Core needle biopsy rate for new cancer diagnosis in an interdisciplinary breast center: Evaluation of quality of care 2007-2008

Annals of Surgery

Volumn 255, Issue 1, 2012, Pages 38-43

  Linebarger, Jared H ^a   Landercasper, Jeffrey ^a,b   Ellis, Richard L ^b,c   Gundrum, Jacob D ^d   Marcou, Kristen A ^b   De Maiffe, Brooke M ^d   Hudak, Jane M ^b   Andersen, Jeremiah J ^e  

^a GUNDERSEN LUTHERAN MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^b Norma J Vinger Center for Breast Care (NJVCBC)   (United States)

^c NJVCBC   (United States)

^d GLMF   (United States)

^e GLHS   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ASPIRATION BIOPSY; BREAST BIOPSY; BREAST CALCIFICATION; BREAST CANCER; BREAST DISCHARGE; CANCER DIAGNOSIS; CANCER INVASION; CANCER STAGING; CANCER SURGERY; CORE NEEDLE BIOPSY; ECHOGRAPHY; FALSE NEGATIVE RESULT; FOLLOW UP; HEALTH CARE COST; HEALTH CARE QUALITY; HISTOPATHOLOGY; HUMAN; MAMMOGRAPHY; MINIMALLY INVASIVE PROCEDURE; NEEDLE BIOPSY; PARTIAL MASTECTOMY; PATIENT SATISFACTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PUNCH BIOPSY; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; REVIEW; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; STEREOTACTIC BIOPSY;

ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; BIOPSY, FINE-NEEDLE; BIOPSY, NEEDLE; BREAST; BREAST NEOPLASMS; CARCINOMA, DUCTAL, BREAST; CARCINOMA, INTRADUCTAL, NONINFILTRATING; COOPERATIVE BEHAVIOR; FEMALE; HOSPITALS, SPECIAL; HUMANS; INTERDISCIPLINARY COMMUNICATION; MEDICAL AUDIT; MIDDLE AGED; PATIENT SATISFACTION; QUALITY ASSURANCE, HEALTH CARE; QUALITY OF HEALTH CARE; REGISTRIES; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; SURGERY, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; UTILIZATION REVIEW;

EID: 84155167129     PISSN: 00034932     EISSN: 15281140     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/SLA.0b013e31823e00bf     Document Type: Review

References (42)

1. InternationalBreastCancer ConsensusConference. Image-detected breast cancer: state of the art diagnosis and treatment. J AmColl Surg. 2001;193:297-302.
2. Silverstein MJ, Lagios MD, Recht A, et al. Image-detected breast cancer: state of the art diagnosis and treatment. Special report: International Consensus Conference II. J Am Coll Surg. 2005;201:586-597. (Pubitemid 41393082)
3. American Society of Breast Surgeons. Official Consensus Statement of percutaneous needle biopsy for image detected breast abnormalities. Approved June 2006. Available at: http://www.breastsurgeons.org/statements/index.php. Accessed September 4, 2010.
4. National Consortium of Breast Centers, Inc. National Quality Measures for Breast CentersTM Program. Quality Measures. Available at: http://www. nqmbc.org/about/QualityMeasures.htm. Accessed September 4, 2010.
5. American College of Radiology. ACR Practice Guideline for the Performance of Stereotactically Guided Breast Interventional Procedures. Revised 2009 (Res. 28). Available at: http://www.acr.org/SecondaryMainMenu Categories/quality- safety/guidelines/breast.aspx. Accessed September 4, 2010.
6. American College of Radiology. ACR Practice Guideline for the Performance of Ultrasound-Guided Percutaneous Breast Interventional Procedures. Revised 2009 (Res. 29). http://www.acr.org/SecondaryMainMenuCategories/quality-safety/ guidelines/breast.aspx. Accessed September 4, 2010.
7. National Accreditation Program for Breast Centers. Program Standards/ Components. Revised August 30, 2010. http://accreditedbreast centers.org/standards/standards.html. Accessed September 4, 2010.
8. Silverstein MJ, Recht A, Lagios MD, et al. Special report: consensus conference III. Image-detected breast cancer: state-of-the-art diagnosis and treatment. J Am Coll Surg. 2009;209:504-520.
9. Clarke-Pearson EM, Jacobson AF, Boolbol SK, et al. Quality assurance initiative at one institution for minimally invasive breast biopsy as the initial diagnostic technique. J Am Coll Surg. 2009;208:75-78.
10. Silverstein MJ. Commentary: where's the outrage? J Am Coll Surg. 2009;208:78-79.
11. Perry NM; EUSOMA Working Party. Quality assurance in the diagnosis of breast disease. Eur J Cancer. 2001;37:159-172. (Pubitemid 32144692)
12. Ozdemir A, Voyvoda NK, Gultekin S, et al. Can core biopsy be used instead of surgical biopsy in the diagnosis and prognostic factor analysis of breast carcinoma? Clin Breast Cancer. 2007;7:791-795. (Pubitemid 350086124)
13. Friese CR, Neville BA, Edge SB, et al. Breast biopsy patterns and outcomes in Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare data. Cancer. 2009;115:716-724.
14. Golub RM, Bennett CL, Stinson T, et al. Cost minimization study of imageguided core biopsy versus surgical excisional biopsy for women with abnormal mammograms. J Clin Oncol. 2004;22:2430-2437. (Pubitemid 41115401)
15. Bruening W, Schoelles K, Treadwell J, et al. Comparative Effectiveness of Core-needle and Open Surgical Biopsy for the Diagnosis of Breast lesions, Executive Summary. Comparative effectiveness review No 19. (Prepared by ECRI Institute Evidence-based Practice Center under Contract No. 290-02-0019.) Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. December 2009. Available at: http://www.effectivehealthcare.ahrq.gov/index.cfm/search- forguides-reviews-and-reports/?pageaction=displayproduct&productid=372. Accessed September 4, 2010.
16. Burkhardt JH, Sunshine JH. Core-needle and surgical breast biopsy: comparison of three methods of assessing cost. Radiology. 1999;212:181-188. (Pubitemid 29302533)
17. Logan-Young W, Dawson AE, Wilbur DC, et al. The cost-effectiveness of fine-needle aspiration cytology and 14-gauge core needle biopsy compared with open surgical biopsy in the diagnosis of breast carcinoma. Cancer. 1998;82:1867-1873. (Pubitemid 28208641)
18. Landercasper J, Ellis RL, Mathiason MA, et al. A Community Breast Center Report Card Determined by participation in a National Breast Cancer Quality Initiative. Breast J. 2010;16:472-480.
19. Landercasper J, Linebarger JH, Ellis RL, et al. Aquality reviewof the timeliness of breast cancer diagnosis and treatment in an integrated breast center. J Am Coll Surg. 2010;210:449-455.
20. Smith TJ, Landercasper J, Gundrum JD, et al. Perioperative quality metrics for one step breast cancer surgery: a patient centered approach. J Surg Oncol. 2010;102:34-38.
21. Kitowski NJ, Landercasper J, Gundrum JD, et al. Anesthesia and breast cancer surgery: comparison of local regional anesthesia and general anesthesia. Arch Surg. 2010;146:592-594.
22. Landercasper J, Linebarger JH. Contemporary breast imaging and concordance assessment: a surgical prospective. Surg Clin North Am. 2011;91:33-58.
23. Page DL, Rogers LW. Combined histologic and cytologic criteria for the diagnosis of mammary atypical ductal hyperplasia. Hum Pathol. 1992;23:1095-1097.
24. Peters N, Hoorntje L, Mali W, et al. Diagnostic performance of stereotactic large core needle biopsy for nonpalpable breast lesions in routine clinical practice. Int J Cancer. 2008;122:468-471. (Pubitemid 350234737)
25. Verkooijen HM. Core Biopsy After Radiological Localisation (COBRA) Study Group. Diagnostic accuracy of stereotactic large-core needle biopsy for nonpalpable breast disease: results of a multicenter prospective study with 95% surgical confirmation. Int J Cancer 2002;99:853-859. (Pubitemid 34575704)
26. Susman E. Needle biopsy underutilized at NCCN institutions. Oncol Times. 2004;26:28.
27. Wilke LG, Ballman KV, McCall LM, et al. Adherence to the National Quality Forum (NQF) breast cancer measures within cancer clinical trials: a review from ACOSOG Z0010. Ann Surg Oncol. 2010;17:1989-1994.
28. Gutwein L, Ang D, Liu H, et al. Utilization of minimally invasive breast biopsy for the evaluation of suspicious breast lesions. Am J Surg. 2011;202:127-132.
29. Kaufman CS, Shockney L, Rabinowitz B, et al. Quality Initiative Committee. National Quality Measures for Breast Centers (NQMBC): a robust quality tool. Ann Surg Oncol. 2009;17:377-385.
30. Pocock B, Taback B, Klein L, et al. Pre-operative needle biopsy as a potential quality measure in breast cancer surgery. Ann SurgOncol. 2009;16:1108-1111.
31. Landercasper J, Tafra L. The relationship between quality and cost during the perioperative breast cancer episode of care. Breast. 2010;19:289-296.
32. Hukkinen K, Kivisaari L, Heikkila PS, et al. Unsuccessful preoperative biopsies, fine needle aspiration cytology or core needle biopsy, lead to increased costs in the diagnostic workup in breast cancer. Acta Oncol. 2008;47:1037-1045.
33. Rose C, Stovall E, Ganz PA, et al. Cancer quality alliance: blueprint for a better cancer care system. CA Cancer J Clin. 2008;58: 266-292.
34. Institute of Medicine, Committee on Health Care in America. Crossing the Quality Chasm: A New Health System for the 21st Century. Washington, DC: National Academies Press; 2001.
35. National Breast Cancer Coalition (NBCC). Quality care for breast cancer: core values and essential components, October 2003. Available at: www. stopbreastcancer.org/index.php?option=com-content&task=view&id=52. Accessed September 4, 2010.
36. Shen KW, Wu J, Lu JS, et al. Fiberoptic ductoscopy for breast cancer patients with nipple discharge. Surg Endosc. 2001;15:1340-1345. (Pubitemid 33035416)
37. Quality Measures and Definitions. Available at: www.qualitymeasures.ahrq. gov/. Accessed September 4, 2010.
38. American Society of Breast Disease Colloquium on Breast Disease and Gaps in Care: Gap 1.8. Ensuring optimal interdisciplinary breast care in the United States. Available at: www.asbd.org. Accessed March 24, 2010.
39. American Society of Breast Surgeons Mastery of Breast Surgery Program: a national quality initiative for breast surgeons. Available at: www.breastsurgeons.org/mastery/index.php. Accessed September 4, 2010.
40. Whitacre E. The importance of measuring the measures (Editorial). Ann Surg Oncol. 2009;16:1090-1091. Available at: www.springerlink. com/content/a723658253w64011/fulltext.html. Accessed September 4, 2010.
41. National Quality Measures for Breast Centers™. A quality initiative of the National Consortium of Breast Centers, Inc. Available at: www.nqmbc.org/Default.htm. Accessed September 24, 2010.
42. The American Society of Breast Surgeons. Statement on breast surgery quality initiatives. Available at: http://www.breastsurgeons.org/statements/ index.php. Accessed September 24, 2010.