Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

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

  • Breast Oncology
  • Published:
Annals of Surgical Oncology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

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.

Methods

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.

Results

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.

Conclusions

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.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Portschy PR, Kuntz KM, Tuttle TM. Survival outcomes after contralateral prophylactic mastectomy: a decision analysis. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2014;106.

  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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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. Brewster AM, Parker PA. Current knowledge on contralateral prophylactic mastectomy among women with sporadic breast cancer. Oncologist. 2011;16:935–41.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Murphy JA, Milner TD, O’Donoghue JM. Contralateral risk-reducing mastectomy in sporadic breast cancer. Lancet Oncol. 2013;14:e262–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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. 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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Katz SJ, Morrow M. Contralateral prophylactic mastectomy for breast cancer: addressing peace of mind. JAMA. 2013;310:793–4.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Newman LA. Contralateral prophylactic mastectomy: is it a reasonable option? JAMA. 2014;312:895–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Zion SM, Slezak JM, Sellers TA, et al. Reoperations after prophylactic mastectomy with or without implant reconstruction. Cancer. 2003;98:2152–60.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Crosby MA, Garvey PB, Selber JC, et al. Reconstructive outcomes in patients undergoing contralateral prophylactic mastectomy. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2011;128:1025–33.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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. Craft RO, Colakoglu S, Curtis MS, et al. Patient satisfaction in unilateral and bilateral breast reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2011;127:1417–24.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  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.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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.

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Disclosure

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mark Sisco MD, FACS.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Silva, A.K., Lapin, B., Yao, K. et al. The Effect of Contralateral Prophylactic Mastectomy on Perioperative Complications in Women Undergoing Immediate Breast Reconstruction: A NSQIP Analysis. Ann Surg Oncol 22, 3474–3480 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-015-4628-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-015-4628-7

Keywords

Navigation