Literature DB >> 27034079

Additional Cavity Shaving at the Time of Breast-Conserving Surgery Enhances Accuracy of Margin Status Examination.

Giacomo Pata1, Michele Bartoli2, Anna Bianchi3, Mario Pasini3, Stefano Roncali3, Fulvio Ragni3.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: We addressed the impact of separate cavity margin excision (shaving) during breast-conserving surgery (BCS) for breast cancer on specimen volume, tumor margin clearance, re-excision rate, local recurrence and survival.
METHODS: A retrospective case-matched study was performed on 298 women with stage 0-III breast cancer; 179 patients received shaving (shaving + lumpectomy group; SLG) and 119 patients did not (lumpectomy group; LG).
RESULTS: The two groups had similar baseline characteristics. The median volume of surgical specimen was 131.9 cc in the SLG versus 134.8 cc in the LG (p = 0.81), and surgical margins were tumor-free in 90.7 % of cases in the LG versus 92.7 % in the SLG (87.1 % before shaving) (p = 0.69). The re-excision rate was 14.3 % in the LG versus 10.6 % in the SLG (p = 0.44). In the SLG, shaving spared 10 (5.6 %) patients from reoperation (positive lumpectomy margins but tumor-free shaving margins) (p = 0.11), and only 2/19 (10.5 %) patients in the SLG had tumor-free response at histological examination of re-excised margins compared with 10/17 (58.8 %) cases in the LG (p = 0.004). Tumor in shavings was found in 44/156 (28.2 %) patients having tumor-free lumpectomy margins. At multivariate analysis, distance of tumor from lumpectomy margins, tumor multifocality, receptor status, and tumor size were related to tumor persistence in shavings. Median follow-up was 27 months (range 23-35), and two patients had tumor relapse in the SLG versus none in the LG (p = 0.16). Overall survival was 100 % in both groups.
CONCLUSIONS: Shaving does not significantly decrease the re-excision rate but provides wider clear margins in most procedures. It ensures more accurate margin examination and decreases false-positive margin rate, without any increase in removed breast-tissue volume.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27034079     DOI: 10.1245/s10434-016-5210-7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol        ISSN: 1068-9265            Impact factor:   5.344


  5 in total

Review 1.  Surgical Management of Breast Cancer Treated with Neoadjuvant Therapy.

Authors:  Octavi Cordoba; Lourdes Carrillo-Guivernau; Carmen Reyero-Fernández
Journal:  Breast Care (Basel)       Date:  2018-07-25       Impact factor: 2.860

2.  Does cavity margin shaving reduce residual tumor and re-excision rates? A systematic review.

Authors:  M Fernandez-Pacheco; O Ortmann; A Ignatov; E C Inwald
Journal:  Arch Gynecol Obstet       Date:  2022-05-20       Impact factor: 2.344

3.  Letter to the Editor: The Impact of Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy on Margin Re-excision in Breast-Conserving Surgery.

Authors:  Dileep Ramesh Hoysal; Gaurav Agarwal
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2021-02-26       Impact factor: 3.352

Review 4.  Cavity Shaving plus Lumpectomy versus Lumpectomy Alone for Patients with Breast Cancer Undergoing Breast-Conserving Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Ke Wang; Yu Ren; Jianjun He
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-01-03       Impact factor: 3.240

5.  Reoperation rate after breast conserving surgery as quality indicator in breast cancer treatment: A reappraisal.

Authors:  Francesca Tamburelli; Furio Maggiorotto; Caterina Marchiò; Davide Balmativola; Alessandra Magistris; Franziska Kubatzki; Paola Sgandurra; Maria Rosaria Di Virgilio; Daniele Regge; Filippo Montemurro; Marco Gatti; Anna Sapino; Riccardo Ponzone
Journal:  Breast       Date:  2020-08-13       Impact factor: 4.380

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.