Research Article| Volume 43, ISSUE 4, P665-671, April 2017

Download started.


Short term safety of oncoplastic breast conserving surgery for larger tumors

Published:December 17, 2016DOI:



      Oncoplastic surgery (OPS) replaces lumpectomy as standard technique in breast conserving surgery (BCS). OPS has shown to give good cosmetic results, but is it as safe as standard lumpectomy? We conducted a retrospective cohort study to determine postoperative complications, resection margins and re-excision rates for OPS compared to standard lumpectomy.


      Based on data from the ‘Netherlands Cancer Registry’ and medical records we scored patient, treatment and follow-up related variables. All consecutive patients, with an initially breast conserving operation for primary breast cancer, performed between January 2010 and December 2014 in a dedicated breast center were eligible. Breast surgeons performed the operations. Invasive and in situ tumors were included. Postoperative complications within 30 days after surgery and the need for additional treatment were classified using the Clavien Dindo classification. Involved margin rates and subsequent re-excision were compared.


      We included 828 women with 842 breast cancers, who had a standard lumpectomy (62.7%) or oncoplastic resection (37.3%). OPS was performed more often for larger tumors (17.5 mm vs 13.6 mm, p = 0.002) and for tumors in the caudal half of the breast (33.1% vs 16.9%, p < 0.001). There was no significant difference in postoperative complications. Positive surgical margins were similar (OPS 22.6%, lumpectomy 18.2%, p = 0.119), as were re-excision rates (p = 0.337).


      Oncoplastic breast surgery can be safely applied in larger tumors, resulting in comparable postoperative complications, resection margins and re-excision rates compared to standard lumpectomy.


      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'


      Subscribe to European Journal of Surgical Oncology
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect


        • Franceschini G.
        • Terribile D.
        • Magno S.
        • et al.
        Update on oncoplastic breast surgery.
        Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci. 2012 Oct; 16: 1530-1540
        • Wang H.T.
        • Barone C.M.
        • Steigelman M.B.
        • et al.
        Aesthetic outcomes in breast conservation therapy.
        Aesthet Surg J. 2008 Mar-Apr; 28: 165-170
        • Santos G.
        • Urban C.
        • Edelweiss M.I.
        • et al.
        Long term comparison of aesthetical outcomes after oncoplastic surgery and lumpectomy in breast cancer.
        Ann Surg Oncol. 2015 Aug; 22: 2500-2508
        • Hamdi
        Oncoplastic and reconstructive surgery of the breast.
        Breast. 2013; 22: S100-S105
        • Losken A.
        • Dugal C.S.
        • Styblo T.M.
        • Charlson G.W.
        A meta-analysis comparing breast conservation therapy alone to the oncoplastic technique.
        Ann Plast Surg. 2014 Feb; 72: 145-149
        • Tenofsky P.L.
        • Dowell P.
        • Topalovski T.
        • Helmer S.D.
        Surgical, oncologic and cosmetic differences between oncoplastic and nononcoplastic breast conserving surgery in breast cancer patients.
        Am J Surg. 2014 Mar; 207: 398-402
        • Charlson M.
        • Szatrowski T.P.
        • Peterson J.
        • Gold J.
        Validation of a combined comorbidity index.
        J Clin Epidemiol. 1994 Nov; 47: 1245-1251
        • Clough K.B.
        • Kaufman G.J.
        • Nos C.
        • Buccimazza I.
        • Sarfati I.M.
        Improving breast cancer surgery: a classification and quadrant per quadrant atlas for oncoplastic surgery.
        Ann Surg Oncol. 2010 May; 17: 1375-1391
        • Dindo D.
        • Demartines N.
        • Clavien P.A.
        Classification of surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey.
        Ann Surg. 2004 Aug; 240: 205-213
        • Panhofer P.
        • Ferenc V.
        • Schütz M.
        • et al.
        Standardization of morbidity assessment in breast cancer surgery using the Clavien Dino classification.
        Int J Surg. 2014; 12: 334-339
        • Rose M.
        • Manjer J.
        • Ringberg A.
        • Svensson H.
        Surgical strategy, methods of reconstruction, surgical margins and postoperative complications in oncoplastic breast surgery.
        Eur J Plast Surg. 2014; 37: 205-214
        • Yang C.C.
        • Chen P.C.
        • Hsu C.W.
        • et al.
        Validity of the age-adjusted Charlson comorbidity index on clinical outcome for patients with nasopharyngeal cancer post radiation treatment: a 5-year nationwide cohort study.
        PLoS One. 2015 Jan 24; 10: e0117323
        • Braithwaite D.
        • Moore D.H.
        • Satariano W.A.
        • et al.
        Prognostic impact of comorbidity among long-term breast cancer survivors: results from the LACE study.
        Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2012 Jul; 21: 1115-1125
        • Ouellette J.R.
        • Small D.G.
        • Termuhlen P.M.
        Evaluation of Charlson-age comorbidity index as predictor of morbidity and mortality in patients with colorectal carcinoma.
        J Gastrointest Surg. 2004 Dec; 8: 1061-1067
        • De Blacam C.
        • Ogunleye A.A.
        • Momoh A.O.
        • et al.
        High body mass index and smoking predict morbidity in breast cancer surgery: a multivariate analysis of 26.988 patients from the national surgical quality improvement database.
        Ann Surg. 2012 Mar; 255: 551-555
        • Teija-Kaisa A.
        • Eija M.
        • Marja S.
        • Outi L.
        Risk factors for surgical site infection in breast surgery.
        J Clin Nurs. 2013 Apr; 22: 948-957
        • Xue D.Q.
        • Qian C.
        • Yang L.
        • Wang X.F.
        Risk factors for surgical site infections after breast surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
        Eur J Surg Oncol. 2012 May; 38: 375-381
        • Sørensen L.T.
        Wound healing and infection in surgery. The clinical impact of smoking and smoking cessation: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
        Arch Surg. 2012 Apr; 147: 373-383
        • Grøndjær M.
        • Eliasen M.
        • Skov-Ettrup L.S.
        • et al.
        Preoperative smoking status and postoperative complications: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
        Ann Surg. 2014 Jan; 259: 52-71
        • Chauhan A.
        • Sharma M.M.
        Evaluation of surgical outcomes following oncoplastic breast surgery in early breast cancer and comparison with conventional breast conservation surgery.
        Med J Armed Forces India. 2016 Jan; 72: 12-18
        • Silverstein M.J.
        • Savalia N.
        • Khan S.
        • Ryan J.
        Extreme oncoplasty: breast conservation for patients who need mastectomy.
        Breast J. 2015 Jan-Feb; 21: 52-59
        • Down S.K.
        • Jha P.K.
        • Burger A.
        • Hussien M.I.
        Oncological advantages of oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery in treatment of early breast cancer.
        Breast J. 2013 Jan-Feb; 19: 56-63
        • Kaur N.
        • Petit J.Y.
        • Rietjens M.
        • et al.
        Comparative study of surgical margins in oncoplastic surgery and quadrantectomy in breast cancer.
        Ann Surg Oncol. 2005 Jul; 12: 539-545
        • Yeap B.H.
        • Muniandy S.
        • Lee S.K.
        • et al.
        Specimen shrinkage and its influence on margin assessment in breast cancer.
        Asian J Surg. 2007 Jul; 30: 183-187
        • Tóth D.
        • Varga Z.
        • Sebö É.
        • et al.
        Predictive factors for positive margin and the surgical learning curve in non-palpable breast cancer after wire-guided localization – prospective study of 214 consecutive patients.
        Pathol Oncol Res. 2016 Jan; 22: 209-215
        • Pleijhuis R.G.
        • Kwast A.B.
        • Jansen L.
        • et al.
        A validated web-based nomogram for predicting positive surgical margins following breast-conserving surgery as a preoperative tool for clinical decision-making.
        Breast. 2013 Oct; 22: 773-779
        • Clough K.B.
        • Gouveia P.F.
        • Benyahi D.
        • et al.
        Positive margins after oncoplastic surgery for breast cancer.
        Ann Surg Oncol. 2015 Dec; 22: 4247-4253
        • Wanis M.L.
        • Wong J.A.
        • Rodriguez S.
        • et al.
        Rate of re-excision after breast-conserving surgery for invasive lobular carcinoma.
        Am Surg. 2013 Oct; 79: 1119-1122
        • Crown A.
        • Wechter D.G.
        • Grumley J.W.
        Oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery reduces mastectomy and postoperative re-excision rates.
        Ann Surg Oncol. 2015 Oct; 22: 3363-3368
        • Chakravorty A.
        • Shrestha A.K.
        • Sanmugalingam N.
        • et al.
        How safe is oncoplastic breast conservation? Comparative analysis with standard breast conserving surgery.
        Eur J Surg Oncol. 2012 May; 38: 395-398