BACKGROUND: There is marked variability of re-excision rates after initial lumpectomy for breast cancer. Reasons for re-excision and variability across surgeons have not been well documented. We hypothesized the American Society of Breast Surgeons (ASBrS) Mastery(SM) Program can identify reasons for re-excision. METHODS: Data from January 1 to 7 November 2013 were evaluated in the ASBrS Mastery(SM) Program to determine re-excision lumpectomy rate (RELR). On 1 June 2013, a tool to track reasons for re-excision was developed. Variation in re-excision rate by surgeon and patient characteristics was performed by Chi square test and Fisher's test for univariate analysis, then logistic regression with backwards elimination method for multivariate analysis. RESULTS: For 6,725 patients undergoing initial lumpectomy for cancer, 328 surgeons reported 1,451 (21.6 %) patients had one or more re-excisions. The most common reasons for re-excision were ink positive margins in 783 (49.7 %), margin <1 mm (34.3 %), and margin 1-2 mm (7.2 %). By multivariate analysis, re-excision rates were lower in patients aged less than 35 years, with White (non-) Hispanic ethnicity, and, among surgeons in solo practice, more years in practice and higher-volume practice. CONCLUSION: Half of re-excisions after initial lumpectomy were performed for margins that are positive. Most of the remainder were for negative close (<1-2 mm) margins. This information corroborates surgeon survey data regarding reasons for re-excision and provides proof of concept the Mastery(SM) Program can capture surgical outcome data in real time, providing opportunity and a method for future performance improvement.
BACKGROUND: There is marked variability of re-excision rates after initial lumpectomy for breast cancer. Reasons for re-excision and variability across surgeons have not been well documented. We hypothesized the American Society of Breast Surgeons (ASBrS) Mastery(SM) Program can identify reasons for re-excision. METHODS: Data from January 1 to 7 November 2013 were evaluated in the ASBrS Mastery(SM) Program to determine re-excision lumpectomy rate (RELR). On 1 June 2013, a tool to track reasons for re-excision was developed. Variation in re-excision rate by surgeon and patient characteristics was performed by Chi square test and Fisher's test for univariate analysis, then logistic regression with backwards elimination method for multivariate analysis. RESULTS: For 6,725 patients undergoing initial lumpectomy for cancer, 328 surgeons reported 1,451 (21.6 %) patients had one or more re-excisions. The most common reasons for re-excision were ink positive margins in 783 (49.7 %), margin <1 mm (34.3 %), and margin 1-2 mm (7.2 %). By multivariate analysis, re-excision rates were lower in patients aged less than 35 years, with White (non-) Hispanic ethnicity, and, among surgeons in solo practice, more years in practice and higher-volume practice. CONCLUSION: Half of re-excisions after initial lumpectomy were performed for margins that are positive. Most of the remainder were for negative close (<1-2 mm) margins. This information corroborates surgeon survey data regarding reasons for re-excision and provides proof of concept the Mastery(SM) Program can capture surgical outcome data in real time, providing opportunity and a method for future performance improvement.
Authors: Maarten R Grootendorst; Anthony J Fitzgerald; Susan G Brouwer de Koning; Aida Santaolalla; Alessia Portieri; Mieke Van Hemelrijck; Matthew R Young; Julie Owen; Massi Cariati; Michael Pepper; Vincent P Wallace; Sarah E Pinder; Arnie Purushotham Journal: Biomed Opt Express Date: 2017-05-09 Impact factor: 3.732
Authors: Rebekah H Griesenauer; Jared A Weis; Lori R Arlinghaus; Ingrid M Meszoely; Michael I Miga Journal: Phys Med Biol Date: 2017-05-18 Impact factor: 3.609
Authors: Rebekah H Griesenauer; Jared A Weis; Lori R Arlinghaus; Ingrid M Meszoely; Michael I Miga Journal: J Med Imaging (Bellingham) Date: 2018-02-08
Authors: Jennifer M Racz; Amy E Glasgow; Gary L Keeney; Amy C Degnim; Tina J Hieken; James W Jakub; John C Cheville; Elizabeth B Habermann; Judy C Boughey Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2020-07-04 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Rebekah H Conley; Ingrid M Meszoely; Jared A Weis; Thomas S Pheiffer; Lori R Arlinghaus; Thomas E Yankeelov; Michael I Miga Journal: Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg Date: 2015-06-20 Impact factor: 2.924
Authors: J M Escribà; L Esteban; J Gálvez; M J Pla; A Melià; M Gil-Gil; R Clèries; L Pareja; X Sanz; M Bustins; J M Borrás; J Ribes Journal: Clin Transl Oncol Date: 2016-09-13 Impact factor: 3.405