Variation between hospitals in surgical margins after first breast-conserving surgery in the Netherlands

被引:24
作者
van der Heiden-van der Loo, Margriet [1 ]
De Munck, Linda [1 ]
Visser, Otto [1 ]
Westenend, Pieter J. [2 ]
van Dalen, Thijs [3 ]
Menke, Marian B. [4 ]
Rutgers, Emiel J. [5 ]
Peeters, Petra H. [6 ]
机构
[1] Ctr Comprehens Canc, Dept Res, NL-3501 DB Utrecht, Netherlands
[2] Lab Pathol Dordrecht, NL-3917 DA Dordrecht, Netherlands
[3] Diakonessenhuis Utrecht, Dept Surg, NL-3508 TG Utrecht, Netherlands
[4] Erasmus MC Daniel den Hoed, Dept Surg, NL-3000 CA Rotterdam, Netherlands
[5] Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hosp, Netherlands Canc Inst, Dept Surg, NL-1006 BE Amsterdam, Netherlands
[6] Univ Med Ctr Utrecht, Julius Ctr Hlth Sci & Primary Care, NL-3508 GA Utrecht, Netherlands
关键词
Breast cancer; Breast-conserving surgery; Tumor residue; Variation; Hospitals; Health care quality; CONSERVATION SURGERY; LOCAL RECURRENCE; CANCER; THERAPY;
D O I
10.1007/s10549-011-1809-3
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
Surgical margin status after first breast-conserving surgery (BCS) is used as a quality indicator of breast cancer care in the Netherlands. The aim is to describe the variation in surgical margin status between hospitals. 7,345 patients with DCIS or invasive cancer (T1-2,N0-1,M0) diagnosed between July 1, 2008, and June 30, 2009, who underwent BCS as first surgery, were selected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Patients were treated in 96 hospitals. Maximum target values were 30% 'focally positive' or 'more than focally positive' for DCIS and 10% 'more than focally positive' for invasive carcinoma. Results per hospital are presented in funnel plots. For invasive carcinoma, multivariate logistic regression was used to adjust for case mix. Overall 28.5% (95% CI: 25.5-31.4%) of DCIS and 9.1% (95% CI: 8.4-9.8%) of invasive carcinoma had positive margins. Variation between hospitals was substantial. 6 and 10 hospitals, respectively, for DCIS and invasive cancer showed percentages above the upper limit of agreement. Case mix correction led to significant different conclusions for 5 hospitals. After case mix correction, 10 hospitals showed significant higher rates, while 7 hospitals showed significant lower rates. High rates were not related to breast cancer patient volume or type of hospital (teaching vs. non-teaching). Higher rates were related to hospitals where the policy is to aim for BCS instead of mastectomy. The overall percentage of positive margins in the Netherlands is within the predefined targets. The variation between hospitals is substantial but can be largely explained by coincidence. Case mix correction leads to relevant shifts.
引用
收藏
页码:691 / 698
页数:8
相关论文
共 21 条
  • [11] The relationship between surgical factors and margin status after breast-conservation surgery for early stage breast cancer
    Lovrics, Peter J.
    Cornacchi, Sylvie D.
    Farrokhyar, Forough
    Garnett, Anna
    Chen, Vicky
    Franic, Slobodan
    Simunovic, Marko
    [J]. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 2009, 197 (06) : 740 - 746
  • [12] The surgical margin status after breast-conserving surgery: discussion of an open issue
    Luini, Alberto
    Rososchansky, Joel
    Gatti, Giovanna
    Zurrida, Stefano
    Caldarella, Pietro
    Viale, Giuseppe
    dos Santos, Gabriela Rosali
    Frasson, Antonio
    [J]. BREAST CANCER RESEARCH AND TREATMENT, 2009, 113 (02) : 397 - 402
  • [13] Trends in the Surgical Treatment of Breast Cancer
    Morrow, Monica
    [J]. BREAST JOURNAL, 2010, 16 : S17 - S19
  • [14] National Breast Cancer Organization of the Netherlands, GUID BREAST CANC
  • [15] Funnel plots for comparing institutional performance
    Spiegelhalter, DJ
    [J]. STATISTICS IN MEDICINE, 2005, 24 (08) : 1185 - 1202
  • [16] Re-resection rates after breast-conserving surgery as a performance indicator: Introduction of a case-mix model to allow comparison between Dutch hospitals
    Talsma, A. K.
    Reedijk, A. M. J.
    Damhuis, R. A. M.
    Westenend, P. J.
    Vles, W. J.
    [J]. EJSO, 2011, 37 (04): : 357 - 363
  • [17] Union for International Cancer Control, 2017, TNM CLASSIFICATION M
  • [18] van Steenbergen L N, 2010, Eur J Surg Oncol, V36 Suppl 1, pS36, DOI 10.1016/j.ejso.2010.06.021
  • [19] Random Physician Effect and Comparative Effectiveness of Treatment for Ductal Carcinoma In Situ
    Virnig, Beth A.
    Tuttle, Todd M.
    [J]. JNCI-JOURNAL OF THE NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE, 2011, 103 (02):
  • [20] Vles WJ, 2009, MEDISCH CONTACT, P1354