Reoperation rates after breast conserving surgery for breast cancer among women in England: Retrospective study of hospital episode statistics

BMJ (Online)

Volumn 345, Issue 7869, 2012, Pages

  Jeevan, R ^a   Cromwell, D A ^a,b   Trivella, M ^a,c   Lawrence, G ^d   Kearins, O ^d   Pereira, J ^e   Sheppard, C ^f   Caddy, C M ^g   Van Der Meulen, J H P ^a,b  

^a ROYAL COLLEGE OF SURGEONS OF ENGLAND   (United Kingdom)

^b LONDON SCHOOL OF HYGIENE AND TROPICAL MEDICINE   (United Kingdom)

^c UK COCHRANE CENTRE   (United Kingdom)

^d UNIVERSITY OF BIRMINGHAM   (United Kingdom)

^e JAMES PAGET UNIVERSITY HOSPITALS NHS FOUNDATION TRUST   (United Kingdom)

^f QUEEN ALEXANDRA HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

^g ROYAL HALLAMSHIRE HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGE; ARTICLE; BREAST CANCER; COHORT ANALYSIS; COMORBIDITY; CONFIDENCE INTERVAL; FEMALE; HUMAN; INTRADUCTAL CARCINOMA; LOGISTIC REGRESSION ANALYSIS; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MASTECTOMY; MEDICAL RECORD REVIEW; NATIONAL HEALTH SERVICE; PARTIAL MASTECTOMY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REOPERATION; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; RISK ASSESSMENT; SOCIAL STATUS; TUMOR VOLUME; UNITED KINGDOM; ADOLESCENT; AGED; BREAST TUMOR; CANCER INVASION; CARCINOMA IN SITU; EVALUATION; HEALTH CARE DISPARITY; LUNG CARCINOMA; MIDDLE AGED; MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS; PATHOLOGY; PUBLIC HOSPITAL; SEGMENTAL MASTECTOMY; STATISTICAL MODEL; STATISTICS;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; BREAST NEOPLASMS; CARCINOMA IN SITU; CARCINOMA, INTRADUCTAL, NONINFILTRATING; CARCINOMA, LOBULAR; ENGLAND; FEMALE; HEALTHCARE DISPARITIES; HOSPITALS, PUBLIC; HUMANS; LOGISTIC MODELS; MASTECTOMY, SEGMENTAL; MIDDLE AGED; MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS; NEOPLASM INVASIVENESS; REOPERATION; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; STATE MEDICINE; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84864886553     PISSN: None     EISSN: 17561833     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1136/bmj.e4505     Document Type: Article

References (41)

1. Ferlay J, Autier P, Boniol M, Heanue M, Colombet M, Boyle P. Estimates of the cancer incidence and mortality in Europe in 2006. Ann Oncol 2007;18:581-92. (Pubitemid 46359643)
2. American Cancer Society. Breast cancer facts and figures 2009-2010. American Cancer Society, 2009.
3. Office for National Statistics. Cancer statistics registrations: registrations of cancer diagnosed in 2008, England. (Series MB1, no 39.) ONS, 2010.
4. Jeevan R, Browne J, van der Meulen J, Pereira J, Caddy C, Sheppard C, et al. First annual report of the National Mastectomy and Breast Reconstruction Audit 2008. NHS Information Centre, 2008.
5. Fisher B, Anderson S, Bryant J, Margolese RG, Deutsch M, Fisher ER, 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. (Pubitemid 35176242)
6. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Early and locally advanced breast cancer: diagnosis and treatment. (Clinical guideline 80.) NICE, 2009.
7. Pleijhuis RG, Graafland M, de Vries J, Bart J, de Jong JS, van Dam GM. Obtaining adequate surgical margins in breast-conserving therapy for patients with early-stage breast cancer: current modalities and future directions. Ann Surg Oncol 2009;16:2717-30.
8. Kirstein LJ, Rafferty E, Specht MC, Moore RH, Taghian AG, Hughes KS, et al. Outcomes of multiple wire localization for larger breast cancers: when can mastectomy be avoided? J Am Coll Surg 2008;207:342-6.
9. Wilkinson LS, Given-Wilson R, Hall T, Potts H, Sharma AK, Smith E. Increasing the diagnosis of multifocal primary breast cancer by the use of bilateral whole-breast ultrasound. Clin Radiol 2005;60:573-8. (Pubitemid 40553320)
10. ABS at BASO Screening Audit Group. NHS breast screening programme & Association of Breast Surgery at BASO: an audit of screen detected breast cancers for the year of screening April 2007 to March 2008. West Midlands Cancer Intelligence Unit, 2009.
11. Aziz D, Rawlinson E, Narod SA, Sun P, Lickley HL, McDready DR, et al. The role of reexcision for positive margins in optimizing local disease control after breast-conserving surgery for cancer. Breast J 2006;12:331-7. (Pubitemid 43989977)
12. Menes TS, Tartter PI, Bleiweiss I, Godbold JH, Estabrook A, Smith SR. The consequence of multiple re-excisions to obtain clear lumpectomy margins in breast cancer patients. Ann Surg Oncol 2005;12:881-5. (Pubitemid 41504220)
13. Kouzminova NB, Aggarwal S, Aggarwal A, Allo MD, Lin AY. Impact of initial surgical margins and residual cancer upon re-excision on outcome of patients with localized breast cancer. Am J Surg 2009;198:771-80.
14. Munshi A, Kakkar S, Bhutani R, Jalali R, Budrukkar A, Dinshaw KA. Factors influencing cosmetic outcome in breast conservation. Clin Oncol 2009;21:285-93.
15. Jacobson AF, Asad J, Boolbol S, Osborne MP, Boachie-Adjei K, Feldman SM. Do additional shaved margins at the time of lumpectomy eliminate the need for re-excision? Am J Surg 2008;196:556-8.
16. Freedman G, Fowble B, Hanlon A, Nicolaou N, Fein D, Hoffman J, et al. Patients with early stage invasive cancer with close or positive margins treated with conservative surgery and radiation have an increased risk of breast recurrence that is delayed by adjuvant systemic therapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1999;44:1005-15. (Pubitemid 29342901)
17. Cellini C, Hollenbeck ST, Christos P, Martins D, Carson J, Kemper S, et al. Factors associated with residual breast cancer after re-excision for close or positive margins. Ann Surg Oncol 2004;11:915-20. (Pubitemid 40486677)
18. Talsma AK, Reedijk AM, Damhuis RA, Westenend PJ, Vles WJ. Re-resection rates after breast-conserving surgery as a performance indicator: introduction of a case-mix model to allow comparison between Dutch hospitals. Eur J Surg Oncol 2011;37:357-63.
19. Jeevan R, Cromwell D, Browne J, van der Meulen J, Pereira J, Caddy C, et al. Second annual report of the National Mastectomy and Breast Reconstruction Audit 2009. NHS Information Centre, 2009.
20. NHS Information Centre for Health and Social Care. Hospital episode statistics (HES). NHS Information Centre, 2010.
21. World Health Organization. International classification of diseases and related health problems. 10th ed. WHO, 1992.
22. Office of Population Censuses and Surveys. Tabular list of the classification of surgical operations and procedures: fourth revision consolidated version. HMSO, 1990.
23. Evans A, Clements K, Maxwell A, Dobson H, Wallis M, Lawrence G, et al. Mammographic bi-dimensional product: a powerful predictor of successful excision of ductal carcinoma in situ. Clin Radiol 2007;62:787-91.
24. Armitage JN, van der Meulen JH, Royal College of Surgeons Co-morbidity Consensus Group. Identifying comorbidity in surgical patients using administrative data: the RCS Charlson score. Br J Surg 2010;97:772-81.
25. Noble M, McLennan D, Wilkinson K, Whitworth A, Exley S, Barnes H, et al. The English indices of deprivation 2007: summary. HMSO, 2008.
26. Spiegelhalter DJ. Funnel plots for comparing institutional performance. Stat Med 2005;24:1185-202. (Pubitemid 40485757)
27. Smitt MC, Horst K. Association of clinical and pathologic variables with lumpectomy surgical margin status after preoperative diagnosis or excisional biopsy of invasive breast cancer. Ann Surg Oncol 2007;14:1040-4.
28. NHS Breast Screening Programme and National Cancer Intelligence Network. All breast cancer report: a UK analysis of all symptomatic and screen-detected breast cancers diagnosed in 2006. NHSBSP and NCIN, 2009.
29. PbR Data Assurance Framework 2007/08. Findings from the first year of the national clinical coding audit programme. Audit Commission, 2008.
30. West Midlands Cancer Intelligence Unit. Breast Cancer Clinical Outcome Measures Project newsletter: issue 5 August 2009. West Midlands Cancer Intelligence Unit, 2009.
31. McCahill LE, Single RM, Aiello Bowles EJ, Feigelson HS, James TA, Barney T, et al. Variability in reexcision following breast conservation surgery. JAMA 2012;307:467-75.
32. Wong H, Lau S, Yau T, Cheung P, Epstein RJ. Presence of an in situ component is associated with reduced biological aggressiveness of size-matched invasive breast cancer. Br J Cancer 2010;102:1391-6.
33. MacMahon S, Peto R, Cutler J, Collins R, Sorlie P, Neaton J, et al. Blood pressure, stroke, and coronary heart disease: part 1. Prolonged differences in blood pressure: prospective observational studies corrected for the regression dilution bias. Lancet 1990;335:765-74. (Pubitemid 20106689)
34. Bani MR, Lux MP, Heusinger K, Wenkel E, Magener A, Schulz-Wendtland R, et al. Factors correlating with reexcision after breast-conserving therapy. Eur J Surg Oncol 2009;35:32-7.
35. Thomas J, Evans A, Macartney J, Pinder SE, Hanby A, Ellis I, et al. Radiological and pathological size estimations of pure ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast, specimen handling and the influence on the success of breast conservation surgery: a review of 2564 cases from the Sloane Project. Br J Cancer 2010;102:285-93.
36. Dartmouth Institute for Health Policy and Clinical Practice. The Dartmouth atlas of health care: preference-sensitive care. Dartmouth Institute for Health Policy and Clinical Practice, 2011.
37. Tengher-Barna I, Hequet D, Reboul-Marty J, Frassati-Biaggi A, Seince N, Rodrigues-Faure A, et al. Prevalence and predictive factors for the detection of carcinoma in cavity margin performed at the time of breast lumpectomy. Mod Pathol 2009;22:299-305.
38. National Cancer Institute Physician Data Query Adult Treatment Editorial Board. Breast cancer treatment information summary. NCI, 2009.
39. Scarth H, Cantin J, Levine M. Clinical practice guidelines for the care and treatment of breast cancer: 3. Mastectomy or lumpectomy? The choice of operation for clinical stages I and II breast cancer (2002 update). Steering Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Care and Treatment of Breast Cancer, 2002.
40. Povoski SP, Jimenez RE, Wang WP, Xu RX. Standardized and reproducible methodology for the comprehensive and systematic assessment of surgical resection margins during breast-conserving surgery for invasive breast cancer. BMC Cancer 2009;9:254.
41. Association of Breast Surgery at BASO. Surgical guidelines for the management of breast cancer. Eur J Surg Oncol 2009;35(suppl 1):1-22.