BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: This study was performed to investigate recent trends and factors associated with immediate breast reconstruction (IBR) using a large population-based registry. We hypothesized that rates of IBR have increased since passage of the Women's Health and Cancer Rights Act of 1998. METHODS: The SEER (surveillance, epidemiology and end results) database was used to evaluate Stage I-III breast cancer (BC) patients who underwent total mastectomy from 1998 to 2008. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to study predictors of IBR. RESULTS: Of 112,348 patients with BC treated by mastectomy 18,001 (16%) had IBR. Rates of IBR increased significantly from 1998 to 2008 (P < 0.0001). Use of IBR significantly decreased as patient age increased (P < 0.0001), as stage increased (P < 0.0001), and as the number of positive lymph nodes increased (P < 0.0001). Estrogen receptor+/progesterone receptor+ (ER+/PR+) patients had significantly higher IBR rates than ER-/PR-patients (P < 0.0001). IBR was used in 3,615 of 25,823 (14.0%) of patients having post-mastectomy radiation (XRT) and in 14,188 of 86,513 (16.4%) of those not having XRT (P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: The utilization of IBR has increased significantly over the last decade. IBR was found to be significantly associated with age, race, geographical region, stage, ER, grade, LN status, and XRT (P < 0.0001).
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: This study was performed to investigate recent trends and factors associated with immediate breast reconstruction (IBR) using a large population-based registry. We hypothesized that rates of IBR have increased since passage of the Women's Health and Cancer Rights Act of 1998. METHODS: The SEER (surveillance, epidemiology and end results) database was used to evaluate Stage I-III breast cancer (BC) patients who underwent total mastectomy from 1998 to 2008. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to study predictors of IBR. RESULTS: Of 112,348 patients with BC treated by mastectomy 18,001 (16%) had IBR. Rates of IBR increased significantly from 1998 to 2008 (P < 0.0001). Use of IBR significantly decreased as patient age increased (P < 0.0001), as stage increased (P < 0.0001), and as the number of positive lymph nodes increased (P < 0.0001). Estrogen receptor+/progesterone receptor+ (ER+/PR+) patients had significantly higher IBR rates than ER-/PR-patients (P < 0.0001). IBR was used in 3,615 of 25,823 (14.0%) of patients having post-mastectomy radiation (XRT) and in 14,188 of 86,513 (16.4%) of those not having XRT (P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: The utilization of IBR has increased significantly over the last decade. IBR was found to be significantly associated with age, race, geographical region, stage, ER, grade, LN status, and XRT (P < 0.0001).
Authors: Caprice K Christian; Joyce Niland; Stephen B Edge; Rebecca A Ottesen; Melissa E Hughes; Richard Theriault; John Wilson; Charles A Hergrueter; Jane C Weeks Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2006-02 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: Dara Christante; SuEllen J Pommier; Brian S Diggs; Bethany T Samuelson; AiLien Truong; Carol Marquez; Juliana Hansen; Arpana M Naik; John T Vetto; Rodney F Pommier Journal: Arch Surg Date: 2010-09
Authors: Anne Warren Peled; Kaoru Itakura; Robert D Foster; Debby Hamolsky; Janet Tanaka; Cheryl Ewing; Michael Alvarado; Laura J Esserman; E Shelley Hwang Journal: Arch Surg Date: 2010-09
Authors: J Y Petit; O Gentilini; N Rotmensz; P Rey; M Rietjens; C Garusi; E Botteri; F De Lorenzi; S Martella; R Bosco; D K Khuthaila; A Luini Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2008-01-22 Impact factor: 4.872
Authors: Amy K Alderman; Sarah T Hawley; Nancy K Janz; Mahasin S Mujahid; Monica Morrow; Ann S Hamilton; John J Graff; Steven J Katz Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2009-10-05 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Amanda R Sergesketter; Samantha M Thomas; Whitney O Lane; Jonah P Orr; Ronnie L Shammas; Oluwadamilola M Fayanju; Rachel A Greenup; Scott T Hollenbeck Journal: Plast Reconstr Surg Date: 2019-06 Impact factor: 4.730
Authors: Tracy Onega; Julie E Weiss; Martha E Goodrich; Weiwei Zhu; Wendy B DeMartini; Karla Kerlikowske; Elissa Ozanne; Anna N A Tosteson; Louise M Henderson; Diana S M Buist; Karen J Wernli; Sally D Herschorn; Elise Hotaling; Cristina O'Donoghue; Rebecca Hubbard Journal: J Surg Oncol Date: 2017-11-11 Impact factor: 3.454
Authors: Katie E Weichman; Jennifer B Hamill; Hyungjin Myra Kim; Xiaoxue Chen; Edwin G Wilkins; Andrea L Pusic Journal: J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg Date: 2015-06-14 Impact factor: 2.740
Authors: Cynthia L Miller; Amy S Colwell; Nora Horick; Melissa N Skolny; Lauren S Jammallo; Jean A O'Toole; Mina N Shenouda; Betro T Sadek; Meyha N Swaroop; Chantal M Ferguson; Barbara L Smith; Michelle C Specht; Alphonse G Taghian Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2016-02 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: Sabine Oskar; Jonas A Nelson; Madeleine E V Hicks; Kenneth P Seier M S; Kay See Tan; Jacqueline J Chu; Scott West; Robert J Allen; Andrea V Barrio; Evan Matros; Anoushka M Afonso Journal: Plast Reconstr Surg Date: 2022-01-01 Impact factor: 5.169
Authors: Ryan C DeCoster; Robert-Marlo F Bautista; Jack C Burns; Adam J Dugan; R Wesley Edmunds; Brian D Rinker; J Matthew Webster; Henry C Vasconez Journal: J Rural Health Date: 2019-09-11 Impact factor: 4.333
Authors: Daniel R Leff; Alex Bottle; Erik Mayer; Darren K Patten; Christopher Rao; Paul Aylin; Dimitri J Hadjiminas; Thanos Athanasiou; Ara Darzi; Gerald Gui Journal: Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open Date: 2015-09-04