ArticleBreast (Edinburgh, Scotland)2020
Reoperation rate after breast conserving surgery as quality indicator in breast cancer treatment: A reappraisal.
Article in Breast (Edinburgh, Scotland), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Contrast-enhanced mammography in the preoperative assessment of primary operable breast cancer: Results from a prospective, two-centre study.European journal of radiology open · 2026Article
- Margin of Error: The Emerging Role of Field Cancerization in Predicting Recurrence Risk of Ductal Carcinoma In Situ.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- Touching the tumor boundary: a pilot study on ultrasound-based virtual fixtures for breast-conserving surgery.International journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery · 2025Article
- Prognostic Impact of Surgical Margin Status on Overall Survival of Patients with Early Breast Cancer: A Retrospective Analysis from the Department for Women's Medicine at Charité - University Hospital Berlin.Geburtshilfe und Frauenheilkunde · 2024Article
- Blood flow on ultrasound imaging is a predictor of lump margin status in breast-conserving patients: a retrospective matching study.European journal of medical research · 2023Article
- Immediate or delayed oncoplastic surgery after breast conserving surgery at the Netherlands Cancer Institute: a cohort study of 251 cases.Breast cancer research and treatment · 2023Article
- Comparison of Recurrence Rate Between Re-Excision With Radiotherapy and Radiotherapy-Only Groups in Surgical Margin Involvement ofJournal of breast cancer · 2022Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimTo analyse the role of repeated breast surgery (RBS) after breast conserving surgery (BCS) as a quality indicator in a consecutive series of breast cancer patients.
methodsData from 1233 breast cancer patients submitted to BCS from 2015 to 2019 were reviewed. The influence of several variables on RBS rate (182/1232; 14.8%) was examined. Univariate and multivariate analyses were conducted to look for significant associations with the risk of RBS.
resultsSurgical workload, BCS rate and clinicopathological variables were consistent over the study period, while RBS rate decreased after the introduction of shaving of cavity margins (from 17.9% to 9.5%). Tumor persistence at RBS was higher for mastectomy vs. re-excision (87.3% vs. 37.8%; p = 0.05), inconclusive vs. positive diagnostic biopsy (48.2% vs. 69.4%; p = 0.003), ductal carcinoma in situ vs. invasive carcinoma (69.0% vs. 51.3%; p = 0.046) and lower after neoadjuvant therapy (14.3% vs. 57.8%; p = 0.044). Several clinicopathological variables were associated with the risk of RBS, but only multifocality [Odds Ratio (OR): 1.8; p = 0.009], microcalcifications (OR: 2.0, p = 0.000), neoadjuvant therapy (OR: 0.4; p = 0.014), pathological intraoperative assessment (OR: 0.6; p = 0.010) and shaving of cavity margins (OR: 0.3; p = 0.000) retained independent value at multivariate analysis.
conclusionsRBS rate can be reduced by shaving of cavity margins. Current standards for RBS should not be made more stringent due to the existence of non-actionable risk factors. The value of RBS as a quality indicator should be scrutinzed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.