Literature DB >> 28210549

Evaluation of discrepancies in weights of fresh and fixed specimens in breast surgery: a retrospective cohort study.

Dinesh Thekkinkattil1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Handling of breast specimen is not well monitored and there is limited data on the impact of fixative solutions on specimen weights. Weight of resected breast tissue acts as a guide for future reconstructive and symmetrisation procedures. The aim is to quantitatively evaluate the discrepancies in weight of fresh breast specimen and the weight of specimen after being kept in a fixative solution for a variable length of time.
METHODS: Single centre retrospective cohort study including patients undergone breast surgery for both diagnostic and therapeutic purposes between January of 2013 and June 2015. Demographic details were collected from case notes, pathology reports and operation room management information system (ORMIS).
RESULTS: A total of 229 patients with a median age of 63 [interquartile range (IQR) 51-73] years were included. The median body mass index (BMI) was 27.9 (IQR 24.3-31.75) kg/m2. Median weight of the fresh specimens was 104 (IQR 44-535) g and that of fixed specimen was 99 (IQR 43-525) g (P value <0.05, Wilcoxon test). The variation was not unidirectional and factors which were important in influencing this variation were: inclusion of overlying skin and larger specimens (P value <0.05, Mann-Whitney U test). Age, BMI, duration of preservation in fixative solution and density of breast did not have significant influence.
CONCLUSIONS: Fixative solution does have significant influence on breast specimen weights. This is more pronounced with heavier specimens and those including overlying skin. It is advisable to measure the weight and volume of fresh breast specimen to aid future surgery with best aesthetic outcome.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Specimen weight; breast cancer; breast specimen; mammoplasty; oncoplastic breast surgery

Year:  2017        PMID: 28210549      PMCID: PMC5293641          DOI: 10.21037/gs.2016.09.10

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Gland Surg        ISSN: 2227-684X


  24 in total

1.  Mammographic determination of breast volume: comparing different methods.

Authors:  C L Kalbhen; J J McGill; P M Fendley; K W Corrigan; J Angelats
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  1999-12       Impact factor: 3.959

2.  Disparate surgical margin lengths of colorectal resection specimens between in vivo and in vitro measurements. The effects of surgical resection and formalin fixation on organ shrinkage.

Authors:  N S Goldstein; A Soman; J Sacksner
Journal:  Am J Clin Pathol       Date:  1999-03       Impact factor: 2.493

3.  Is breast specimen shrinkage really a problem in breast-conserving surgery?

Authors:  Nicole M A Krekel; Henk Jan van Slooten; Ellis Barbé; Elly S M de Lange de Klerk; Sybren Meijer; M Petrousjka van den Tol
Journal:  J Clin Pathol       Date:  2011-11-02       Impact factor: 3.411

4.  Effect of histologic preparation on the cross-sectional area of arterial rings.

Authors:  P B Dobrin
Journal:  J Surg Res       Date:  1996-03       Impact factor: 2.192

5.  Assessment of coronary heart disease morbidity and mortality after radiation therapy for early breast cancer.

Authors:  Katherine A Vallis; Melania Pintilie; Nelson Chong; Eric Holowaty; Pamela S Douglas; Peter Kirkbride; Andreas Wielgosz
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2002-02-15       Impact factor: 44.544

6.  The effect of tissue fixation and processing on breast cancer size.

Authors:  Bobbi Pritt; Joseph J Tessitore; Donald L Weaver; Hagen Blaszyk
Journal:  Hum Pathol       Date:  2005-07       Impact factor: 3.466

7.  Breast volume and anthropomorphic measurements: normal values.

Authors:  D J Smith; W E Palin; V L Katch; J E Bennett
Journal:  Plast Reconstr Surg       Date:  1986-09       Impact factor: 4.730

8.  Difference between actual vs. pathology prostate weight in TURP and radical robotic-assisted prostatectomy specimen.

Authors:  Szilveszter Lukacs; Justin Vale; Evangelos Mazaris
Journal:  Int Braz J Urol       Date:  2014 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 1.541

9.  Weight versus volume in breast surgery: an observational study.

Authors:  Chetan Parmar; Malcolm West; Samir Pathak; J Nelson; Lee Martin
Journal:  JRSM Short Rep       Date:  2011-11-15

10.  Magnetic resonance imaging-based volumetric analysis and its relationship to actual breast weight.

Authors:  Anna Yoo; Kyung Won Minn; Ung Sik Jin
Journal:  Arch Plast Surg       Date:  2013-05-16
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.