Caroline McGugin1, Tara Spivey1, Suzanne Coopey1, Barbara Smith1, Bridget Kelly1, Michele Gadd1, Kevin Hughes1, Brian Dontchos2, Michelle Specht3. 1. Department of Surgical Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, 55 Fruit Street, Yawkey 7, Boston, MA, 02114, USA. 2. Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, 55 Fruit Street, Boston, MA, 02114, USA. 3. Department of Surgical Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, 55 Fruit Street, Yawkey 7, Boston, MA, 02114, USA. mspecht@mgh.harvard.edu.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Radiofrequency identification (RFID) tag localization (TL) is a technique of localizing non-palpable breast lesions that can be performed prior to surgery. We sought to evaluate whether TL is comparable to wire localization (WL) in regard to specimen size, operative time, and re-excision rate. METHODS: A retrospective cohort analysis was performed on TL and WL excisional biopsies and lumpectomies performed by 5 surgeons at 2 institutions. Cases were stratified by surgery type and surgical indication. Associations between localization technique and specimen volume, operative time, and re-excision rate were assessed by univariate and multivariate analyses. RESULTS: A total of 503 procedures were included, 147 TL (29.2%) and 356 WL (70.8%). Nineteen (12.9%) RFID tags were placed before surgery, ranging 1-22 days. All intended targets were removed. TL and WL excisional biopsy and lumpectomy specimen volumes were similar (p = 0.560 and 0.494). TL and WL excisional biopsy and lumpectomy + SLNB operative times were similar (p = 0.152 and 0.158), but TL lumpectomies without SLNB took longer than WL (57 min vs 49 min; p = 0.027). Re-excision rates were similar by surgical procedure (p = 0.615), surgical indication (DCIS p = 0.145; invasive carcinoma p = 0.759), and confirmed by multivariable analysis (OR 0.754, 95% CI 0.392-1.450; p = 0.397). CONCLUSIONS: TL has similar surgical outcomes to WL with added benefit that TL can occur prior to the day of surgery. TL is an acceptable alternative to WL and should be considered for non-palpable breast lesions.
PURPOSE: Radiofrequency identification (RFID) tag localization (TL) is a technique of localizing non-palpable breast lesions that can be performed prior to surgery. We sought to evaluate whether TL is comparable to wire localization (WL) in regard to specimen size, operative time, and re-excision rate. METHODS: A retrospective cohort analysis was performed on TL and WL excisional biopsies and lumpectomies performed by 5 surgeons at 2 institutions. Cases were stratified by surgery type and surgical indication. Associations between localization technique and specimen volume, operative time, and re-excision rate were assessed by univariate and multivariate analyses. RESULTS: A total of 503 procedures were included, 147 TL (29.2%) and 356 WL (70.8%). Nineteen (12.9%) RFID tags were placed before surgery, ranging 1-22 days. All intended targets were removed. TL and WL excisional biopsy and lumpectomy specimen volumes were similar (p = 0.560 and 0.494). TL and WL excisional biopsy and lumpectomy + SLNB operative times were similar (p = 0.152 and 0.158), but TL lumpectomies without SLNB took longer than WL (57 min vs 49 min; p = 0.027). Re-excision rates were similar by surgical procedure (p = 0.615), surgical indication (DCIS p = 0.145; invasive carcinoma p = 0.759), and confirmed by multivariable analysis (OR 0.754, 95% CI 0.392-1.450; p = 0.397). CONCLUSIONS: TL has similar surgical outcomes to WL with added benefit that TL can occur prior to the day of surgery. TL is an acceptable alternative to WL and should be considered for non-palpable breast lesions.
Entities:
Keywords:
Non-palpable breast lesions; Tag localization; Wireless 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: 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: Maggie Banys-Paluchowski; Maria Luisa Gasparri; Jana de Boniface; Oreste Gentilini; Elmar Stickeler; Steffi Hartmann; Marc Thill; Isabel T Rubio; Rosa Di Micco; Eduard-Alexandru Bonci; Laura Niinikoski; Michalis Kontos; Guldeniz Karadeniz Cakmak; Michael Hauptmann; Florentia Peintinger; David Pinto; Zoltan Matrai; Dawid Murawa; Geeta Kadayaprath; Lukas Dostalek; Helidon Nina; Petr Krivorotko; Jean-Marc Classe; Ellen Schlichting; Matilda Appelgren; Peter Paluchowski; Christine Solbach; Jens-Uwe Blohmer; Thorsten Kühn Journal: Cancers (Basel) Date: 2021-03-29 Impact factor: 6.639