure the quality of breast surgical care? Ann Surg Oncol. 2011;18(11):3053–60.PubMedCrossRef

American Society of Breast Surgeons Mastery Program. Available: https://www.breastsurgeons.org/mastery/index.php.

National Accreditation Program for Breast Centers Standards Manual. Available: http://napbc-breast.org/standards/standards.html.

National Consortium of Breast Centers Quality Measurement Program. Available: http://www.nqmbc.org/about/About.htm.

American Society of Clinical Oncology Quality Oncology Performance Initiative. Available from: http://www.asco.org/qopi.

Commission on Cancer endorsed Quality Measures. Available: http://www.facs.org/cancer/qualitymeasures.html.

Berwick DM, Nolan TW, Whittington J. The triple aim: care, health and cost. Health Aff. 2008;27(3):759–69. doi:10.1377/hlthaff.27.3.759.CrossRef

National Quality Forum Measure Evaluation Criteria. Available: http://www.qualityforum.org/Measuring_Performance/Submitting_Standards/Measure_Evaluation_Criteria.aspx.

Crossing the quality chiasm. A new health system for the twenty first century. Health care quality may be judged according to its safety, effectiveness, patient-centeredness, timeliness, efficiency and equity. CA Cancer J Clin. 2008;58:266–92.CrossRef

10.

Quality Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Tutorials on Quality Measures. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2013. Available: http://www.qualitymeasures.ahrq.gov/tutorial/varieties.aspx. Accessed 22 May 2013.

11.

Neumayer L, Schifftner TL, Henderson WG, Khuri SF, El-Tamer M. Breast cancer surgery in Veterans Affairs and selected university medical centers: results of the patient safety in surgery study. J Am Coll Surg. 2007;204(6):1235–41.PubMedCrossRef

12.

American Society of Breast Surgeons. Position Statement on Breast Cancer Lumpectomy Margins, 2013. Available: https://www.breastsurgeons.org/statements/PDF_Statements/Lumpectomy_Margins. Accessed 22 May 2013.

13.

Morrow M, Katz SJ. The challenge of developing quality measures for breast cancer surgery. JAMA. 2012;307(5):509–10.PubMedCrossRef

14.

McCahill LE, Single RM, Aiello Bowles EJ, Feigelson HS, James TA, Barney T, Engel JM, Onitilo AA. Variability in reexcision following breast conservation surgery. JAMA. 2012;307(5):467–75.PubMedCrossRef

15.

Canadian Institute for Health Information on quality of care. Available: http://www.cihi.ca/CIHI-extportal/internet/en/Document/health+system+performance/quality+of+care+and+outcomes/outcomes/RELEASE_11OCT12. Accessed 20 June 2013.

16.

Jeevan R, Cromwell DA, Trivella M, Lawrence G, Kearins O, Pereira J, Sheppard C, Caddy CM, van der Meulen JH. Reoperation rates after breast conserving surgery for breast cancer among women in England: retrospective study of hospital episode statistics. BMJ. 2012;345:e4505.PubMedCrossRef

17.

Coopey S, Smith BL, Hanson S, Buckley J, Hughes KS, Gadd M, Specht MC. The safety of multiple re-excisions after lumpectomy for breast cancer. Ann Surg Oncol. 2011;18(13):3797–801.PubMedCrossRef

18.

Houssami N, Macaskill P, Marinovich ML, Dixon JM, Irwig L, Brennan ME, Solin LJ. Meta-analysis of the impact of surgical margins on local recurrence in women with early-stage invasive breast cancer treated with breast-conserving therapy. Eur J Cancer. 2010;46:3219.PubMedCrossRef

19.

Dunne C, Burke JP, Morrow M, Kell MR. Effect of margin status on local recurrence after breast conservation and radiation therapy for ductal carcinoma in situ. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27(10):1615–20.PubMedCrossRef

20.

NCCN Guideline for breast cancer. Available: www.nccn.org. 2013.

21.

Azu M, Abrahamse P, Katz SJ, Jagsi R, Morrow M. What is an adequate margin for breast-conserving surgery? Surgeon attitudes and correlates. Ann Surg Oncol. 2010;17(2):558–63.PubMedCrossRef

22.

Taghian A, Mohiuddin M, Jagsi R, Goldberg S, Ceilley E, Powell S. Current perceptions regarding surgical margin status after breast-conserving therapy: results of a survey. Ann Surg. 2005;241(4):629–39.PubMedCrossRef

23.

Blair SL, Thompson K, Rococco J, Malcarne V, Beitsch PD, Ollila DW. Attaining negative margins in breast-conservation operations: is there a consensus among breast surgeons? J Am Coll Surg. 2009;209(5):608–13.PubMedCrossRef

24.

Morrow M, Harris JR, Schnitt SJ. Surgical margins in lumpectomy for breast cancer—bigger is not better. N Engl J Med. 2012;367(1):79–82.PubMedCrossRef

25.

Persing S, James TA, Mace J, Goodwin A, Geller B. Variability in the quality of pathology reporting of margin status following breast cancer surgery. Ann Surg Oncol. 2011;18:3061–5.PubMedCrossRef

26.

Esbona K, Li Z, Wilke LG. Intraoperative imprint cytology and frozen section pathology for margin assessment in breast conservation surgery: a systematic review. Ann Surg Oncol. 2012;19(10):3236–45.PubMedCrossRef

27.

Clarke M, Collins R, Darby S, et al. Effects of radiotherapy and differences in the extent of surgery for early breast cancer on local recurrence and 15-year survival: an overview of the randomized trials. Lancet. 2005;366:2087–106.PubMed

28.

Cardoso MJ, Cardoso JS, Vrieling C, Macmillan D, Rainsbury D, Heil J, Hau E, Keshtgar M. Recommendations for the aesthetic evaluation of breast cancer conservative treatment. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2012;135:629–37.PubMedCrossRef

29.

Cano SJ, Klassen AF, Scott AM, Pusic AL. A closer look at the BREAST-Q©. Clin Plast Surg. 2013;40(2):287–96.PubMedCrossRef

Title: Should Re-excision Lumpectomy Rates Be a Quality Measure in Breast-Conserving Surgery?
Authors: Theresa Schwartz
Amy C. Degnim
Jeffrey Landercasper
Publication date: 01-10-2013
Publisher: Springer US
Published in: Annals of Surgical Oncology / Issue 10/2013
Print ISSN: 1068-9265
Electronic ISSN: 1534-4681
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-013-3206-0

At a glance: The STEP trials

Springer Medicine

Should Re-excision Lumpectomy Rates Be a Quality Measure in Breast-Conserving Surgery?

Excerpt

At a glance: The STEP trials

Springer Medicine

Excerpt

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 10/2013

Increasing Eligibility for Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy

How Genomics, Research, Ethics and Advances Translate into Improved Care for Breast Surgery Patients

DCIS Treated with Excision Alone Using the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) Guidelines

Axillary Surgery Among Estrogen Receptor Positive Women 70 Years of Age or Older with Clinical Stage I Breast Cancer, 2004–2010: A Report from the National Cancer Data Base

Trends in Radiotherapy After Breast-Conserving Surgery in Elderly Patients with Early-Stage Breast Cancer

Geographic and Temporal Trends in the Management of Occult Primary Breast Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis