BACKGROUND: Recent studies indicate that women with unilateral breast cancer are choosing contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM) at an increasing rate. There is limited literature evaluating the postoperative complication rates associated with CPM without breast reconstruction. The objective of this study was to compare postoperative complications in women undergoing unilateral mastectomy (UM) and sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) to those undergoing bilateral mastectomy (BM) and SLNB for the treatment of their breast cancer. METHODS: The American College of Surgeons National Surgery Quality Improvement Program (ACS NSQIP) Participant Use Files between 2007 and 2010 were used to identify women with breast cancer undergoing UM or BM with SLNB. Individual and composite end points of 30-day complications were used to compare both groups by univariate and multivariate analyses. RESULTS: We identified 4,219 breast cancer patients who had a SLNB: 3,722 (88.2 %) had UM and 497 (11.8 %) had BM. The wound complication rate was significantly higher in the BM group versus the UM group, 5.8 % versus 2.9 % [unadjusted odds ratio (OR) 2.1, 95 % confidence interval (CI) 1.3-3.3, P < 0.01]. The overall 30-day complication rate in UM patients was 4.2 % versus 7.6 % in the BM group (unadjusted OR 1.9, 95 % CI 1.3-2.7, P < 0.01). The adjusted OR for overall complications adjusting for important patient characteristics was 1.9 (95 % CI 1.3-2.8, P < 0.01). Independent predictors of overall postoperative complications were body mass index (OR 1.1, P < 0.01) and smoking (OR 2.2, P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: For patients with breast cancer, bilateral mastectomy is associated with an increased risk of wound and overall postoperative complications. Discussion of these outcomes is imperative when counseling women contemplating CPM.
BACKGROUND: Recent studies indicate that women with unilateral breast cancer are choosing contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM) at an increasing rate. There is limited literature evaluating the postoperative complication rates associated with CPM without breast reconstruction. The objective of this study was to compare postoperative complications in women undergoing unilateral mastectomy (UM) and sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) to those undergoing bilateral mastectomy (BM) and SLNB for the treatment of their breast cancer. METHODS: The American College of Surgeons National Surgery Quality Improvement Program (ACS NSQIP) Participant Use Files between 2007 and 2010 were used to identify women with breast cancer undergoing UM or BM with SLNB. Individual and composite end points of 30-day complications were used to compare both groups by univariate and multivariate analyses. RESULTS: We identified 4,219 breast cancerpatients who had a SLNB: 3,722 (88.2 %) had UM and 497 (11.8 %) had BM. The wound complication rate was significantly higher in the BM group versus the UM group, 5.8 % versus 2.9 % [unadjusted odds ratio (OR) 2.1, 95 % confidence interval (CI) 1.3-3.3, P < 0.01]. The overall 30-day complication rate in UM patients was 4.2 % versus 7.6 % in the BM group (unadjusted OR 1.9, 95 % CI 1.3-2.7, P < 0.01). The adjusted OR for overall complications adjusting for important patient characteristics was 1.9 (95 % CI 1.3-2.8, P < 0.01). Independent predictors of overall postoperative complications were body mass index (OR 1.1, P < 0.01) and smoking (OR 2.2, P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: For patients with breast cancer, bilateral mastectomy is associated with an increased risk of wound and overall postoperative complications. Discussion of these outcomes is imperative when counseling women contemplating CPM.
Authors: Shoshana M Rosenberg; Karen Sepucha; Kathryn J Ruddy; Rulla M Tamimi; Shari Gelber; Meghan E Meyer; Lidia Schapira; Steven E Come; Virginia F Borges; Mehra Golshan; Eric P Winer; Ann H Partridge Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2015-05-01 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Jada G Hamilton; Margaux C Genoff; Melissa Salerno; Kimberly Amoroso; Sherry R Boyar; Margaret Sheehan; Megan Harlan Fleischut; Beth Siegel; Angela G Arnold; Erin E Salo-Mullen; Jennifer L Hay; Kenneth Offit; Mark E Robson Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2017-02-01 Impact factor: 4.872
Authors: Thomas A D'Agostino; Abenaa M Brewster; Susan K Peterson; Isabelle Bedrosian; Patricia A Parker Journal: Transl Behav Med Date: 2020-05-20 Impact factor: 3.046
Authors: Margaret A Olsen; Katelin B Nickel; Ida K Fox; Julie A Margenthaler; Kelly E Ball; Daniel Mines; Anna E Wallace; Victoria J Fraser Journal: Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol Date: 2015-06-03 Impact factor: 3.254
Authors: Sarah T Hawley; Reshma Jagsi; Monica Morrow; Nancy K Janz; Ann Hamilton; John J Graff; Steven J Katz Journal: JAMA Surg Date: 2014-06 Impact factor: 14.766
Authors: J E Squires; S N Simard; S Asad; D Stacey; I D Graham; M Coughlin; M Clemons; J M Grimshaw; J Zhang; J M Caudrelier; A Arnaout Journal: Curr Oncol Date: 2019-08-01 Impact factor: 3.677