
Abstract Background High rates of reoperation following breast-conserving surgery (BCS) for positive margins are associated with costs to healthcare providers. The aim was to assess the quality of evidence on reported re-excision costs and compare the direct patient-level costs between patients undergoing successful BCS versus reoperations after BCS. Methods The study used data from women who had BCS with or without reoperation at a single institution between April 2015 and March 2016. A systematic review of health economic analysis in BCS was conducted and scored using the Quality of Health Economic Studies (QHES) instrument. Financial data were retrieved using the Patient-Level Information and Costing Systems (PLICS) for patients. Exchange rates used were: US $1 = £0·75, £1 = €1·14 and US $1 = €0·85. Results The median QHES score was 47 (i.q.r. 32·5–79). Only two of nine studies scored in the upper QHES quartile (score at least 75). Costs of initial lumpectomy and reoperation were in the range US $1234–11786 and $655–9136 respectively. Over a 12-month interval, 153 patients had definitive BCS and 59 patients underwent reoperation. The median cost of reoperations after BCS (59 patients) was £4511 (range 1752–18 019), representing an additional £2136 per patient compared with BCS without reoperation (P < 0·001). Conclusion The systematic review demonstrated variation in methodological approach to cost estimates and a paucity of high-quality cost estimate studies for reoperations. Extrapolating local PLICS data to a national level suggests that getting BCS right first time could result in substantial savings.
Adult, Reoperation, Databases, Factual, 610, LOCAL RECURRENCE, Breast Neoplasms, Mastectomy, Segmental, THERAPY, Risk Assessment, Cost of Illness, MASTECTOMY, Humans, RATES, 11 Medical and Health Sciences, Aged, Retrospective Studies, Analysis of Variance, Science & Technology, 20-YEAR FOLLOW-UP, Carcinoma, Ductal, Breast, WOMEN, Margins of Excision, Health Care Costs, Middle Aged, CANCER, Survival Analysis, PATHOLOGY, Treatment Outcome, Oncology, Multivariate Analysis, Linear Models, Surgery, TRIAL, Female, Life Sciences & Biomedicine, LUMPECTOMY
Adult, Reoperation, Databases, Factual, 610, LOCAL RECURRENCE, Breast Neoplasms, Mastectomy, Segmental, THERAPY, Risk Assessment, Cost of Illness, MASTECTOMY, Humans, RATES, 11 Medical and Health Sciences, Aged, Retrospective Studies, Analysis of Variance, Science & Technology, 20-YEAR FOLLOW-UP, Carcinoma, Ductal, Breast, WOMEN, Margins of Excision, Health Care Costs, Middle Aged, CANCER, Survival Analysis, PATHOLOGY, Treatment Outcome, Oncology, Multivariate Analysis, Linear Models, Surgery, TRIAL, Female, Life Sciences & Biomedicine, LUMPECTOMY
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 46 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Top 10% | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% |
