Tulin D Cil1,2,3, Erin Cordeiro4,5. 1. Department of Surgery, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada. Tulin.cil@uhn.ca. 2. Division of General Surgery, University Health Network, Toronto, ON, Canada. Tulin.cil@uhn.ca. 3. Department of Surgery, Women's College Hospital, Toronto, ON, Canada. Tulin.cil@uhn.ca. 4. Department of Surgery, The Ottawa Hospital, Ottawa, ON, Canada. 5. Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, ON, Canada.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Oncoplastic breast surgery (OBS) aims to provide breast cancer patients with optimum oncologic outcomes and excellent cosmesis. We sought to determine if there is a difference in complications associated with OBS involving soft tissue transfer compared with the traditional breast-conserving surgical (BCS) approach. METHODS: Analysis of the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database was performed. Patients with breast cancer who underwent BCS from 2005 to 2014 were included in the study cohort, while patients undergoing concurrent high-risk non-breast surgery, male patients, and those with metastatic disease were excluded. Patients with concomitant current procedural terminology codes identifying soft tissue transfer were categorized as having OBS. Multivariable analysis was performed to determine the independent effect of OBS on postoperative morbidity. RESULTS: We identified 75,972 patients who underwent BCS for breast cancer between 2005 and 2014, of whom 1363 (1.8 %) underwent OBS with soft tissue transfer. Compared with the standard lumpectomy group, patients undergoing OBS were more likely to be younger, had a lower body mass index, were less likely to be smokers, and more often received neoadjuvant chemotherapy. OBS with soft tissue transfer also had a significantly longer operative time (83 vs. 59 min; p < 0.001). The multivariable analysis confirmed that soft tissue transfer OBS was not an independent predictor of overall complications (odds ratio 0.78; 95 % confidence interval 0.50-1.19). CONCLUSIONS: These data confirm that the use of OBS with soft tissue transfer for breast cancer treatment does not confer an increased risk of surgical complications, despite the longer operative time. This is important given the increasing use of oncoplastic surgery techniques within North America.
BACKGROUND:Oncoplastic breast surgery (OBS) aims to provide breast cancerpatients with optimum oncologic outcomes and excellent cosmesis. We sought to determine if there is a difference in complications associated with OBS involving soft tissue transfer compared with the traditional breast-conserving surgical (BCS) approach. METHODS: Analysis of the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database was performed. Patients with breast cancer who underwent BCS from 2005 to 2014 were included in the study cohort, while patients undergoing concurrent high-risk non-breast surgery, male patients, and those with metastatic disease were excluded. Patients with concomitant current procedural terminology codes identifying soft tissue transfer were categorized as having OBS. Multivariable analysis was performed to determine the independent effect of OBS on postoperative morbidity. RESULTS: We identified 75,972 patients who underwent BCS for breast cancer between 2005 and 2014, of whom 1363 (1.8 %) underwent OBS with soft tissue transfer. Compared with the standard lumpectomy group, patients undergoing OBS were more likely to be younger, had a lower body mass index, were less likely to be smokers, and more often received neoadjuvant chemotherapy. OBS with soft tissue transfer also had a significantly longer operative time (83 vs. 59 min; p < 0.001). The multivariable analysis confirmed that soft tissue transfer OBS was not an independent predictor of overall complications (odds ratio 0.78; 95 % confidence interval 0.50-1.19). CONCLUSIONS: These data confirm that the use of OBS with soft tissue transfer for breast cancer treatment does not confer an increased risk of surgical complications, despite the longer operative time. This is important given the increasing use of oncoplastic surgery techniques within North America.
Authors: Maximilian Präger; Marion Kiechle; Björn Stollenwerk; Christoph Hinzen; Jürgen Glatz; Matthias Vogl; Reiner Leidl Journal: PLoS One Date: 2018-06-01 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Alice Lee; Richard M Kwasnicki; Hasaan Khan; Yasmin Grant; Abigail Chan; Angela E E Fanshawe; Daniel R Leff Journal: BJS Open Date: 2021-11-09
Authors: Michael M Jonczyk; Carla Suzanne Fisher; Russell Babbitt; Jessica K Paulus; Karen M Freund; Brian Czerniecki; Julie A Margenthaler; Albert Losken; Abhishek Chatterjee Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2021-02-22 Impact factor: 4.339