Dutch breast reconstruction guideline

Risk Factors for Unplanned Reoperation during the Expansion Phase in Two-Stage Breast Reconstruction in the Dutch Breast Implant Registry

BACKGROUND

The majority of postmastectomy breast reconstructions (PMBRs) are currently performed in two stages using a tissue expander (TE). However, complications during the expansion phase occur regularly, leading to unplanned reoperations and/or reconstruction failure. This study aimed to identify risk factors for unplanned reoperation after TE placement, assessed the time until unplanned and planned reoperation, and investigated indications for unplanned reoperation.

METHODS

Patient- and surgery-related characteristics of patients who underwent two-stage PMBR between 2017 and 2021 were collected from the Dutch Breast Implant Registry (DBIR). Unplanned reoperation was defined as TE explantation followed by either no replacement or replacement with the same or a different TE. Covariate-adjusted characteristics associated with unplanned reoperation were determined using backward stepwise selection and multivariable logistic regression analyses.

RESULTS

In total, 2529 patients (mean age, 50.2 years) were included. Unplanned reoperation occurred in 19.4% of all registered TEs ( n = 3190). Independent factors associated with unplanned reoperation were body mass index (BMI) greater than or equal to 25 kg/m 2 (adjusted OR [aOR], 1.63, 99% CI, 1.20 to 2.57 for BMI of 25 to 29.9 kg/m 2 ; aOR, 2.57, 99% CI, 1.74 to 3.78 for BMI ≥30 kg/m 2 ), low institutional volume (aOR, 1.51; 99% CI, 1.06 to 2.18), no drains (aOR, 2.06; 99% CI, 1.15 to 3.60), subcutaneous TE placement (aOR, 5.71; 99% CI, 3.59 to 9.10), and partial pectoralis major muscle coverage (aOR, 1.35; 99% CI, 1.02 to 1.79). Age younger than 40 years (aOR, 0.49; 99% CI, 0.32 to 0.74) and delayed PMBR (aOR, 0.35; 99% CI, 0.19 to 0.60) reduced the risk of unplanned reoperation. Median time until reoperation was 97 days for unplanned and 213 days for planned reoperation. Deep wound infections were most often registered as indication for unplanned reoperation (34.4%).

CONCLUSION

This study identified several risk factors for unplanned reoperation that may be used to reduce complications in expander-based PMBR.

CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Risk, III.

Imaging of the Reconstructed Breast

The incidence of breast cancer and, therefore, the need for breast reconstruction are expected to increase. The many reconstructive options available and the changing aspects of the field make this a complex area of plastic surgery, requiring knowledge and expertise. Two major types of breast reconstruction can be distinguished: breast implants and autologous flaps. Both present advantages and disadvantages. Autologous fat grafting is also commonly used. MRI is the modality of choice for evaluating breast reconstruction. Knowledge of the type of reconstruction is preferable to provide the maximum amount of pertinent information and avoid false positives. Early complications include seroma, hematoma, and infection. Late complications depend on the type of reconstruction. Implant rupture and implant capsular contracture are frequently encountered. Depending on the implant type, specific MRI signs can be depicted. In the case of myocutaneous flap, fat necrosis, fibrosis, and vascular compromise represent the most common complications. Late cancer recurrence is much less common. Rarely reported late complications include breast-implant-associated large cell anaplastic lymphoma (BIA-ALCL) and, recently described and even rarer, breast-implant-associated squamous cell carcinoma (BIA-SCC). In this review article, the various types of breast reconstruction will be presented, with emphasis on pertinent imaging findings and complications.

Surgical outcomes following breast reconstruction in patients with and without a history of chest radiotherapy for Hodgkin lymphoma: a multicentre, matched cohort study

BACKGROUND

Breast cancer is the most common treatment-related second malignancy among women with previous chest radiotherapy for Hodgkin lymphoma (HL). Little is known about the effects of this kind of radiotherapy on the outcomes of postmastectomy breast reconstruction (BR). This study compared adverse outcomes of BR after HL-related chest radiotherapy to matched controls.

METHODS

The authors conducted a retrospective, matched cohort study in two expert cancer centres in the Netherlands. BRs after therapeutic or prophylactic mastectomy in HL survivors who received chest radiotherapy were matched with BRs in nonirradiated patients without HL on age at mastectomy date, date of BR, and type of BR. The primary outcome was complication-related BR failure or conversion and secondary outcomes were complication-related re-operation, capsular contracture, major donor-site complications, and complication-related ICU admission. The authors analyzed all outcomes univariably using Fisher's exact tests and the authors assessed reconstruction failure, complication-related re-operation, and capsular contracture with multivariable Cox regression analysis adjusting for confounding and data clustering.

RESULTS

Seventy BRs in 41 patients who received chest radiotherapy for HL were matched to 121 BRs in 110 nonirradiated patients. Reconstruction failure did not differ between HL survivors (12.9%) and controls (12.4%). The comparison groups showed no differences in number of reoperations, major donor-site complications, or capsular contractures. BR in HL survivors more often let to ICU admission due to complications compared with controls ( P =0.048).

CONCLUSIONS

We observed no increased risk of adverse outcomes following BR after previous chest radiotherapy for HL. This is important information for counselling these patients and may improve shared decision-making.

Comparing quality of breast cancer care in the Netherlands and Norway by federated propensity score analytics

PURPOSE

The aim of the study was to benchmark and compare breast cancer care quality indicators (QIs) between Norway and the Netherlands using federated analytics preventing transfer of patient-level data.

METHODS

Breast cancer patients (2017-2018) were retrieved from the Netherlands Cancer Registry and the Cancer Registry of Norway. Five European Society of Breast Cancer Specialists (EUSOMA) QIs were assessed: two on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), two on surgical approaches, and one on postoperative radiotherapy. The QI outcomes were calculated using 'Vantage 6' federated Propensity Score Stratification (PSS). Likelihood of receiving a treatment was expressed in odds ratios (OR).

RESULTS

In total, 39,163 patients were included (32,786 from the Netherlands and 6377 from Norway). PSS scores were comparable to the crude outcomes of the QIs. The Netherlands scored higher on the QI 'proportions of patients preoperatively examined with breast MRI' [37% vs.17.5%; OR 2.8 (95% CI 2.7-2.9)], the 'proportions of patients receiving primary systemic therapy examined with breast MRI' [83.3% vs. 70.8%; OR 2.3 (95% CI 1.3-3.3)], and 'proportion of patients receiving a single breast operation' [95.2% vs. 91.5%; OR 1.8 (95% CI 1.4-2.2)]. Country scores for 'immediate breast reconstruction' and 'postoperative radiotherapy after breast-conserving surgery' were comparable. The EUSOMA standard was achieved in both countries for 4/5 indicators.

CONCLUSION

Both countries achieved high scores on the QIs. Differences were observed in the use of MRI and proportion of patients receiving single surgery. The federated approach supports future possibilities on benchmark QIs without transfer of privacy-sensitive data.

Immediate or delayed oncoplastic surgery after breast conserving surgery at the Netherlands Cancer Institute: a cohort study of 251 cases

PURPOSE

Oncoplastic surgery (OPS) after breast conserving surgery is preferably performed during the same operation. Offering delayed OPS instead of mastectomy to patients with a high risk of tumor-positive margins allows breast conservation with the option of margin re-excision during OPS, without having to dismantle the reconstruction. We aimed to evaluate surgical outcomes after immediate and delayed OPS.

METHODS

We included early-stage breast cancer patients who underwent OPS at the Netherlands Cancer Institute between 2016 and 2019. Patients were selected for delayed OPS after multidisciplinary consultation if the risk of tumor-positive margins with immediate OPS was considered significant (> 30%). Groups were compared on baseline characteristics and short-term surgical outcomes.

RESULTS

Of 242 patients with 251 OPS, 130 (52%) OPS had neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Immediate OPS was performed in 176 (70%) cases and delayed OPS in 76 (30%). Selection for delayed OPS was associated with tumor size (OR 1.03, 95% CI 1.01-1.04), ILC (OR 2.61, 95% CI 1.10-6.20), DCIS (OR 3.45, 95% CI 1.42-8.34) and bra size (OR 0.76, 95% CI 0.62-0.94). Delayed and immediate OPS differed in tissue weight (54 vs. 67 g, p = 0.034), tissue replacement (51% vs. 26%, p < .001) and tumor-positive margins (66% vs. 18%, p < .001). Re-excision was performed in 48 (63%) delayed OPS and in 11 (6%) immediate OPS. Groups did not differ in complications (21% vs. 18%, p = 0.333). Breast conservation after immediate and delayed OPS was 98% and 93%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Performing delayed OPS in selected cases facilitated simultaneous margin re-excision without increasing complications, and resulted in an excellent breast conservation rate.

Does the breast reconstruction method have an impact on time delay to adjuvant chemotherapy – A comparison between autologous and expander/implant breast reconstruction

Introduction

This study aims to analyze whether autologous breast reconstruction as compared to expander/implant reconstruction has a higher risk of postoperative wound healing problems (WHPs) and thus potentially delays chemotherapy start.

Methods

Between January 2012 and December 2019, a total of 64 women with NSME/SSME and autologous (Group1, n = 33) or expander/implant reconstruction (Group2, n = 31) and adjuvant chemotherapy were enrolled in this study conducted at Innsbruck Medical University Hospital. Immediate postoperative WHPs in each group were compared, and the time from operation to initiation of chemotherapy was analyzed. If the start of chemotherapy was postponed for more than six weeks postoperatively due to WHP, it was defined as delayed. Statistical analysis was performed with SPSS and Fisher's exact test.

Results

More postoperative WHP occurred in Group 1 than in Group 2 (51.6% vs. 9.7%, p < 0.001). Due to WHP, chemotherapy start was delayed for more than six weeks postoperatively in 30.3% of Group 1 patients and 3.2% of Group 2 patients. Only small differences in age (Group 1: 47±1 vs. Group 2: 46±2 years) and BMI (Group 1: 24.3 ± 0.6 vs. Group 2: 23.3 ± 0.7 kg/m²) were found.

Conclusion

Our study shows a far smaller risk for postoperative WHP and delay of chemotherapy start in the expander/implant group in comparison with the autologous group. In some selected patients with high urgency for adjuvant chemotherapy, a bridging operation by means of expander reconstruction prior to chemotherapy could be an oncologically safe pathway.

Donor Site Satisfaction Following Autologous Fat Transfer for Total Breast Reconstruction

BACKGROUND

With evolving breast cancer survival and patient preferences, it is essential that reconstructive surgeons worldwide continue searching for the best reconstruction technique for patients. Autologous fat transfer (AFT) is a relatively new technique for total breast reconstruction that has already proven to be effective and safe with all advantages of autologous tissue. However, little is known about the aesthetic results and satisfaction concerning donor sites.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to measure donor site satisfaction following AFT for total breast reconstruction in breast cancer patients.

METHODS

Between May and August of 2021, participants of the BREAST- trial who were at least 24 months after their final reconstruction surgery were invited to complete an additional survey concerning donor sites. The BODY-Q was utilized for data collection. Results of AFT patients were compared with a control group of implant-based reconstruction patients who did not have a donor site.

RESULTS

A total of 51 patients (20 control, 31 intervention) completed the questionnaire. Satisfaction with body did not statistically differ between the groups. The most frequent complaint was contour irregularities (31 reports, 60.8%), with the least favorable donor site being thighs (23 reports, 53.5%) in the AFT group.

CONCLUSIONS

Satisfaction with body did not differ between breast cancer patients receiving AFT or implant-based reconstruction, meaning that large-volume liposuction does not aesthetically affect the utilized donor sites. Nevertheless, reconstructive surgeons should be aware of possible donor site complications, especially contour irregularities at the thighs, and discuss this with their patients.

Predictors of delayed breast reconstruction in the Netherlands: a 5-year follow-up study in stage I-III breast cancer patients

PURPOSE

Delayed breast reconstruction (DBR) is a valid option for postmastectomy breast cancer patients who have a desire for breast reconstruction but are not considered suitable for immediate breast reconstruction (IBR). The objective of this study was to investigate the clinical practice and predictors of the use of DBR in the Netherlands.

METHODS

Stage I-III breast cancer patients diagnosed from January to March 2012 and treated with mastectomy were selected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Routinely collected patient, tumor, treatment and hospital characteristics were complemented with data about DBR up to 2018. Multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed to identify factors independently associated with postmastectomy DBR. Factors associated with time to DBR were identified through Cox regression analyses.

RESULTS

Of all patients who underwent mastectomy (n = 1,415), 10.2% underwent DBR. DBR patients more often received autologous reconstruction compared to IBR patients (37.5% vs 6.2%, p < 0.001). Age below 50 years (age < 35 OR 15.55, age 35-49 OR 4.18) and neoadjuvant and adjuvant chemotherapy (OR 2.59 and OR 2.83, respectively) were significantly associated with DBR. Mean time to DBR was 2.4 years [range 1-6 years]. Time to DBR was significantly associated with age < 35 years (HR 2.22), and a high hospital volume (HR 1.87).

DISCUSSION

The use of DBR after mastectomy could not be fully explained by age below 50 years, chemotherapy, and hospital volume. Treatment with radiotherapy and adjuvant chemotherapy increased time to DBR. More information about patient preferences is needed to understand the use and timing of reconstruction.

Understanding Preoperative Breast Satisfaction among Patients Undergoing Mastectomy and Immediate Reconstruction: BREAST-Q Insights

BACKGROUND

This study aims to present normative values for satisfaction with breasts among preoperative breast reconstruction patients as assessed using the BREAST-Q instrument and to delineate factors associated with preoperative breast satisfaction.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data was performed examining women undergoing postmastectomy breast reconstruction at a tertiary care center who preoperatively completed the BREAST-Q from 2010 to 2017. Because breast satisfaction scores were nonnormally distributed, scores were categorized into quartiles for analysis. Patient- and treatment-level variables were tested in a multivariable ordinal logistic regression model as predictors of breast satisfaction. Preoperative satisfaction was also tested for association with choice of reconstructive modality.

RESULTS

Among 1306 postmastectomy reconstruction patients included in the study, mean preoperative Satisfaction with Breasts score was 61.8 ± 21.5 and the median score was 58.0 (interquartile range, 48 to 70). Factors associated with significantly lower preoperative satisfaction included history of psychiatric diagnosis, preoperative radiotherapy, marital status (married), and higher body mass index. Factors associated with significantly higher scores were malignancy (localized tumor), medium bra size (B to C cup), and self-identification as black. Preoperative breast satisfaction was lower among patients who elected autologous reconstruction than among those with implant reconstruction (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Preoperative breast satisfaction is influenced by multiple factors. Understanding these factors may improve preoperative counseling and expectation management for patients who undergo postmastectomy breast reconstruction.

CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Risk, III.

Cost-utility analysis of four common surgical treatment pathways for breast cancer

BACKGROUND

The aim was to evaluate the cost-utility of four common surgical treatment pathways for breast cancer: mastectomy, breast-conserving therapy (BCT), implant breast reconstruction (BR) and autologous-BR.

METHODS

Patient-level healthcare consumption data and results of a large quality of life (QoL) study from five Dutch hospitals were combined. The cost-effectiveness was assessed in terms of incremental costs and quality adjusted life years (QALYs) over a 10-year follow-up period. Costs were assessed from a healthcare provider perspective.

RESULTS

BCT resulted in comparable QoL with lower costs compared to implant-BR and autologous-BR and showed better QoL with higher costs than mastectomy (€17,246/QALY). QoL outcomes and costs of especially autologous-BR were affected by the relatively high occurrence of complications. If reconstruction following mastectomy was performed, implant-BR was more cost-effective than autologous-BR.

CONCLUSION

The occurrence of complications had a substantial effect on costs and QoL outcomes of different surgical pathways for breast cancer. When this was taken into account, BCT was most the cost-effective treatment. Even with higher costs and a higher risk of complications, implant-BR and autologous-BR remained cost-effective over mastectomy. This pleas for adapting surgical pathways to individual patient preferences in the trade-off between the risks of complications and expected outcomes.

Shared decision making in breast cancer treatment guidelines: Development of a quality assessment tool and a systematic review

BACKGROUND

It is not clear whether clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) and consensus statements (CSs) are adequately promoting shared decision making (SDM).

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the recommendations about SDM in CPGs and CSs concerning breast cancer (BC) treatment.

SEARCH STRATEGY

Following protocol registration (Prospero no.: CRD42018106643), CPGs and CSs on BC treatment were identified, without language restrictions, through systematic search of bibliographic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, Scopus, CDSR) and online sources (12 guideline databases and 51 professional society websites) from January 2010 to December 2019.

INCLUSION CRITERIA

CPGs and CSs on BC treatment were selected whether published in a journal or in an online document.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

A 31-item SDM quality assessment tool was developed and used to extract data in duplicate.

MAIN RESULTS

There were 167 relevant CPGs (139) and CSs (28); SDM was reported in only 40% of the studies. SDM was reported more often in recent publications after 2015 (42/101 (41.6 %) vs 46/66 (69.7 %), P = .0003) but less often in medical journal publications (44/101 (43.5 %) vs 17/66 (25.7 %), P = .009). In CPGs and CSs with SDM, only 8/66 (12%) met one-fifth (6 of 31) of the quality items; only 14/66 (8%) provided clear and precise SDM recommendations.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

SDM descriptions and recommendations in CPGs and CSs concerning BC treatment need improvement. SDM was more frequently reported in CPGs and CSs in recent years, but surprisingly it was less often covered in medical journals, a feature that needs attention.

Quality and reporting of clinical guidelines for breast cancer treatment: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

High-quality, well-reported clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) and consensus statements (CSs) underpinned by systematic reviews are needed. We appraised the quality and reporting of CPGs and CSs for breast cancer (BC) treatment.

METHODS

Following protocol registration (Prospero no: CRD42020164801), CPGs and CSs on BC treatment were identified, without language restrictions, through a systematic search of bibliographic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, Scopus, CDSR) and online sources (12 guideline databases and 51 professional society websites) from January 2017 to June 2020. Data were extracted in duplicate assessing overall quality using AGREE II (% of maximum score) and reporting compliance using RIGHT (% of total 35 items); reviewer agreement was 98% and 96% respectively.

RESULTS

There were 59 relevant guidance documents (43 CPGs, 16 CSs), of which 20 used systematic reviews for evidence synthesis. The median overall quality was 54.0% (IQR 35.9-74.3) and the median overall reporting compliance was 60.9% (IQR 44.5-84.4). The correlation between quality and reporting was 0.9. Compared to CSs, CPGs had better quality (55.4% vs 44.2%; p = 0.032) and reporting (67.18% vs 44.5%; p = 0.005). Compared to subjective methods of evidence analysis, guidance documents that used systematic reviews had better quality (76.3% vs 51.4%; p = 0.001) and reporting (87.1% vs 59.4%; p = 0.001).

CONCLUSION

The quality and reporting of CPGs and CSs in BC treatment were moderately strong. Systematic reviews should be used to improve the quality and reporting of CPGs and CSs.

Association between initiation of adjuvant chemotherapy beyond 30 days after surgery and overall survival among patients with triple-negative breast cancer

Delayed time to chemotherapy (TTC) is associated with decreased outcomes of breast cancer patients. Recently, studies suggested that the association might be subtype‐dependent and that TTC within 30 days should be warranted in patients with triple‐negative breast cancer (TNBC). The aim of the current study is to determine if TTC beyond 30 days is associated with reduced 10‐year overall survival in TNBC patients. We identified all TNBC patients diagnosed between 2006 and 2014 who received adjuvant chemotherapy in the Netherlands. We distinguished between breast‐conserving surgery (BCS) vs. mastectomy given the difference in preoperative characteristics and outcomes. The association was estimated with hazard ratios (HRs) using propensity‐score matched Cox proportional hazard analyses. In total, 3,016 patients were included. In matched patients who underwent BCS (n = 904), 10‐year overall survival was favorable for patients with TTC within 30 days (84.4% vs. 76.9%, p = 0.001). Patients with TTC beyond 30 days were more likely than those with TTC within 30 days to die within 10 years after surgery (HR 1.69 (95% CI 1.22–2.34), p = 0.002). In matched patients who underwent mastectomy (n = 1,568), there was no difference in 10 years overall survival between those with TTC within or beyond 30 days (74.5% vs. 74.7%, p = 0.716), nor an increased risk of death for those with TTC beyond 30 days (HR 1.04 (95% CI 0.84–1.28), p = 0.716). Initiation of adjuvant chemotherapy beyond 30 days is associated with decreased 10 years overall survival in TNBC patients who underwent BCS. Therefore, timelier initiation of chemotherapy in TNBC patients undergoing BCS seems warranted.

What's new?

Current breast cancer treatment guidelines recommend that chemotherapy is initiated between 6‐12 weeks after surgery. Delayed treatment can lead to poorer outcome, but there's no precise definition of the optimal window. Recent work suggests that for patients with triple negative breast cancer (TNBC), it's best to initiate chemotherapy within 30 days. Here, the authors evaluated outcomes for TNBC patients correlated with time to chemotherapy. They found that in patients undergoing breast‐conserving surgery, an interval of more than 30 days before chemotherapy was associated with decreased survival. If the patient had undergone a mastectomy, a longer delay before chemotherapy did not impact survival.

Breast-contour preserving procedures for early-stage breast cancer: a population-based study of the trends, variation in practice and predictive characteristics in Denmark and the Netherlands

PURPOSE

Breast-contour preservation (BCP) is possible for most women treated for early-stage breast cancer. BCP can be defined as primary breast-conserving treatment (BCT), neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) followed by BCT and immediate postmastectomy breast reconstruction (IBR). This study provides insight in current BCP strategies in Denmark and the Netherlands and aims to identify opportunities for improvement within both countries.

METHODS

A total of 92,881 patients with early-stage breast cancer who were operated in Denmark and the Netherlands between 2012 and 2017 were selected from the Danish Breast Cancer Group and the Dutch National Breast Cancer Audit databases. BCP procedures and predictive factors were analyzed within and between both countries.

RESULTS

BCP was achieved in 76.7% (n = 16,355) of the Danish and in 74.5% (n = 53,328) of the Dutch patients. While BCP rate did not change significantly over time in Denmark (p = 0.250), a significant increase in BCP rate from 69.5% in 2012 to 78.5% in 2017 (p < 0.001) was observed in the Netherlands. In both countries, variation in BCP rates between hospitals decreased over time. NAC followed by BCT and postmastectomy IBR was substantially more often used in the Netherlands compared to Denmark, specifically in patients younger than 50 years.

CONCLUSIONS

In more than 75% of all Danish and Dutch patients, surgically treated for early-stage breast cancer, the breast-contour was preserved. The different use of BCP strategies within Denmark and the Netherlands and the differences observed between hospitals in both countries emphasize the need for more (inter)national consensus on treatment modalities.

Patterns of immediate breast reconstruction in New South Wales, Australia: a population-based study

Background

The rate of immediate breast reconstruction (IBR) following mastectomy for breast cancer in Australia is low and varies between regions. To date, no previous Australian studies have examined IBR rates between all hospitals within a particular jurisdiction, despite hospitals being an important known contributor to variation in IBR rates in other countries.

Methods

We used cross‐classified random‐effects logistic regression models to examine the inter‐hospital variation in IBR rates by using data on 7961 women who underwent therapeutic mastectomy procedures in New South Wales (NSW) between January 2012 and June 2015. We derived IBR rates by patient‐, residential neighbourhood‐ and hospital‐related factors and investigated the underlying drivers for the variation in IBR.

Results

We estimated the mean IBR rate across all hospitals performing mastectomy to be 17.1% (95% Bayesian credible interval (CrI) 12.1–23.1%) and observed wide inter‐hospital variation in IBR (variance 4.337, CrI 2.634–6.889). Older women, those born in Asian countries (odds ratio (OR) 0.5, CrI 0.4–0.6), residing in neighbourhoods with lower socioeconomic status (OR 0.7, CrI 0.5–0.8 for the most disadvantaged), and who underwent surgery in public hospitals (OR 0.4, CrI 0.1–1.0) were significantly less likely to have IBR. Women residing in non‐metropolitan areas and attending non‐metropolitan hospitals were significantly less likely to undergo IBR than their metropolitan counterparts attending metropolitan hospitals.

Conclusion

Wide inter‐hospital variation raises concerns about potential inequities in access to IBR services and unmet demand in certain areas of NSW. Explaining the underlying drivers for IBR variation is the first step in identifying policy solutions to redress the issue.

Nationwide population-based study of the impact of immediate breast reconstruction after mastectomy on the timing of adjuvant chemotherapy

BACKGROUND

Initiation of adjuvant chemotherapy within 6-12 weeks after mastectomy is recommended by guidelines. The aim of this population-based study was to investigate whether immediate breast reconstruction (IBR) after mastectomy reduces the likelihood of timely initiation of adjuvant chemotherapy.

METHODS

All patients with breast cancer who had undergone mastectomy and adjuvant chemotherapy between 2012 and 2016 in the Netherlands were identified. Time from surgery to adjuvant chemotherapy was categorized as within 6 weeks or after more than 6 weeks, within 9 weeks or after more than 9 weeks, and within 12 weeks or after more than 12 weeks. The impact of IBR on the initiation of adjuvant chemotherapy for these three scenarios was estimated using propensity score matching to adjust for treatment by indication bias.

RESULTS

A total of 6300 patients had undergone primary mastectomy and adjuvant chemotherapy, of whom 1700 (27·0 per cent) had received IBR. Multivariable analysis revealed that IBR reduced the likelihood of receiving adjuvant chemotherapy within 6 weeks (odds ratio (OR) 0·76, 95 per cent c.i. 0·66 to 0·87) and 9 weeks (0·69, 0·54 to 0·87), but not within 12 weeks (OR 0·75, 0·48 to 1·17). Following propensity score matching, IBR only reduced the likelihood of receiving adjuvant chemotherapy within 6 weeks (OR 0·95, 0·90 to 0·99), but not within 9 weeks (OR 0·97, 0·95 to 1·00) or 12 weeks (OR 1·00, 0·99 to 1·01).

CONCLUSION

Postmastectomy IBR marginally reduced the likelihood of receiving adjuvant chemotherapy within 6 weeks, but not within 9 or 12 weeks. Thus, IBR is not contraindicated in patients who need adjuvant chemotherapy after mastectomy.

Breast reconstruction in France, observational study of 140,904 cases of mastectomy for breast cancer

OBJECTIVES

In France, there are few up-to-date epidemiological data on breast reconstruction after mastectomy for breast cancer. The objective of the present study was to measure immediate and delayed breast reconstruction (IBR and DBR, respectively) rates and thus the proportion of patients not benefiting from any reconstruction.

METHODS

We performed an observational study by assessing data from the French nationwide discharge summary database (Programme de Médicalisation des Systèmes d'Information) for the period 2008-2014. All women having undergone a total mastectomy for breast cancer during this period were included. We then searched for reconstructive surgery during the initial or subsequent hospital stays, and recorded the time interval between mastectomy and reconstruction.

RESULTS

Among the 140,904 mastectomies included, the IBR rate was 16.1% on average, and increased over the study period. The time interval between mastectomy and DBR was≤3 years in 92% of cases. For patients included in 2008 and 2009, the DBR rate was 17.8%, and the non-reconstruction rate was 66.4%.

CONCLUSION

The high proportion of women not undergoing breast reconstruction after mastectomy suggests that access to this procedure should be improved.