Reasons for Re-Excision After Lumpectomy for Breast Cancer: Insight from the American Society of Breast Surgeons MasterySM Database
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) MasterySM Program can identify reasons for re-excision.
Data from January 1 to 7 November 2013 were evaluated in the ASBrS MasterySM 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.
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.
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 MasterySM Program can capture surgical outcome data in real time, providing opportunity and a method for future performance improvement.
- 1.National Comprehensive Cancer Network. NCCN guidelines for breast cancer treatment. www.nccn.org. Accessed 5 Apr 2014.
- 9.Canadian Institute for Health Information on quality of care. http://www.cihi.ca/CIHI-extportal/internet/en/Document/health+system+performance/quality+of+care+and+outcomes/outcomes/RELEASE_11OCT12. Accessed 30 Jun 2013.
- 10.Pleijhuis RG, Graafland M, de Vries J, Bart J, de Jong JS, van Dam GM. Obtaining adequate surgical margins in breast-conserving therapy for patients with early-stage breast cancer: current modalities and future directions. Ann Surg Oncol. 2009;16(10):2717–30.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 11.National Quality Forum. Measure evaluation importance criteria. http://www.qualityforum.org/docs/measure_evaluation_criteria.aspx. Accessed 5 Apr 2014.
- 18.National Quality Forum. Reoperations as a NQF-endorsed quality measure. http://www.qualityforum.org/QPS/QPSTool.aspx. Accessed 5 Apr 2014.
- 19.US Department of Health and Human Services. Annual progress report to congress: national strategy for quality improvement in health care. 2013 http://www.ahrq.gov/workingforquality/nqs/nqs2013annlrpt.pdf. Accessed 5 Apr 2014.
- 21.American Society of Breast Surgeons MasterySM Program. http://masterybreastsurgeons.org/. Accessed 5 Apr 2014.
- 23.Berry LL Discovering the soul of service: the nine drivers of sustainable business success. New York: Free Press; 1999. P. 12–13.Google Scholar
- 35.American Society of Breast Surgeons (2013). Position statement on breast cancer lumpectomy margins. https://www.breastsurgeons.org/statements/PDF_Statements/Lumpectomy_Margins. Accessed 22 May 2013.
- 36.Moran MS, Schnitt SJ, Giuliano AE, et al. Society of Surgical Oncology-American Society for Radiation Oncology consensus guideline on margins for breast-conserving surgery with whole-breast irradiation in stages I and II invasive breast cancer. Ann Surg Oncol. 2014;21(3):704–16.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar