The use of imaging tests to obtain optimal margins in breast surgery
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.15584/ejcem.2019.3.8Keywords:
breast conserving surgery, ductal carcinoma in situ, extensive itraductal component, invasive breast cancer, lobular carcinoma in situAbstract
Introduction. The proper negative margins (R0) breadth in the breast - conserving surgery for invasive breast cancer (IBC) and ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) is very important. The presence positive surgical margins (R1) is associated with the necessity of reoperation. It delays the adjuvant therapy and psychologically burdens the patient. The re-operation increases the costs of treatment. The introduction of mammography (MMG) increased detection of DCIS by 20%. With the increase in malignancy, cancer detection decreases in MMG, inversely in MRI groving. Effective preoperative and intraoperative diagnosis aims to reduce the number of R1 resections.
Aim. The size of the tumor next to its biology, determines the clinical course of the tumor. The accurate analysis of imaging tests is important.
Material and methods. This analysis was performed using a systematic literature search.
Results. Adequate surgical margins in breast cancer surgery for breast cancer have been reviewed. It is important to know if the cancer is multifocal and what the extent of the tumor is.
Conclusion. The adequacy of margins is important for adjusting the volume of excision. It is avoiding unnecessary resection of healthy breast tissue. It is essential for a good cosmetic result and the local recurrence rate. The combination of breast MRI with conventional breast imaging resulted in the lover rate of the R1 resectios and the lower rate of the re-operation.
Downloads
References
Shipp DW, Rakha EA, Koloydenko AA, Macmillan RD, Ellis IO. Intra-operative spectroscopic assessment of surgical margins during breast conserving surgery. Nottingham I. Breast Cancer Research:BCR. 2018;20:69.
Henderson SA, Muhammad Gowdh N, Purdie CA, et al. Breast cancer: influence of tumour volume estimation method at MRI on prediction of pathological response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Br J Radiol. 2018;91(1087):20180123.
van Leeuwen MT, Falster MO, Vajdic CM, et al. Reoperation after breast-conserving surgery for cancer in Australia: statewide cohort study of linked hospital data. BMJ Open. 2018; 8(4): e020858.
Sarin R, Somsekhar SP, Kumar R, et al. Practical consensus recommendations for tumor margins and breast conservative surgery. South Asian Journal of Cancer. 2018;7(2):72-78.
Fisher S, Yasui Y, Dabbs K, Winget M. Re-excision and survival following breast conserving surgery in early stage breast cancer patients: a population-based study. BMC Health Services Research. 2018;18:94.
Park S, Ahn SD, Choi EK, Kim SS. The effect of escalating the boost dose for patients with involved resection margin after breast-conserving surgery. Japanese Journal of Clinical Oncology. 2018;48(3):272-277.
Shin YD, Choi YJ, Kim DH, et al. Comparison of outcomes of surgeon-performed intraoperative ultrasonography-guided wire localization and preoperative wire localization in nonpalpable breast cancer patients undergoing breast-conserving surgery: A retrospective cohort study. Medicine. 2017;15;96(50):e9340.
Volders JH, Negenborn VL, Spronk PE, et al. Breast-conserving surgery following neoadjuvant therapy-a systematic review on surgical outcomes. IT, van den Tol MP. Breast Cancer Research and Treatment. 2017;168(1):1-12.
Morrow M, Abrahamse P, Hofer TP, et al. Trends in Reoperation After Initial Lumpectomy for Breast Cancer: Addressing Overtreatment inSurgical Management. JAMA Oncology. 2017; 3(10): 1352-1357.
Campbell EJ, Romics L. Oncological safety and cosmetic outcomes in oncoplastic breast conservation surgery, a review of the best level of evidence literature. Breast Cancer : Targets and Therapy. 2017;9:521-530.
Ko S, Chun YK, Kang SS, Hur MH. The Usefulness of Intraoperative Circumferential Frozen-Section Analysis of Lumpectomy Margins in Breast-Conserving Surgery. Journal of Breast Cancer. 2017;20(2):176-182.
St John ER, Balog J, McKenzie JS, et al. Rapid evaporative ionisation mass spectrometry of electrosurgical vapours for the identification of breast pathology: towards an intelligent knife for breast cancer surgery. Breast Cancer Research: BCR. 2017;23,19: 59.
Qi X, Chen A, Zhang P, Zhang W, Cao X, Xiao C. Mammographic calcification can predict outcome in women with breast cancer treated with breast-conserving surgery. Oncology Letters. 2017;14(1):79-88.
Langhans L, Jensen MB, Talman ML, Vejborg I, Kroman N, Tvedskov TF. Reoperation Rates in Ductal Carcinoma In Situ vs Invasive Breast Cancer After Wire-Guided Breast-Conserving Surgery. JAMA surgery. 2017;152(4):378-384.
Yoon TI, Lee JW, Lee SB, et al. No Association of Positive Superficial and/or Deep Margins with Local Recurrence in Invasive Breast Cancer Treated with Breast-Conserving Surgery. Cancer Research and Treatment: Official Journal of Korean Cancer Association. 2017;50(1):275-282.
Yu J, Elmore LC, Cyr AE, Aft RL, Gillanders WE, Margenthaler JA. Cost Analysis of a Surgical Consensus Guideline in Breast-Conserving Surgery. Journal of the American College of Surgeons. 2017;225(2):294-301.
Vos EL, Siesling S, Baaijens MH, et al. Omitting re-excision for focally positive margins after breast-conserving surgery does not impair disease-free and overall survival. Breast Cancer Research and Treatment. 2017;164(1):157-167.
Carrara GF, Scapulatempo-Neto C, AbrahĂŁo-Machado LF, Brentani MM, Nunes JS, Folgueira MA, da Costa Vieira RA. Breast-conserving surgery in locally advanced breast cancer submitted to neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Safety and effectiveness based on ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence and long-term follow-up. Clinics. 2017;72(3):134-142.
Wu S, Zhu Y, Yang Z, et al. Low rate of positive margins and re-excision after partial mastectomy in highly selected breast cancer patients: A Chinese single-institution experience. Oncotarget. 2017;8(7):12225-12233.
Barrio AV, Van Zee KJ. Controversies in the Treatment of DCIS. Annual review of medicine. 2017;68:197-211.
Wang K, Ren Y, He J. Cavity Shaving plus Lumpectomy versus Lumpectomy Alone for Patients with Breast Cancer Undergoing Breast-Conserving Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. PLoS ONE. 2017;12(1): e0168705.
Chagpar AB, Horowitz NR, Killelea BK, et al. Economic Impact of Routine Cavity Margins Versus Standard Partial Mastectomy in Breast Cancer Patients: Results of a Randomized Controlled Trial. Annals of surgery. 2017;265(1):39-44.
Mota BS, Riera R, DesidĂrio Ricci M, Barrett J, de Castria TB, Atallah ĂN, Bevilacqua JL. Nipple- and areola-sparing mastectomy for the treatment of breast cancer. The Cochrane database of systematic reviews. 2016;29;11:CD008932.
Pataky RE, Baliski CR. Reoperation costs in attempted breast-conserving surgery: a decision analysis. Current Oncology. 2016;23(5):314-321.
Liu J, Guo W, Tong M. Intraoperative indocyanine green fluorescence guidance for excision of nonpalpable breast cancer. World Journal of Surgical Oncology. 2016;14:266.
van Deurzen CH. Predictors of Surgical Margin Following Breast-Conserving Surgery: A Large Population-Based Cohort Study. Annals of Surgical Oncology. 2016;2,23(5):627-633.
Morrow M, Solin LJ, Houssami N. The Association of Surgical Margins and Local Recurrence in Women with Ductal Carcinoma In Situ Treated with Breast-Conserving Therapy: A Meta-Analysis. Annals of surgical oncology. 2016;23(12):3811-3821.
Morrow M, Van Zee KJ, Solin LJ, et al. Society of Surgical Oncology–American Society for Radiation Oncology–American Society of Clinical Oncology Consensus Guideline on Margins for Breast-Conserving Surgery With Whole-Breast Irradiation in Ductal Carcinoma In Situ. Journal of Clinical Oncology. 2016; 34(33):4040-4046.
Maishman T, Cutress RI, Hernandez A, et al. Local Recurrence and Breast Oncological Surgery in Young Women With Breast Cancer: The POSH Observational Cohort Study. Annals of Surgery. 2016;266(1):165-172.
Rosenberger LH, Mamtani A, Fuzesi S, et al. Early option of the SSO-ASTRO Consensus Guidelines on Margins for Breast-Conserving Surgery with Whole-Breast Irradiation in Stage I and II Invasive Breast Cancer: Initial Experience from Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center. Annals of surgical oncology. 2016;23(10):3239-3246.
Lai HW, Chen CJ, Lin YJ, et al. Does Breast Magnetic Resonance Imaging Combined With Conventional Imaging Modalities Decrease the Rates of Surgical Margin Involvement and Reoperation?: A Caseas Control Comparative Analysis. Medicine. 2016;95(22): e3810.
Barrio AV, Morrow M. Appropriate margin for lumpectomy excision of invasive breast cancer. Chinese clinical oncology. 2016;5(3):35.
Dryden MJ, Dogan BE, Fox P, et al. Imaging Factors That Influence Surgical Margins After Preoperative 125I adioactive Seed Localization of Breast Lesions: Comparison With Wire Localization. AJR. American journal of roentgenology. 2016; 206(5):1112-1118.
Lo WC, Li W, Jones EF, et al. Effect of maging Parameter Thresholds on MRI Prediction of Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy Response in Breast Cancer Subtypes. PLoS One. 2016;11(2):e0142047.
Volders JH, Haloua MH, Krekel NM, Meijer S, van den Tol PM. Current status of ultrasound-guided surgery in the treatment of breast cancer. World Journal of Clinical Oncology. 2016;7(1):44-53.
Franceschini G, Sanchez am, Di leone A, Magno S, Moschella F, Accetta C, Masetti . New trends in breast cancer surgery: a therapeutic approach increasingly efficacy and respectful of the patient. R. Il Giornale di Chirurgia. 2015;36(4):145-152.
Karanlik H, Ozgur I, Sahin D, Fayda M, Onder S, Yavuz E. Intraoperative ultrasound reduces the need for re-excision in breast-conserving surgery. World Journal of Surgical Oncology. 2015;13:321.
Haloua MH, Volders JH, Krekel NM, Lopes Cardozo AM, de Roos WK, de Widt-Levert. Intraoperative Ultrasound Guidance in Breast-Conserving Surgery Improves Cosmetic Outcomes and Patient Satisfaction: Results of a Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial (COBALT). Annals of Surgical Oncology. 2015;23:30-37.
Chen K, Liu J, Zhu L, Su F, Song E, Jacobs LK. Comparative effectiveness study of breast-conserving surgery and mastectomy in the general population: A NCDB analysis. Oncotarget. 2015; 6(37):40127-40140.
Van Zee KJ, Subhedar P, Olcese C, Patil S, Morrow M. Relationship Between Margin Width and accurrence of Ductal Carcinoma In Situ: Analysis of 2996 Women Treated With Breast-conserving Surgery for 30 Years. Annals of surgery. 2015; 262(4):623-631.
Shah C, Vicini FA, Berry S, et al. Ductal Carcinoma in Situ of the Breast: Evaluating the Role of Radiation Therapy in the Management and Attempts to Identify Low-Risk
Landercasper J, Attai D, Atisha D, et al. Toolbox to Reduce Lumpectomy Reoperations and Improve Cosmetic Outcome in Breast Cancer Patients: The American Society of Breast Surgeons Consensus Conference. Annals of Surgical Oncology. 2015;22:3174-3183.
Zysk AM, Chen K, Gabrielson E, et al. Intraoperative Assessment of Final Margins with Handheld Optical Imaging Probe During Breast- Conserving Surgery May Reduce the Reoperation Rate: Results of a Multicenter Study. Annals of surgical oncology. 2015;23, 22(10): 3356-3362.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2019 European Journal of Clinical and Experimental Medicine
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Our open access policy is in accordance with the Budapest Open Access Initiative (BOAI) definition: this means that articles have free availability on the public Internet, permitting any users to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of these articles, crawl them for indexing, pass them as data to software, or use them for any other lawful purpose, without financial, legal, or technical barriers other than those inseparable from having access to the Internet itself.
All articles are published with free open access under the CC-BY Creative Commons attribution license (the current version is CC-BY, version 4.0). If you submit your paper for publication by the Eur J Clin Exp Med, you agree to have the CC-BY license applied to your work. Under this Open Access license, you, as the author, agree that anyone may download and read the paper for free. In addition, the article may be reused and quoted provided that the original published version is cited. This facilitates freedom in re-use and also ensures that Eur J Clin Exp Med content can be mined without barriers for the research needs.
