The Effect of Intraoperative Margin Assessment During Breast Conserving Surgery for Breast Cancer in a Dutch Cohort.

INTRODUCTION: Intraoperative specimen radiography is a routinely used procedure to ensure adequate resection of non-palpable breast tumors. Intraoperative digital specimen mammography (IDSM) is an alternative to conventional specimen radiography (CSR) which provides immediate specimen evaluation and can potentially decrease operation time. IDSM may also result in lower positive margin and re-excision rates. IDSM was implemented in our hospital in 2018. The objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of using IDSM versus CSR on operation time, margin status and re-excision rates in breast conserving surgery. METHODS: The present study is a single-center retrospective cohort study with 2 patient cohorts: one which underwent CSR (n = 532) and one which underwent IDSM (n = 475). The primary outcome was the operation time. Secondary outcomes were the margin status of the primary surgery, the cavity shaving rate, and the re-excision rate. Differences between cohorts were compared using univariate statistics and multiple regression analyses to adjust for variables that were significantly different between the groups. RESULTS: IDSM use was associated with an 8-minute reduction in surgery time (B = -8.034, 95% CI [-11.6, -4.5]; P < .001). Treatment variables independently associated with the operation time included use of IDSM, type of surgery, and performance of cavity shaving. Cavity shaves were more often performed when IDSM was used (24% for IDSM vs. 14% for CSR, P < .001), while the proportion of negative margin rates (93% for IDSM vs. 96% for CSR, P = .070) was comparable. CONCLUSION: IDSM was associated with a modest reduction in operation time. Surgeons performed more cavity shaves since the introduction of IDSM, but this increase was not reflected by difference in negative margin rates.

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.