Daniel Schmidt, Kristina Fraser, Jared Reyes, Stephen D Helmer, Mohamad Halloum, Patty L Tenofsky
{"title":"评价住院医师对乳房肿瘤切除术患者标本边缘状态的参与。","authors":"Daniel Schmidt, Kristina Fraser, Jared Reyes, Stephen D Helmer, Mohamad Halloum, Patty L Tenofsky","doi":"10.1177/00031348251385106","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In the practice of breast surgery, positive margins are a troublesome pathologic finding associated with an increased risk of local recurrence and the recommendation of re-excision. For this reason, there is an emphasis placed on negative margins for breast surgeries. In this study, we analyze surgical resident involvement in breast cancer operations and associations with margin status.MethodsA retrospective study was completed of adult female patients who underwent a lumpectomy by a single surgeon. The surgeries were categorized by resident involvement in the surgical procedure. Other variables assessed were cancer type, grade, size, neoadjuvant chemotherapy use, and oncoplastic surgery. Variables were evaluated to determine what associated with a positive margin.ResultsWhen comparing cases with and without resident involvement, no statistically significant differences were noted in patient age (65.46 ± 1.76 years vs. 66.14 ± 9.31 years, <i>P</i> = .560), neoadjuvant therapy (11.8% vs. 8.0%, <i>P</i> =.273), and tumor size (12 mm vs. 13 mm, <i>P</i> =.871). The number of positive margins did not differ statistically whether a resident was involved or not (20.3% vs. 16.7%, <i>P</i> =.420). The only variable associated with increased positive margins was adenocarcinoma mixed with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) and pure DCIS, which was associated with the greatest proportions of positive margins.DiscussionUnlike some previous studies, our data reinforces it is safe to involve residents in breast conservation surgery. Specifically, program year did not significantly impact margin status. Thus, surgical training should continue to involve residents in breast surgery without fear of providing suboptimal care.</p>","PeriodicalId":7782,"journal":{"name":"American Surgeon","volume":" ","pages":"31348251385106"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluation of Resident Participation on Specimen Margin Status in Patients Undergoing Lumpectomy.\",\"authors\":\"Daniel Schmidt, Kristina Fraser, Jared Reyes, Stephen D Helmer, Mohamad Halloum, Patty L Tenofsky\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/00031348251385106\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>In the practice of breast surgery, positive margins are a troublesome pathologic finding associated with an increased risk of local recurrence and the recommendation of re-excision. For this reason, there is an emphasis placed on negative margins for breast surgeries. In this study, we analyze surgical resident involvement in breast cancer operations and associations with margin status.MethodsA retrospective study was completed of adult female patients who underwent a lumpectomy by a single surgeon. The surgeries were categorized by resident involvement in the surgical procedure. Other variables assessed were cancer type, grade, size, neoadjuvant chemotherapy use, and oncoplastic surgery. Variables were evaluated to determine what associated with a positive margin.ResultsWhen comparing cases with and without resident involvement, no statistically significant differences were noted in patient age (65.46 ± 1.76 years vs. 66.14 ± 9.31 years, <i>P</i> = .560), neoadjuvant therapy (11.8% vs. 8.0%, <i>P</i> =.273), and tumor size (12 mm vs. 13 mm, <i>P</i> =.871). The number of positive margins did not differ statistically whether a resident was involved or not (20.3% vs. 16.7%, <i>P</i> =.420). The only variable associated with increased positive margins was adenocarcinoma mixed with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) and pure DCIS, which was associated with the greatest proportions of positive margins.DiscussionUnlike some previous studies, our data reinforces it is safe to involve residents in breast conservation surgery. Specifically, program year did not significantly impact margin status. Thus, surgical training should continue to involve residents in breast surgery without fear of providing suboptimal care.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":7782,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"American Surgeon\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"31348251385106\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-10-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"American Surgeon\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/00031348251385106\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"SURGERY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Surgeon","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00031348251385106","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
在乳房手术实践中,切缘阳性是一个麻烦的病理发现,与局部复发的风险增加和再次切除的建议有关。出于这个原因,人们强调乳房手术的负边际。在这项研究中,我们分析外科住院医师参与乳腺癌手术和与边缘状态的关系。方法回顾性分析由同一位外科医生行乳房肿瘤切除术的成年女性患者。手术按住院医师参与手术过程进行分类。评估的其他变量包括癌症类型、分级、大小、新辅助化疗的使用和肿瘤整形手术。对变量进行评估,以确定与正边际相关的因素。结果住院患者与非住院患者在年龄(65.46±1.76岁vs 66.14±9.31岁,P = 0.560)、新辅助治疗(11.8% vs 8.0%, P = 0.273)、肿瘤大小(12 mm vs 13 mm, P = 0.871)方面差异无统计学意义。无论居民是否参与,阳性边缘的数量在统计学上没有差异(20.3%对16.7%,P = 0.420)。与阳性边缘增加相关的唯一变量是腺癌合并导管原位癌(DCIS)和单纯DCIS,它们与阳性边缘的比例最大相关。与以前的一些研究不同,我们的数据强调,让住院医生参与保乳手术是安全的。具体而言,项目年度对利润率状况没有显著影响。因此,外科培训应该继续让住院医师参与乳房手术,而不必担心提供不理想的护理。
Evaluation of Resident Participation on Specimen Margin Status in Patients Undergoing Lumpectomy.
In the practice of breast surgery, positive margins are a troublesome pathologic finding associated with an increased risk of local recurrence and the recommendation of re-excision. For this reason, there is an emphasis placed on negative margins for breast surgeries. In this study, we analyze surgical resident involvement in breast cancer operations and associations with margin status.MethodsA retrospective study was completed of adult female patients who underwent a lumpectomy by a single surgeon. The surgeries were categorized by resident involvement in the surgical procedure. Other variables assessed were cancer type, grade, size, neoadjuvant chemotherapy use, and oncoplastic surgery. Variables were evaluated to determine what associated with a positive margin.ResultsWhen comparing cases with and without resident involvement, no statistically significant differences were noted in patient age (65.46 ± 1.76 years vs. 66.14 ± 9.31 years, P = .560), neoadjuvant therapy (11.8% vs. 8.0%, P =.273), and tumor size (12 mm vs. 13 mm, P =.871). The number of positive margins did not differ statistically whether a resident was involved or not (20.3% vs. 16.7%, P =.420). The only variable associated with increased positive margins was adenocarcinoma mixed with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) and pure DCIS, which was associated with the greatest proportions of positive margins.DiscussionUnlike some previous studies, our data reinforces it is safe to involve residents in breast conservation surgery. Specifically, program year did not significantly impact margin status. Thus, surgical training should continue to involve residents in breast surgery without fear of providing suboptimal care.
期刊介绍:
The American Surgeon is a monthly peer-reviewed publication published by the Southeastern Surgical Congress. Its area of concentration is clinical general surgery, as defined by the content areas of the American Board of Surgery: alimentary tract (including bariatric surgery), abdomen and its contents, breast, skin and soft tissue, endocrine system, solid organ transplantation, pediatric surgery, surgical critical care, surgical oncology (including head and neck surgery), trauma and emergency surgery, and vascular surgery.