Background: Reexcision rates in patients undergoing breast-conserving surgery (BCS) for early-stage invasive breast cancer are highly variable. The Society of Surgical Oncology (SSO) and American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) published consensus guidelines to help standardize practice. We sought to determine reexcision rates before and after guideline adoption at our institution.

Methods: We identified patients with stage I or II invasive breast cancer initially treated with BCS between June 1, 2013, and October 31, 2014. Margins were defined as positive (tumor on ink), close (≤1 mm), or negative (>1 mm), and were recorded for both invasive cancer and ductal carcinoma-in situ (DCIS) components. Reexcision rates were quantified, characteristics were compared between groups, and multivariable logistic regression was performed.

Results: A total of 1205 patients were identified, 504 before and 701 after the guideline adoption (January 1, 2014). Clinical and pathologic characteristics were similar between time periods. Reexcision rates significantly declined from 21.4 to 15.1 % (p = 0.006) after guideline adoption. A multivariable model identified extensive intraductal component (odds ratio [OR] 2.5, 95 % confidence interval [CI] 1.2-5.2), multifocality (OR 2.0, 95 % CI 1.2-3.6), positive (OR 844.4, 95 % CI 226.3-5562.5) and close (OR 38.3, 95 % CI 21.5-71.8) ductal carcinoma-in situ margin, positive (OR 174.2, 95 % CI 66.2-530.0) and close (OR 6.4, 95 % CI 3.0-13.6) invasive margin, and time period (OR 0.5, 95 % CI 0.3-0.9 for post vs. pre) as independently associated with reexcision.

Conclusions: Overall reexcision rates declined significantly after guideline adoption. Close invasive margins were associated with higher rates of reexcision than negative invasive margins in both time periods; however, the effect diminished in the postguideline adoption period. Thus, we expect continued decline in reexcision rates as adherence to guidelines becomes more uniform.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5070650PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.1245/s10434-016-5397-7DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

reexcision rates
24
guideline adoption
16
invasive breast
12
breast cancer
12
consensus guidelines
8
breast-conserving surgery
8
stage invasive
8
ductal carcinoma-in
8
carcinoma-in situ
8
time periods
8

Similar Publications

Background Breast-conserving surgery (BCS) is standard for early breast cancer, yet achieving clear surgical margins remains challenging. Ultrasound (US)-guided BCS has emerged as a potential alternative to wire-guided surgery, but its efficacy compared to traditional methods requires evaluation. Methods A retrospective review of patients undergoing BCS from April 2022 to April 2023 at the Portuguese Institute of Oncology of Porto (IPO-Porto) was conducted.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

This study aimed to identify factors influencing the completeness of primary and re-excision of basal cell carcinoma (BCC), cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (SCC), and cutaneous carcinoma in situ (CIS) of the head and neck. A retrospective single-center analysis was conducted, encompassing 1513 instances of cutaneous tumors recorded between 2015 and 2022. This dataset comprised 1108 primary excisions and 405 re-excisions, all of which were histologically verified cases of BCC, SCC, and CIS located within the head and neck region.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Re-excision rates after breast-conserving surgery for invasive breast cancer: an Albertan perspective.

Can J Surg

November 2024

From the Division of General Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alta. (Ryan, Rajaee, Olson, Lesniak, Peiris); the Alberta Health Services Cross Cancer Institute, Department of Medical Oncology, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alta. (Ghosh); the Department of Mathematical and Statistical Sciences, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alta. (Ghosh)

Background: Re-operation after breast-conserving surgery for invasive breast cancer is variable among centres and individual surgeons. In this study, we aimed to characterize the current landscape of practice regarding re-operation for invasive breast cancer in the province of Alberta.

Methods: This study was a retrospective review of the Synoptec database for patients undergoing primary breast-conserving surgery for invasive breast cancer or reoperation in the province of Alberta in the year 2020.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF
Article Synopsis
  • Chest wall perforator flaps are gaining traction in breast cancer surgery as a less invasive alternative to mastectomy, but there’s still a lack of standardized practices regarding patient selection and outcomes.
  • This study analyzed data from 603 breast cancer patients across three major hospitals in Sweden, the UK, and Australia, focusing on the reasons for using these flaps and evaluating surgical outcomes.
  • Results showed a low complication rate (8.6%) and high effectiveness of the technique, suggesting that chest wall perforator flaps can safely help many women avoid mastectomy when performed by experienced surgeons.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Purpose: With DCIS incidence on the rise, up to 30% of patients undergo mastectomy for Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) (Nash and Hwang, in: Ann Surg Oncol 30(6):3206-3214, 2023). Local recurrence rates after mastectomy for DCIS are reportedly low, but risk factors for recurrence are not known (Kim et al., in: J Cancer Res Ther 16(6):1197-1202, 2020).

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!