Literature DB >> 26439275

Ultrasound-Guided Versus Wire-Guided Breast-Conserving Surgery for Nonpalpable Breast Cancer.

Holm Eggemann1, Serban Dan Costa1, Atanas Ignatov2.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To determine the efficacy of ultrasound (US)-guided excision of nonpalpable breast cancer and compare it to standard wire-guided breast-conserving surgery (BCS).
METHODS: One hundred fifty-eight women with nonpalpable breast cancer who underwent BCS were retrospectively studied. Positive surgical margins and reexcision rates were investigated.
RESULTS: Of the total cohort, 68 patients were treated with wire-guided and 90 with US-guided tumor excision. The tumor and patient characteristics were similar in the 2 groups; 13.2% and 12.2% of patients in the wire-guided and US-guided groups, respectively, had positive margins. Patient age, menopausal status, tumor size, histologic type, and histologic grade were associated with increased risk of positive margins. The shave margins were reexcised at the time of original operation more often by wire-guided localization (26.5%) than in the US-guided group (10.0%) (P = .010). The surgeon was able to identify correctly the problematic margin in 100% via intraoperative US and in only 27.8% when the wire-guided surgery was used (P < .001). The reexcision rate by a second operation was similar in 2 groups (P = .798). Eight (11.8%) of 68 patients in the wire-guided group and 9 (10.0%) of 90 patients in the US-guided underwent a second operation.
CONCLUSION: US-guided BCS is as effective and safe as standard wire-guided excision of nonpalpable breast tumors.
Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Breast cancer; Breast-conserving surgery; Non-palpable; Tumor; Ultrasound

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26439275     DOI: 10.1016/j.clbc.2015.09.001

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Breast Cancer        ISSN: 1526-8209            Impact factor:   3.225


  4 in total

1.  Utilization of iron (III)-doped nanoshells for in vivo marking of nonpalpable tumors using a VX2 rabbit model.

Authors:  Erin P Ward; James Wang; Natalie Mendez; Jian Yang; Chris Barback; Jessica Wang-Rodriguez; William Trogler; Andrew C Kummel; Sarah Blair
Journal:  Am J Surg       Date:  2016-09-30       Impact factor: 2.565

2.  Clinical Value of Ultrasound-Guided Minimally Invasive Biopsy in the Diagnosis or Treatment of Breast Nodules.

Authors:  Yan-Hong Gao; Shi-Cong Zhu; Ya Xu; Shun-Ji Gao; Yu Zhang; Qun-An Huang; Wen-Hong Gao; Jian Zhu; Hui-Juan Xiang; Xu-Hui Gao
Journal:  Cancer Manag Res       Date:  2020-12-23       Impact factor: 3.989

3.  Breast-conserving surgery with 3D-printed surgical guide: a single-center, prospective clinical study.

Authors:  Zhen-Yu Wu; Hee Jeong Kim; Jongwon Lee; Il Yong Chung; Jisun Kim; Saebyeol Lee; Byung Ho Son; Sei-Hyun Ahn; Hak Hee Kim; Joon Beom Seo; Jae Ho Jeong; Gyungyub Gong; Namkug Kim; BeomSeok Ko
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-01-26       Impact factor: 4.379

4.  Minimally invasive breast cancer excision using the breast lesion excision system under ultrasound guidance.

Authors:  W B G Sanderink; L J A Strobbe; P Bult; M S Schlooz-Vries; S Lardenoije; D J Venderink; I Sechopoulos; N Karssemeijer; W Vreuls; R M Mann
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2020-08-01       Impact factor: 4.872

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.