Advertisement

Annals of Surgical Oncology

, Volume 22, Issue 6, pp 2003–2009 | Cite as

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

  • Margaret A. Olsen
  • Katelin B. Nickel
  • Julie A. Margenthaler
  • Anna E. Wallace
  • Daniel Mines
  • J. Philip Miller
  • Victoria J. Fraser
  • David K. Warren
Breast Oncology

Abstract

Purpose

The aim of this study was to determine the risk of surgical site infection (SSI) after primary breast-conserving surgery (BCS) versus re-excision among women with carcinoma in situ or invasive breast cancer.

Methods

We established a retrospective cohort of women aged 18–64 years with International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-9-CM) procedure or Current Procedural Terminology, 4th edition (CPT-4) codes for BCS from 29 June 2004 to 31 December 2010. Prior insurance plan enrollment of at least 180 days was required to establish the index BCS; subsequent re-excisions within 180 days were identified. SSIs occurring 2–90 days after BCS were identified by ICD-9-CM diagnosis codes. The attributable surgery was defined based on SSI onset compared with the BCS date(s). A χ 2 test and generalized estimating equations model were used to compare the incidence of SSI after index and re-excision BCS procedures.

Results

Overall, 23,001 women with 28,827 BCSs were identified; 23.2 % of women had more than one BCS. The incidence of SSI was 1.82 % (418/23,001) for the index BCS and 2.44 % (142/5,826) for re-excision BCS (p = 0.002). The risk of SSI after re-excision remained significantly higher after accounting for multiple procedures within a woman (odds ratio 1.34, 95 % confidence interval 1.07–1.68).

Conclusions

Surgeons need to be aware of the increased risk of SSI after re-excision BCS compared with the initial procedure. Our results suggest that risk adjustment of SSI rates for re-excision would allow for better comparison of BCS SSI rates between institutions.

Keywords

Surgical Site Infection Diagnosis Code Sentinel Lymph Node Dissection Surgical Site Infection Rate Surgical Site Infection Incidence 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Notes

Acknowledgment

We thank Cherie Hill for database and computer management support. Funding for this project was provided by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) Grant 5R01HS019713 to Margaret A. Olsen. Margaret A. Olsen, Victoria J. Fraser, and David K. Warren were also supported in part by Grant U54CK000162 from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). The findings and conclusions in this document are those of the authors, who are responsible for its content, and do not necessarily represent the views of the AHRQ or CDC.

References

  1. 1.
    Jeevan R, Cromwell DA, Trivella M, et al. Reoperation rates after breast conserving surgery for breast cancer among women in England: retrospective study of hospital episode statistics. BMJ. 2012;345:e4505.CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Jung W, Kang E, Kim SM, et al. Factors associated with re-excision after breast-conserving surgery for early-stage breast cancer. J Breast Cancer. 2012;15:412–19.CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    McCahill LE, Single RM, Aiello Bowles EJ, et al. Variability in reexcision following breast conservation surgery. JAMA. 2012;307:467–75.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    de Camargo CM, Comber H, Sharp L. Hospital and surgeon caseload are associated with risk of re-operation following breast-conserving surgery. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2013;140:535–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Waljee JF, Hu ES, Newman LA, Alderman AK. Predictors of re-excision among women undergoing breast-conserving surgery for cancer. Ann Surg Oncol. 2008;15:1297–303.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Leekha S, Sampathkumar P, Berry DJ, Thompson RL. Should national standards for reporting surgical site infections distinguish between primary and revision orthopedic surgeries? Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2010;31:503–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Peersman G, Laskin R, Davis J, Peterson M. Infection in total knee replacement: a retrospective review of 6489 total knee replacements. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2001;392:15–23.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Katz JN, Wright EA, Wright J, et al. Twelve-year risk of revision after primary total hip replacement in the U.S. Medicare population. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2012;94:1825–32.CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kurtz SM, Lau E, Ong KL. et al. Infection risk for primary and revision instrumented lumbar spine fusion in the Medicare population. J Neurosurg Spine. 2012;17:342–47.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ottino G, De PR, Pansini S, et al. Major sternal wound infection after open-heart surgery: a multivariate analysis of risk factors in 2,579 consecutive operative procedures. Ann Thorac Surg. 1987;44:173–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ashraf M, Biswas J, Gupta S, Alam N. Determinants of wound infections for breast procedures: assessment of the risk of wound infection posed by an invasive procedure for subsequent operation. Int J Surg. 2009;7:543–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Teija-Kaisa A, Eija M, Marja S, Outi L. Risk factors for surgical site infection in breast surgery. J Clin Nurs. 2013;22:948–57.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Tran CL, Langer S, Broderick-Villa G, DiFronzo LA. Does reoperation predispose to postoperative wound infection in women undergoing operation for breast cancer? Am Surg. 2003;69:852–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Nickel KB, Wallace AE, Warren DK, Mines D, Olsen MA. Using claims data to perform surveillance for surgical site infection: the devil is in the details. In: Battles JB, Cleeman JI, Kahn KK, Weinberg DA, eds. Advances in the prevention and control of HAIs. Rockville: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US), publication no. 14-0003; 2014.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. National Healthcare Safety Network (NHSN) procedure-associated (PA) module: surgical site infection (SSI) event. Atlanta: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; 2013. http://www.cdc.gov/nhsn/PDFs/pscManual/9pscSSIcurrent.pdf. Accessed 14 Nov 2013.
  16. 16.
    Li X, King C, deGara C, White J, Winget M. Validation of colorectal cancer surgery data from administrative data sources. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2012;12:97.CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    The Coding Institute. Pathology/lab coding alert: receive fair payment for physician interpretation of pap smear. Durham: The Coding Institute; 2001. http://www.cap.org/apps/docs/pathology_reporting/Enhance_Compliance_with_Chart_Audits.pdf. Accessed 25 Aug 2014.
  18. 18.
    Olsen MA, Fraser VJ. Use of diagnosis codes and/or wound culture results for surveillance of surgical site infection after mastectomy and breast reconstruction. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2010;31:544–7.CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    de Blacam C, Ogunleye AA, Momoh AO, et al. High body mass index and smoking predict morbidity in breast cancer surgery: a multivariate analysis of 26,988 patients from the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database. Ann Surg. 2012;255:551–5.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    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. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2014;88:553–64.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. Global surgery fact sheet. Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services; 2013. http://www.cms.gov/Outreach-and-Education/Medicare-Learning-Network-MLN/MLNProducts/downloads/GloballSurgery-ICN907166.pdf. Accessed 14 Nov 2013.
  22. 22.
    Olsen MA, Chu-Ongsakul S, Brandt KE, Dietz JR, Mayfield J, Fraser VJ. Hospital-associated costs due to surgical site infection after breast surgery. Arch Surg. 2008;143:53–60.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Angarita FA, Acuna SA, Torregrosa L, Tawil M, Escallon J, Ruiz A. Perioperative variables associated with surgical site infection in breast cancer surgery. J Hosp Infect. 2011;79:328–32.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Society of Surgical Oncology 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Margaret A. Olsen
    • 1
    • 2
  • Katelin B. Nickel
    • 1
  • Julie A. Margenthaler
    • 3
  • Anna E. Wallace
    • 4
  • Daniel Mines
    • 4
  • J. Philip Miller
    • 5
  • Victoria J. Fraser
    • 1
  • David K. Warren
    • 1
  1. 1.Division of Infectious Diseases, Department of MedicineWashington University School of MedicineSt. LouisUSA
  2. 2.Division of Public Health Sciences, Department of SurgeryWashington University School of MedicineSt. LouisUSA
  3. 3.Division of General Surgery, Department of SurgeryWashington University School of MedicineSt. LouisUSA
  4. 4.HealthCore, IncWilmingtonUSA
  5. 5.Division of BiostatisticsWashington University School of MedicineSt. LouisUSA

Personalised recommendations