Literature DB >> 23893128

Hospital and surgeon caseload are associated with risk of re-operation following breast-conserving surgery.

Marianna de Camargo Cancela1, Harry Comber, Linda Sharp.   

Abstract

Breast-conserving surgery (BCS) is increasingly used for breast cancer treatment. One of the disadvantages of BCS is the risk of re-operation, associated with additional costs to the woman, health service and society. Hospital and surgeon caseload have been associated with better outcomes in breast cancer. Whether these are related to re-operation rates is not clear. In women who underwent BCS initially, we aimed to quantify re-operation rates and identify the factors related to the risk of undergoing subsequent (i) re-operation and (ii) total mastectomy (TM). From the National Cancer Registry Ireland, we identified women diagnosed with a first invasive breast cancer during 2002-2008, and who initially had BCS. Poisson regression with robust error variance was used to identify factors significantly associated with (i) re-operation (vs no re-operation) or (ii) re-operation by TM (vs re-operation by BCS). 16,551 women were diagnosed with invasive breast cancer and 8,318 underwent initial BCS. Of these, 17 % had one or more subsequent re-operations and, of these, 62 % had TM. Surgeon and hospital volume significantly predicted subsequent re-operation after adjustment for socio-demographic and clinical variables. Women having surgery in lower-volume hospitals by low-volume surgeons significantly increased the risk of re-operation [incidence rate ratio (IRR) = 1.56; 95 % CI 1.33-1.83] compared to those operated in higher-volume hospitals by a higher-volume surgeon. Risk of subsequent TM was increased by 22 % (95 % CI 1.10-1.35) and 21 % (95 % CI 1.09-1.33), if women were operated by a lower or intermediate-volume surgeon. The fact that factors related to healthcare organisation/service provision are associated with re-operations suggests that it may be possible to reduce the overall re-operation rate. The high frequency of subsequent TM raises questions about strategies for selecting women for initial BCS. Our results may inform the development of information strategies to help ensure that women are aware of risks of re-operation following BCS and hence, make appropriate treatment choices.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23893128     DOI: 10.1007/s10549-013-2652-5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat        ISSN: 0167-6806            Impact factor:   4.872


  8 in total

1.  THE EPIDEMIOLOGY AND OUTCOMES OF BREAST CANCER SURGERY.

Authors:  Victoria J Fraser; Katelin B Nickel; Ida K Fox; Julie A Margenthaler; Margaret A Olsen
Journal:  Trans Am Clin Climatol Assoc       Date:  2016

2.  Increased Risk of Surgical Site Infection Among Breast-Conserving Surgery Re-excisions.

Authors:  Margaret A Olsen; Katelin B Nickel; Julie A Margenthaler; Anna E Wallace; Daniel Mines; J Philip Miller; Victoria J Fraser; David K Warren
Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol       Date:  2014-10-31       Impact factor: 5.344

3.  Reoperation costs in attempted breast-conserving surgery: a decision analysis.

Authors:  R E Pataky; C R Baliski
Journal:  Curr Oncol       Date:  2016-10-25       Impact factor: 3.677

Review 4.  The lobar approach to breast ultrasound imaging and surgery.

Authors:  Dominique Amy; Enzo Durante; Tibor Tot
Journal:  J Med Ultrason (2001)       Date:  2015-04-02       Impact factor: 1.314

5.  Morbidity and mortality in patients with esophageal atresia.

Authors:  Jason P Sulkowski; Jennifer N Cooper; Joseph J Lopez; Yamini Jadcherla; Alissabeth Cuenot; Peter Mattei; Katherine J Deans; Peter C Minneci
Journal:  Surgery       Date:  2014-03-14       Impact factor: 3.982

6.  Re-excision and survival following breast conserving surgery in early stage breast cancer patients: a population-based study.

Authors:  Stacey Fisher; Yutaka Yasui; Kelly Dabbs; Marcy Winget
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2018-02-08       Impact factor: 2.655

7.  Reoperation after breast-conserving surgery for cancer in Australia: statewide cohort study of linked hospital data.

Authors:  Marina T van Leeuwen; Michael O Falster; Claire M Vajdic; Philip J Crowe; Sanja Lujic; Elizabeth Klaes; Louisa Jorm; Art Sedrakyan
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2018-04-10       Impact factor: 2.692

8.  The requirements of a specialist breast centre.

Authors:  Laura Biganzoli; Fatima Cardoso; Marc Beishon; David Cameron; Luigi Cataliotti; Charlotte E Coles; Roberto C Delgado Bolton; Maria Die Trill; Sema Erdem; Maria Fjell; Romain Geiss; Mathijs Goossens; Christiane Kuhl; Lorenza Marotti; Peter Naredi; Simon Oberst; Jean Palussière; Antonio Ponti; Marco Rosselli Del Turco; Isabel T Rubio; Anna Sapino; Elzbieta Senkus-Konefka; Marko Skelin; Berta Sousa; Tiina Saarto; Alberto Costa; Philip Poortmans
Journal:  Breast       Date:  2020-02-26       Impact factor: 4.380

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.