OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the safety and performance of localizing nonpalpable breast lesions using radiofrequency identification technology. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Twenty consecutive women requiring preoperative localization of a breast lesion were recruited. Subjects underwent placement of both a hook wire and a radiofrequency identification tag immediately before surgery. The radiofrequency identification tag was the primary method used by the operating surgeon to localize each lesion during excision, with the hook wire serving as backup in case of tag migration or failed localization. Successful localization with removal of the intended lesion was the primary outcome measured. Tag migration and postoperative infection were also noted to assess safety. RESULTS: Twenty patients underwent placement of a radiofrequency identification tag, 12 under ultrasound guidance and eight with stereotactic guidance. In all cases, the radiofrequency identification tag was successfully localized by the reader at the level of the skin before incision, and the intended lesion was removed along with the radiofrequency identification tag. There were no localization failures and no postoperative infections. Tag migration did not occur before incision, but in three cases, occurred as the lesion was being retracted with fingers to make the final cut along the deep surface of the specimen. CONCLUSION: In this initial clinical study, radiofrequency tags were safe and able to successfully localize nonpalpable breast lesions. Radiofrequency identification technology may represent an alternative method to hook wire localization.
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the safety and performance of localizing nonpalpable breast lesions using radiofrequency identification technology. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Twenty consecutive women requiring preoperative localization of a breast lesion were recruited. Subjects underwent placement of both a hook wire and a radiofrequency identification tag immediately before surgery. The radiofrequency identification tag was the primary method used by the operating surgeon to localize each lesion during excision, with the hook wire serving as backup in case of tag migration or failed localization. Successful localization with removal of the intended lesion was the primary outcome measured. Tag migration and postoperative infection were also noted to assess safety. RESULTS: Twenty patients underwent placement of a radiofrequency identification tag, 12 under ultrasound guidance and eight with stereotactic guidance. In all cases, the radiofrequency identification tag was successfully localized by the reader at the level of the skin before incision, and the intended lesion was removed along with the radiofrequency identification tag. There were no localization failures and no postoperative infections. Tag migration did not occur before incision, but in three cases, occurred as the lesion was being retracted with fingers to make the final cut along the deep surface of the specimen. CONCLUSION: In this initial clinical study, radiofrequency tags were safe and able to successfully localize nonpalpable breast lesions. Radiofrequency identification technology may represent an alternative method to hook wire localization.
Authors: Patrik Pöschke; Julius Emons; Felix Heindl; Rüdiger Schulz-Wendtland; Sebastian Jud; Ramona Erber; Carolin C Hack; Caroline Preuss; Annika Behrens Journal: In Vivo Date: 2022 Sep-Oct Impact factor: 2.406
Authors: Wolfram Malter; Johannes Holtschmidt; Fabinshy Thangarajah; Peter Mallmann; Barbara Krug; Mathias Warm; Christian Eichler Journal: In Vivo Date: 2019 Sep-Oct Impact factor: 2.155
Authors: Umar Wazir; Salim Tayeh; Nicholas Perry; Michael Michell; Anmol Malhotra; Kefah Mokbel Journal: In Vivo Date: 2020 Jan-Feb Impact factor: 2.155
Authors: Bianca M den Dekker; Anke Christenhusz; Thijs van Dalen; Lisa M Jongen; Margreet C van der Schaaf; Anneriet E Dassen; Ruud M Pijnappel Journal: BMC Cancer Date: 2022-03-22 Impact factor: 4.430
Authors: Lu Lan; Yan Xia; Rui Li; Kaiming Liu; Jieying Mai; Jennifer Anne Medley; Samilia Obeng-Gyasi; Linda K Han; Pu Wang; Ji-Xin Cheng Journal: Light Sci Appl Date: 2018-05-18 Impact factor: 17.782