Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Annals of Surgical Oncology 13/2018

01-12-2018 | Reconstructive Oncology

Trends in Lumpectomy and Oncoplastic Breast-Conserving Surgery in the US, 2011–2016

Authors: Chloe Christina Kimball, BA, Christine Ida Nichols, MA, MBA, Joshua Greene Vose, MD, MBA, Anne Warren Peled, MD

Published in: Annals of Surgical Oncology | Issue 13/2018

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Oncoplastic breast surgery aims to optimize efficacy of surgical resection and cosmesis to maximize patient satisfaction; however, despite the benefits, oncoplastic techniques have not been widely adopted in the US. This study examined trends in the incidence of lumpectomy (partial mastectomy) with or without oncoplastic techniques from 2011 to 2016.

Methods

This was a retrospective analysis of claims from the Optum Clinformatics database (January 2010–March 2017). Female patients with no history of breast surgery in the prior year were categorized into three independent cohorts: isolated lumpectomy (Lx), lumpectomy with tissue transfer (LxTT), or lumpectomy with mammaplasty and/or mastopexy (LxMM). Oncoplastic techniques (in cohorts two and three) were performed at either time of the initial lumpectomy or during 90-day follow-up.

Results

Overall, 19,253 patients met the inclusion criteria (91.1% Lx, 5.2% LxTT, and 3.7% LxMM). Significantly fewer patients with Lx had a family history of breast cancer compared with patients with oncoplastic techniques (26.4% vs. 33.7% and 37.9%, respectively; p < 0.001). The incidence of Lx declined significantly from 2011 (92.9%) to 2016 (88.1%), while LxTT and LxMM increased from 4.2 to 7.2% and 2.8 to 4.7%, respectively (both p < 0.001). The greatest utilization of oncoplastic techniques was observed in the Pacific census division (19.2%), while lowest utilization was in the East South Central division (3.2%; p < 0.001).

Conclusions

While increased adoption of oncoplastic techniques was observed, the compound annual growth rate remained below 10% and varied significantly by region. Further adoption of oncoplastic techniques is necessary to improve cosmetic outcomes and patient satisfaction following breast-conserving surgery.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Urban C, Lima R, Schunemann E, Spautz C, Rabinovich I, Anselmi K. Oncoplastic principles in breast conserving surgery. Breast 2011;20(Suppl 3):S92–5.CrossRef Urban C, Lima R, Schunemann E, Spautz C, Rabinovich I, Anselmi K. Oncoplastic principles in breast conserving surgery. Breast 2011;20(Suppl 3):S92–5.CrossRef
2.
go back to reference Losken A, Kapadia S, Egro FM, Baecher KM, Styblo TM, Carlson GW. Current opinion on the oncoplastic approach in the USA. Breast J. 2016;22(4):437–41.CrossRef Losken A, Kapadia S, Egro FM, Baecher KM, Styblo TM, Carlson GW. Current opinion on the oncoplastic approach in the USA. Breast J. 2016;22(4):437–41.CrossRef
3.
go back to reference Weber WP, Soysal SD, El-Tamer M, et al. First international consensus conference on standardization of oncoplastic breast conserving surgery. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2017;165(1):139–49.CrossRef Weber WP, Soysal SD, El-Tamer M, et al. First international consensus conference on standardization of oncoplastic breast conserving surgery. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2017;165(1):139–49.CrossRef
4.
go back to reference Kawamura M, Itoh Y, Sawaki M, et al. A phase I/II trial of intraoperative breast radiotherapy in an Asian population: 5-year results of local control and cosmetic outcome. Radiat Oncol. 2015;10(1):150.CrossRef Kawamura M, Itoh Y, Sawaki M, et al. A phase I/II trial of intraoperative breast radiotherapy in an Asian population: 5-year results of local control and cosmetic outcome. Radiat Oncol. 2015;10(1):150.CrossRef
5.
go back to reference Hennigs A, Hartmann B, Rauch G, et al. Long-term objective esthetic outcome after breast-conserving therapy. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2015;153(2):345–51.CrossRef Hennigs A, Hartmann B, Rauch G, et al. Long-term objective esthetic outcome after breast-conserving therapy. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2015;153(2):345–51.CrossRef
6.
go back to reference Waljee JF, Hu ES, Ubel PA, Smith DM, Newman LA, Alderman AK. Effect of esthetic outcome after breast-conserving surgery on psychosocial functioning and quality of life. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26(20):3331–7.CrossRef Waljee JF, Hu ES, Ubel PA, Smith DM, Newman LA, Alderman AK. Effect of esthetic outcome after breast-conserving surgery on psychosocial functioning and quality of life. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26(20):3331–7.CrossRef
7.
go back to reference Cochrane RA, Valasiadou P, Wilson AR, Al-Ghazal SK, Macmillan RD. Cosmesis and satisfaction after breast-conserving surgery correlates with the percentage of breast volume excised. Br J Surg. 2003;90(12):1505–9.CrossRef Cochrane RA, Valasiadou P, Wilson AR, Al-Ghazal SK, Macmillan RD. Cosmesis and satisfaction after breast-conserving surgery correlates with the percentage of breast volume excised. Br J Surg. 2003;90(12):1505–9.CrossRef
8.
go back to reference Dahlbäck C, Manjer J, Rehn M, Ringberg A. Determinants for patient satisfaction regarding aesthetic outcome and skin sensitivity after breast-conserving surgery. World J Surg Oncol. 2016;14(1):303.CrossRef Dahlbäck C, Manjer J, Rehn M, Ringberg A. Determinants for patient satisfaction regarding aesthetic outcome and skin sensitivity after breast-conserving surgery. World J Surg Oncol. 2016;14(1):303.CrossRef
9.
go back to reference Hennigs A, Biehl H, Rauch G, et al. Change of patient-reported aesthetic outcome over time and identification of factors characterizing poor aesthetic outcome after breast-conserving therapy: long-term results of a prospective cohort study. Ann Surg Oncol. 2016;23(5):1744–51.CrossRef Hennigs A, Biehl H, Rauch G, et al. Change of patient-reported aesthetic outcome over time and identification of factors characterizing poor aesthetic outcome after breast-conserving therapy: long-term results of a prospective cohort study. Ann Surg Oncol. 2016;23(5):1744–51.CrossRef
10.
go back to reference Foersterling E, Golatta M, Hennigs A, et al. Predictors of early poor aesthetic outcome after breast-conserving surgery in patients with breast cancer: initial results of a prospective cohort study at a single institution. J Surg Oncol. 2014;110(7):801–6.CrossRef Foersterling E, Golatta M, Hennigs A, et al. Predictors of early poor aesthetic outcome after breast-conserving surgery in patients with breast cancer: initial results of a prospective cohort study at a single institution. J Surg Oncol. 2014;110(7):801–6.CrossRef
11.
go back to reference Losken A, Dugal CS, Styblo TM, Carlson GW. A meta-analysis comparing breast conservation therapy alone to the oncoplastic technique. Ann Plast Surg. 2014;72(2):145–9.CrossRef Losken A, Dugal CS, Styblo TM, Carlson GW. A meta-analysis comparing breast conservation therapy alone to the oncoplastic technique. Ann Plast Surg. 2014;72(2):145–9.CrossRef
12.
go back to reference Carter SA, Lyons GR, Kuerer HM, et al. Operative and oncologic outcomes in 9861 patients with operable breast cancer: single-institution analysis of breast conservation with oncoplastic reconstruction. Ann Surg Oncol. 2016;23(10):3190–8.CrossRef Carter SA, Lyons GR, Kuerer HM, et al. Operative and oncologic outcomes in 9861 patients with operable breast cancer: single-institution analysis of breast conservation with oncoplastic reconstruction. Ann Surg Oncol. 2016;23(10):3190–8.CrossRef
13.
go back to reference Piper ML, Esserman LJ, Sbitany H, Peled AW. Outcomes following oncoplastic reduction mammoplasty: a systematic review. Ann Plast Surg. 2016;76(Suppl 3):S222–6.CrossRef Piper ML, Esserman LJ, Sbitany H, Peled AW. Outcomes following oncoplastic reduction mammoplasty: a systematic review. Ann Plast Surg. 2016;76(Suppl 3):S222–6.CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Trends in Lumpectomy and Oncoplastic Breast-Conserving Surgery in the US, 2011–2016
Authors
Chloe Christina Kimball, BA
Christine Ida Nichols, MA, MBA
Joshua Greene Vose, MD, MBA
Anne Warren Peled, MD
Publication date
01-12-2018
Publisher
Springer International Publishing
Published in
Annals of Surgical Oncology / Issue 13/2018
Print ISSN: 1068-9265
Electronic ISSN: 1534-4681
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-018-6760-7

Other articles of this Issue 13/2018

Annals of Surgical Oncology 13/2018 Go to the issue