Skip to main content

Early Postoperative Outcomes in Breast Conservation Surgery Versus Simple Mastectomy with Implant Reconstruction: A NSQIP Analysis of 11,645 Patients

Annals of Surgical Oncology volume 23, pages 92–98 (2016)Cite this article

Abstract

Background

Little has been studied that compares early postoperative outcomes between breast conservation surgery (BCS) and simple mastectomy with implant reconstruction (SM). Our goal was to utilize a large-volume database to compare such outcomes in women with early stage breast cancer.

Methods

The National Surgery Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) database was searched for patients who underwent partial or complete mastectomy between 2009 and 2012. Exclusion criteria eliminated potential confounding factors. We compared preoperative comorbidities and postoperative complication rates between each treatment group by Chi square and two-sample t tests; we also determined the odds ratios for the likelihood of adverse events in a number of categories.

Results

A total of 11,645 patients met the study criteria: 9571 underwent BCS and 2074 underwent SM with implant reconstruction. The baseline characteristics of the two groups showed significant differences for age (61.7 years in BCS, 53.5 years in SM), body mass index (29.6 kg/m2 in BCS, 27.0 kg/m2 in SM), and rates of hypertension (47.0 % in BCS, 25.6 % in SM), coronary artery disease (1.3 % in BCS, 0.6 % in SM), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (2.4 % in BCS, 1.0 % in SM), and diabetes (11.7 % in BCS, 5.9 % in SM). Statistical analysis between each treatment modality revealed that the SM with implant group had significantly higher total complication (5.5 vs. 2.1 % in BCS), wound (2.8 vs. 1.4 % in BCS), infection (1.9 vs. 0.4 % in BCS), and bleeding (0.2 vs. 0.05 % in BCS) rates than the BCS group.

Conclusions

BCS has fewer overall early postoperative wound, infectious, and bleeding complications despite a significantly higher rate of preexisting risk factors.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

43,34 €

Price includes VAT (Finland)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

References

  1. Neff PT, Bear HD, Pierce CV, et al. Long-term results of breast conservation therapy for breast cancer. Ann Surg. 1996;223:709–16.

    PubMed  CAS  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Collins ED, Moore CP, Clay KF, et al. Can women with early-stage breast cancer make an informed decision for mastectomy? J Clin Oncol. 2009;27:519–25.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Covelli AM, Baxter NN, Fitch MI, et al. “Taking control of cancer”: understanding women’s choice for mastectomy. Ann Surg Oncol. 2015;22:383–91.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Fisher CS, Martin-Dunlap T, Ruppel MB, et al. Fear of recurrence and perceived survival benefit are primary motivators for choosing mastectomy over breast-conservation therapy regardless of age. Ann Surg Oncol. 2012;19:3246–50.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Albornoz CR, Matros E, Lee CN, et al. Bilateral mastectomy versus breast-conserving surgery for early-stage breast cancer: the role of breast reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2015;135:1518–26.

    PubMed  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Fisher B, Redmond C, Poisson R, et al. Eight-year results of a randomized clinical trial comparing total mastectomy and lumpectomy with or without irradiation in the treatment of breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 1989;320:822–8.

    PubMed  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Veronesi U, Cascinelli N, Mariani L, et al. Twenty-year follow-up of a randomized study comparing breast-conserving surgery with radical mastectomy for early breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2002;347:1227–32.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Clarke M, Collins R, Darby S, et al. Effects of radiotherapy and of differences in the extent of surgery for early breast cancer on local recurrence and 15-year survival: an overview of the randomised trials. Lancet. 2005;366(9503):2087–106.

    PubMed  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Fisher B, Anderson S, Bryant J, et al. Twenty-year follow-up of a randomized trial comparing total mastectomy, lumpectomy, and lumpectomy plus irradiation for the treatment of invasive breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2002;347:1233–41.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Chatterjee A, Pyfer B, Czerniecki B, Rosenkranz K, Tchou J, Fisher C. Early postoperative outcomes in lumpectomy versus simple mastectomy. J Surg Res. 2015. doi:10.1016/j.jss.2015.01.054.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Albornoz CR, Bach PB, Mehrara BJ, et al. A paradigm shift in US breast reconstruction: increasing implant rates. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2013;131:15–23.

    PubMed  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  12. McGuire KP, Santillan AA, Kaur P, et al. Are mastectomies on the rise? A 13-year trend analysis of the selection of mastectomy versus breast conservation therapy in 5865 patients. Ann Surg Oncol. 2009;16:2682–90.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Colwell AS, Damjanovic B, Zahedi B, et al. Retrospective review of 331 consecutive immediate single-stage implant reconstructions with acellular dermal matrix: indications, complications, trends, and costs. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2011;128:1170–8.

    PubMed  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Salzberg CA. Direct-to-implant breast reconstruction. Clin Plast Surg. 2012;39:119–26.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Cordeiro PG, McCarthy CM. A single surgeon’s 12-year experience with tissue expander/implant breast reconstruction: Part I. A prospective analysis of early complications. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2006;118:825–31.

    PubMed  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  16. McCarthy CM, Mehrara BJ, Riedel E, et al. Predicting complications following expander/implant breast reconstruction: an outcomes analysis based on preoperative clinical risk. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2008;121:1886–92.

    PubMed  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Osman F, Saleh F, Jackson TD, et al. Increased postoperative complications in bilateral mastectomy patients compared to unilateral mastectomy: an analysis of the NSQIP database. Ann Surg Oncol. 2013;20:3212–7.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Lyman GH, Khorana AA, Falanga A, et al. American Society of Clinical Oncology guideline: recommendations for venous thromboembolism prophylaxis and treatment in patients with cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25:5490–505.

    PubMed  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Pannucci CJ, Bailey SH, Dreszer G, et al. Validation of the Caprini risk assessment model in plastic and reconstructive surgery patients. J Am Coll Surg. 2011;212:105–12.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Murphy RX Jr, Schmitz D, Rosolowski K. Evidence-based practices for thromboembolism prevention: a report from the ASPS Venous Thromboembolism Task Force approved by ASPS executive committee, July 2011. http://www.plasticsurgery.org/Documents/medical-professionals/health-policy/key-issues/ASPS_VTE_Report.pdf. Accessed 20 July 2015.

  21. Habermann EB, Abbott A, Parsons HM, et al. Are mastectomy rates really increasing in the United States? J Clin Oncol. 2010;28:3437–41.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  22. 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.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Katipamula R, Degnim AC, Hoskin T, et al. Trends in mastectomy rates at the Mayo Clinic Rochester: effect of surgical year and preoperative magnetic resonance imaging. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27:4082–8.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Barratt AL. Breast screening overdiagnosis. Consensus and decision aids. BMJ. 2009;339:b3260.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Sepucha KR, Ozanne EM, Partridge AH, et al. Is there a role for decision aids in advanced breast cancer? Med Decis Making. 2009;29:475–82.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Waljee JF, Rogers MA, Alderman AK. Decision aids and breast cancer: do they influence choice for surgery and knowledge of treatment options? J Clin Oncol. 2007;25:1067–73.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Obeidat R, Finnell DS, Lally RM. Decision aids for surgical treatment of early stage breast cancer: a narrative review of the literature. Patient Educ Couns. 2011;85:e311–21.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Belkora JK, Loth MK, Volz S, et al. Implementing decision and communication aids to facilitate patient-centered care in breast cancer: a case study. Patient Educ Couns. 2009;77:360–8.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Krishnan NM, Chatterjee A, Van Vliet MM, et al. A comparison of acellular dermal matrix to autologous dermal flaps in single-stage, implant-based immediate breast reconstruction: a cost-effectiveness analysis. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2013;131:953–61.

    PubMed  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Chatterjee A, Krishnan NM, Van Vliet MM, et al. A comparison of free autologous breast reconstruction with and without the use of laser-assisted indocyanine green angiography: a cost-effectiveness analysis. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2013;131:693e–701e.

    PubMed  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Chatterjee A, Krishnan NM, Rosen JM. Complex ventral hernia repair using components separation with or without synthetic mesh: a cost-utility analysis. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2014;133:137–46.

    PubMed  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Chatterjee A, Kosowski T, Pyfer B, et al. A cost-utility analysis comparing the sartorius versus the rectus femoris flap in the treatment of the infected vascular groin graft wound. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2015;135:1707–14.

    PubMed  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Chatterjee A, Krishnan NM, Rosen JM. Complex ventral hernia repair using components separation with or without biologic mesh: a cost-utility analysis. Ann Plast Surg. 2015;74:471–8.

    PubMed  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Krishnan NM, Chatterjee A, Rosenkranz KM, et al. The cost effectiveness of acellular dermal matrix in expander-implant immediate breast reconstruction. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2014;67(4):468–76.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Eck DL, Koonce SL, Goldberg RF, et al. Breast surgery outcomes as quality measures according to the NSQIP database. Ann Surg Oncol. 2012;19:3212–7.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Decker MR, Greenblatt DY, Havlena J, et al. Impact of neoadjuvant chemotherapy on wound complications after breast surgery. Surgery. 2012;152:382–8.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Ibrahim AM, Shuster M, Koolen PG, et al. Analysis of the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database in 19,100 patients undergoing implant-based breast reconstruction: complication rates with acellular dermal matrix. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2013;132:1057–66.

    PubMed  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Hoffman RM, Elmore JG, Fairfield KM, et al. Lack of shared decision making in cancer screening discussions: results from a national survey. Am J Prev Med. 2014;47:251–9.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Stacey D, Legare F, Col NF, et al. Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014;1:CD001431.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Disclosure

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Author information

Affiliations

  1. Department of Surgery, Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth, Lebanon, NH, USA

    Bryan Pyfer BS

  2. Department of Surgery, University of Pennsylvania Health System, Philadelphia, PA, USA

    Abhishek Chatterjee MD, MBA, Brian Czerniecki MD, PhD, Julia Tchou MD & Carla Fisher MD

  3. Department of Surgery, Lahey Hospital and Medical Center, Burlington, MA, USA

    Lilian Chen MD

  4. Department of Surgery, Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, Lebanon, NH, USA

    John Nigriny MD

Authors
  1. Bryan Pyfer BS
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Abhishek Chatterjee MD, MBA
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Lilian Chen MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. John Nigriny MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Brian Czerniecki MD, PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Julia Tchou MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Carla Fisher MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Bryan Pyfer BS.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Pyfer, B., Chatterjee, A., Chen, L. et al. Early Postoperative Outcomes in Breast Conservation Surgery Versus Simple Mastectomy with Implant Reconstruction: A NSQIP Analysis of 11,645 Patients. Ann Surg Oncol 23, 92–98 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-015-4770-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-015-4770-2

Keywords

  • Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease
  • Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy
  • Early Stage Breast Cancer
  • Preoperative Risk Factor
  • Reconstruction Group