Annals of Surgical Oncology

, Volume 22, Issue 11, pp 3474–3480 | Cite as

The Effect of Contralateral Prophylactic Mastectomy on Perioperative Complications in Women Undergoing Immediate Breast Reconstruction: A NSQIP Analysis

  • Amanda K. Silva
  • Brittany Lapin
  • Katharine A. Yao
  • David H. Song
  • Mark Sisco
Breast Oncology



Women with breast cancer are increasingly choosing to undergo contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM) despite questionable survival benefit and limited data on added risks. Little is known about differences in perioperative complications between women who undergo bilateral mastectomy (BM) versus unilateral mastectomy (UM) with reconstruction.


The American College of Surgeons National Surgery Quality Improvement Program Participant Use Files (2005–2013) were used to identify women with unilateral breast cancer who underwent UM or BM with reconstruction. Adjusted 30-day complications were compared between UM and BM groups using logistic regression models.


A total of 20,501 patients were identified, of whom 35.3 % underwent BM. Of these, 84.3 % had implant reconstruction and 15.7 % had autologous reconstruction. For all women, BM was associated with longer hospital stays (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.98–2.09, p < 0.001) and a higher transfusion rate than UM (aOR 2.52–3.06, p < 0.001). BM with implant reconstruction was associated with a modestly increased reoperation rate (aOR 1.15, p = 0.029). BM with autologous reconstruction was associated with a higher wound disruption rate (aOR 2.51, p = 0.015). Surgical site infections, prosthesis failure, and medical complications occurred at similar rates in UM and BM groups.


CPM is associated with significant increases in some, but not all, surgical site complications. CPM does not increase the likelihood of medical complications, which are generally infrequent.


Breast Reconstruction Contralateral Prophylactic Mastectomy Bilateral Mastectomy Unilateral Breast Cancer Current Procedural Terminology Code 
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.



The authors declare no conflict of interest.


  1. 1.
    Tuttle TM, Habermann EB, Grund EH, Morris TJ, Virnig BA. Increasing use of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy for breast cancer patients: a trend toward more aggressive surgical treatment. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25:5203–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Tuttle TM, Jarosek S, Habermann EB, et al. Increasing rates of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy among patients with ductal carcinoma in situ. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27:1362–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Jones NB, Wilson J, Kotur L, Stephens J, Farrar WB, Agnese DM. Contralateral prophylactic mastectomy for unilateral breast cancer: an increasing trend at a single institution. Ann Surg Oncol. 2009;16:2691–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Pesce CE, Liederbach E, Czechura T, Winchester DJ, Yao K. Changing surgical trends in young patients with early stage breast cancer, 2003 to 2010: a report from the National Cancer Data Base. J Am Coll Surg. 2014;219:19–28.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kurian AW, Lichtensztajn DY, Keegan TH, Nelson DO, Clarke CA, Gomez SL. Use of and mortality after bilateral mastectomy compared with other surgical treatments for breast cancer in California, 1998–2011. JAMA. 2014;312:902–14.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bedrosian I, Hu CY, Chang GJ. Population-based study of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy and survival outcomes of breast cancer patients. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2010;102:401–9.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Portschy PR, Kuntz KM, Tuttle TM. Survival outcomes after contralateral prophylactic mastectomy: a decision analysis. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2014;106.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Yao K, Winchester DJ, Czechura T, Huo D. Contralateral prophylactic mastectomy and survival: report from the National Cancer Data Base, 1998–2002. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2013;142:465–76.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Lostumbo L, Carbine NE, Wallace J. Prophylactic mastectomy for the prevention of breast cancer. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010;10:CD002748.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Brewster AM, Parker PA. Current knowledge on contralateral prophylactic mastectomy among women with sporadic breast cancer. Oncologist. 2011;16:935–41.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Murphy JA, Milner TD, O’Donoghue JM. Contralateral risk-reducing mastectomy in sporadic breast cancer. Lancet Oncol. 2013;14:e262–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Nichols HB, Berrington de González A, Lacey JV Jr, Rosenberg PS, Anderson WF. Declining incidence of contralateral breast cancer in the United States from 1975 to 2006. J Clin Oncol. 2011;29:1564–9.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Gao X, Fisher SG, Emami B. Risk of second primary cancer in the contralateral breast in women treated for early-stage breast cancer: a population-based study. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2003;56:1038–45.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Katz SJ, Morrow M. Contralateral prophylactic mastectomy for breast cancer: addressing peace of mind. JAMA. 2013;310:793–4.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Newman LA. Contralateral prophylactic mastectomy: is it a reasonable option? JAMA. 2014;312:895–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Rosenberg SM, Tracy MS, Meyer ME, et al. Perceptions, knowledge, and satisfaction with contralateral prophylactic mastectomy among young women with breast cancer: a cross-sectional survey. Ann Intern Med. 2013;159:373–81.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Osman F, Saleh F, Jackson TD, Corrigan MA, Cil T. Increased postoperative complications in bilateral mastectomy patients compared to unilateral mastectomy: an analysis of the NSQIP database. Ann Surg Oncol. 2013;20:3212–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Cemal Y, Albornoz CR, Disa JJ, et al. A paradigm shift in US breast reconstruction: part 2. The influence of changing mastectomy patterns on reconstructive rate and method. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2013;131:320e–6e.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Jagsi R, Jiang J, Momoh AO, et al. Trends and variation in use of breast reconstruction in patients with breast cancer undergoing mastectomy in the United States. J Clin Oncol. 2014;32:919–26.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Arrington AK, Jarosek SL, Virnig BA, Habermann EB, Tuttle TM. Patient and surgeon characteristics associated with increased use of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy in patients with breast cancer. Ann Surg Oncol. 2009;16:2697–704.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Shiloach M, Frencher SK Jr, Steeger JE, et al. Toward robust information: data quality and inter-rater reliability in the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program. J Am Coll Surg. 2010;210:6–16.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Daley J, Forbes MG, Young GJ, et al. Validating risk-adjusted surgical outcomes: site visit assessment of process and structure. National VA Surgical Risk Study. J Am Coll Surg. 1997;185:341–51.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Zion SM, Slezak JM, Sellers TA, et al. Reoperations after prophylactic mastectomy with or without implant reconstruction. Cancer. 2003;98:2152–60.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Crosby MA, Garvey PB, Selber JC, et al. Reconstructive outcomes in patients undergoing contralateral prophylactic mastectomy. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2011;128:1025–33.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Miller ME, Czechura T, Martz B, et al. Operative risks associated with contralateral prophylactic mastectomy: a single institution experience. Ann Surg Oncol. 2013;20:4113–20.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Antony AK, McCarthy C, Disa JJ, Mehrara BJ. Bilateral implant breast reconstruction: outcomes, predictors, and matched cohort analysis in 730 2-stage breast reconstructions over 10 years. Ann Plast Surg. 2014;72:625–30.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Lin IC, Nelson JA, Wu LC, Kovach SJ 3rd, Serletti JM. Assessing surgical and medical complications in bilateral abdomen-based free flap breast reconstructions compared with unilateral free flap breast reconstructions. Ann Plast Surg. 2014. doi: 10.1097/SAP.0000000000000343.
  28. 28.
    Craft RO, Colakoglu S, Curtis MS, et al. Patient satisfaction in unilateral and bilateral breast reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2011;127:1417–24.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Fischer JP, Wes AM, Tuggle CT 3rd, Serletti JM, Wu LC. Risk analysis of early implant loss after immediate breast reconstruction: a review of 14,585 patients. J Am Coll Surg. 2013;217:983–90.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Fischer JP, Wes AM, Tuggle CT, Serletti JM, Wu LC. Risk analysis and stratification of surgical morbidity after immediate breast reconstruction. J Am Coll Surg. 2013;217:780–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Gart MS, Smetona JT, Hanwright PJ, et al. Autologous options for postmastectomy breast reconstruction: a comparison of outcomes based on the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program. J Am Coll Surg. 2013;216:229–38.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Fischer JP, Tuggle CT, Au A, Kovach SJ. A 30-day risk assessment of mastectomy alone compared to immediate breast reconstruction (IBR). J Plast Surg Hand Surg. 2014;48:209–15.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    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. J Plast Surg Hand Surg. 2009;7:543–6.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Boughey JC, Hoskin TL, Hartmann LC, et al. Impact of reconstruction and reoperation on long-term patient-reported satisfaction after contralateral prophylactic mastectomy. Ann Surg Oncol. 2015;22:401–8.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Ting J, Rozen WM, Le Roux CM, Ashton MW, Garcia-Tutor E. Predictors of blood transfusion in deep inferior epigastric artery perforator flap breast reconstruction. J Reconstr Microsurg. 2011;27:233–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Rohde JM, Dimcheff DE, Blumberg N, et al. Health care–associated infection after red blood cell transfusion: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA. 2014;311:1317–26.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Peled AW, Stover AC, Foster RD, McGrath MH, Hwang ES. Long-term reconstructive outcomes after expander-implant breast reconstruction with serious infectious or wound-healing complications. Ann Plast Surg. 2012;68:369–73.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Neumayer L, Schifftner TL, Henderson WG, Khuri SF, El-Tamer M. Breast cancer surgery in Veterans Affairs and selected university medical centers: results of the patient safety in surgery study. J Am Coll Surg. 2007;204:1235–41.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Society of Surgical Oncology 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Amanda K. Silva
    • 1
  • Brittany Lapin
    • 2
  • Katharine A. Yao
    • 3
  • David H. Song
    • 1
  • Mark Sisco
    • 4
  1. 1.Section of Plastic and Reconstructive SurgeryUniversity of Chicago HospitalsChicagoUSA
  2. 2.Center for Biomedical Research InformaticsNorthShore University HealthSystem Research InstituteEvanstonUSA
  3. 3.Division of Surgical OncologyNorthShore University HealthSystemEvanstonUSA
  4. 4.Division of Plastic and Reconstructive SurgeryNorthShore University HealthSystemEvanstonUSA

Personalised recommendations