open access

Ahead of print
Review paper
Published online: 2021-06-17
Get Citation

Review of methods of intraoperative margin assessment in breast conserving surgery

Tomasz Sachańbiński, Barbara Radecka
DOI: 10.5603/NJO.a2021.0040

open access

Ahead of print
Review article
Published online: 2021-06-17

Abstract

Breast conserving therapy is the primary treatment modality in early-stage breast cancer patients. Despite the development of methods for the intraoperative assessment of tumor margins, still 20-30% of patients require re-resection due to postoperative tumor infiltration at the surgery margins. In recent years, many methods have been developed to reduce the number of re-resection due to margins infiltration. Here we review the current methods together with several more techniques being under investigation.

Abstract

Breast conserving therapy is the primary treatment modality in early-stage breast cancer patients. Despite the development of methods for the intraoperative assessment of tumor margins, still 20-30% of patients require re-resection due to postoperative tumor infiltration at the surgery margins. In recent years, many methods have been developed to reduce the number of re-resection due to margins infiltration. Here we review the current methods together with several more techniques being under investigation.

Get Citation

Keywords

breast conserving surgery; surgical margin; re-resection

About this article
Title

Review of methods of intraoperative margin assessment in breast conserving surgery

Journal

Nowotwory. Journal of Oncology

Issue

Ahead of print

Article type

Review paper

Published online

2021-06-17

DOI

10.5603/NJO.a2021.0040

Keywords

breast conserving surgery
surgical margin
re-resection

Authors

Tomasz Sachańbiński
Barbara Radecka

References (49)
  1. Jeziorski A, Rutkowski P, Wysocki W. Chirurgia onkologiczna t. 2. PZWL, Warszawa 2018: 820–821.
  2. Veronesi U, Cascinelli N, Mariani L, et al. Twenty-year follow-up of a randomized study comparing breast-conserving surgery with radical mastectomy for early breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2002; 347(16): 1227–1232.
  3. Houssami N, Macaskill P, Marinovich ML, et al. The association of surgical margins and local recurrence in women with early-stage invasive breast cancer treated with breast-conserving therapy: a meta-analysis. Ann Surg Oncol. 2014; 21(3): 717–730.
  4. Moran MS, Schnitt SJ, Giuliano AE, et al. Society of Surgical Oncology-American Society for Radiation Oncology consensus guideline on margins for breast-conserving surgery with whole-breast irradiation in stages I and II invasive breast cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2014; 88(3): 553–564.
  5. Morrow M, Van Zee KJ, Solin LJ, et al. Society of Surgical Oncology-American Society for Radiation Oncology-American Society of Clinical Oncology Consensus Guideline on Margins for Breast-Conserving Surgery with Whole-Breast Irradiation in Ductal Carcinoma In Situ. Ann Surg Oncol. 2016; 23(12): 3801–3810.
  6. Morrow M, Van Zee KJ, Solin LJ, et al. Society of Surgical Oncology, American Society for Radiation Oncology. Surgical margins in lumpectomy for breast cancer--bigger is not better. N Engl J Med. 2012; 367(1): 79–82.
  7. Bolger JC, Solon JG, Khan SA, et al. A comparison of intra-operative margin management techniques in breast-conserving surgery: a standardised approach reduces the likelihood of residual disease without increasing operative time. Breast Cancer. 2015; 22(3): 262–268.
  8. Dillon MF, Mc Dermott EW, O'Doherty A, et al. Factors affecting successful breast conservation for ductal carcinoma in situ. Ann Surg Oncol. 2007; 14(5): 1618–1628.
  9. Dunne C, Burke JP, Morrow M, et al. Effect of margin status on local recurrence after breast conservation and radiation therapy for ductal carcinoma in situ. J Clin Oncol. 2009; 27(10): 1615–1620.
  10. Balch G, Mithani S, Simpson J, et al. Accuracy of Intraoperative Gross Examination of Surgical Margin Status in Women Undergoing Partial Mastectomy for Breast Malignancy. The American Surgeon. 2005; 71(1): 22–28.
  11. Chagpar AB, Killelea BK, Tsangaris TN, et al. A Randomized, Controlled Trial of Cavity Shave Margins in Breast Cancer. N Engl J Med. 2015; 373(6): 503–510.
  12. Wang Ke, Ren Yu, He J. Cavity Shaving plus Lumpectomy versus Lumpectomy Alone for Patients with Breast Cancer Undergoing Breast-Conserving Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. PLoS One. 2017; 12(1): e0168705.
  13. CLEMENT Z. Should cavity shave margins be performed as a routine in breast conserving surgery? A review of randomised controlled trials. Int J Surg Med. 2017; 3(2): 1.
  14. Tang R, Coopey SB, Buckley JM, et al. Lumpectomy cavity shaved margins do not impact re-excision rates in breast cancer patients. Ann Surg Oncol. 2011; 18(11): 3036–3040.
  15. Esbona K, Li Z, Wilke LG. Intraoperative imprint cytology and frozen section pathology for margin assessment in breast conservation surgery: a systematic review. Ann Surg Oncol. 2012; 19(10): 3236–3245.
  16. Nowikiewicz T, Śrutek E, Głowacka-Mrotek I, et al. Clinical outcomes of an intraoperative surgical margin assessment using the fresh frozen section method in patients with invasive breast cancer undergoing breast-conserving surgery - a single center analysis. Sci Rep. 2019; 9(1): 13441.
  17. Riedl O, Fitzal F, Mader N, et al. Intraoperative frozen section analysis for breast-conserving therapy in 1016 patients with breast cancer. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2009; 35(3): 264–270.
  18. Martin DT, Sandoval S, Ta CN, et al. Quantitative automated image analysis system with automated debris filtering for the detection of breast carcinoma cells. Acta Cytol. 2011; 55(3): 271–280.
  19. Nowecki ZJ, Jeziorski A. Chirurgiczne leczenie zmian nowotworowych piersi Konsensus Polskiego Towarzystwa Chirurgii Onkologicznej. Onkol W Prakt Klin - Eduk. 2017; 3(3): 93–153.
  20. Layfield DM, May DJ, Cutress RI, et al. The effect of introducing an in-theatre intra-operative specimen radiography (IOSR) system on the management of palpable breast cancer within a single unit. Breast. 2012; 21(4): 459–463.
  21. Bimston DN, Bebb GG, Wagman LD. Is specimen mammography beneficial? Arch Surg. 2000; 135(9): 1083–6; discussion 1086.
  22. Britton PD, Sonoda LI, Yamamoto AK, et al. Breast surgical specimen radiographs: how reliable are they? Eur J Radiol. 2011; 79(2): 245–249.
  23. McCormick JT, Keleher AJ, Tikhomirov VB, et al. Analysis of the use of specimen mammography in breast conservation therapy. Am J Surg. 2004; 188(4): 433–436.
  24. Schulz-Wendtland R, Dilbat G, Bani MR, et al. Use of Tomosynthesis in Intraoperative Digital Specimen Radiography - Is a Reduction of Breast Re-excision Rates Possible? Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd. 2011; 71(12): 1080–1084.
  25. Amer HA, Schmitzberger F, Ingold-Heppner B, et al. Digital breast tomosynthesis versus full-field digital mammography-Which modality provides more accurate prediction of margin status in specimen radiography? Eur J Radiol. 2017; 93: 258–264.
  26. Chand JT, Sharma MM, Dharmarajan JP, et al. Digital Breast Tomosynthesis as a Tool in Confirming Negative Surgical Margins in Non-palpable Breast Lesions. Indian J Surg Oncol. 2019; 10(4): 624–628.
  27. Karanlik H, Ozgur I, Sahin D, et al. Intraoperative ultrasound reduces the need for re-excision in breast-conserving surgery. World J Surg Oncol. 2015; 13: 321.
  28. Ramos M, Díaz JC, Ramos T, et al. Ultrasound-guided excision combined with intraoperative assessment of gross macroscopic margins decreases the rate of reoperations for non-palpable invasive breast cancer. Breast. 2013; 22(4): 520–524.
  29. Mesurolle B, El-Khoury M, Hori D, et al. Sonography of postexcision specimens of nonpalpable breast lesions: value, limitations, and description of a method. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2006; 186(4): 1014–1024.
  30. Qiu SQ, Dorrius MD, de Jongh SJ, et al. Micro-computed tomography (micro-CT) for intraoperative surgical margin assessment of breast cancer: A feasibility study in breast conserving surgery. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2018; 44(11): 1708–1713.
  31. McClatchy DM, Zuurbier RA, Wells WA, et al. Micro-computed tomography enables rapid surgical margin assessment during breast conserving surgery (BCS): correlation of whole BCS micro-CT readings to final histopathology. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2018; 172(3): 587–595.
  32. Papa M, Allweis T, Karni T, et al. An intraoperative MRI system for margin assessment in breast conserving surgery: Initial results from a novel technique. J Surg Oncol. 2016; 114(1): 22–26.
  33. Dashevsky BZ, D'Alfonso T, Sutton EJ, et al. The Potential of High Resolution Magnetic Resonance Microscopy in the Pathologic Analysis of Resected Breast and Lymph Tissue. Sci Rep. 2015; 5: 17435.
  34. Thill M. MarginProbe: intraoperative margin assessment during breast conserving surgery by using radiofrequency spectroscopy. Expert Rev Med Devices. 2013; 10(3): 301–315.
  35. Schnabel F, Boolbol SK, Gittleman M, et al. A randomized prospective study of lumpectomy margin assessment with use of MarginProbe in patients with nonpalpable breast malignancies. Ann Surg Oncol. 2014; 21(5): 1589–1595.
  36. Dixon JM, Renshaw L, Young O, et al. Intra-operative assessment of excised breast tumour margins using ClearEdge imaging device. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2016; 42(12): 1834–1840.
  37. Rząca M, Orzechowski K, Wolny A, et al. Chirurgia raka gruczołu piersiowego wspomagana technikami dielektrycznymi. Biuletyn PTO NOWOTWORY. 2017; 2(2): 140–147.
  38. Nguyen FT, Zysk AM, Chaney EJ, et al. Intraoperative evaluation of breast tumor margins with optical coherence tomography. Cancer Res. 2009; 69(22): 8790–8796.
  39. Erickson-Bhatt SJ, Nolan RM, Shemonski ND, et al. Real-time Imaging of the Resection Bed Using a Handheld Probe to Reduce Incidence of Microscopic Positive Margins in Cancer Surgery. Cancer Res. 2015; 75(18): 3706–3712.
  40. Zysk AM, Chen K, Gabrielson E, et al. Intraoperative Assessment of Final Margins with a Handheld Optical Imaging Probe During Breast-Conserving Surgery May Reduce the Reoperation Rate: Results of a Multicenter Study. Ann Surg Oncol. 2015; 22(10): 3356–3362.
  41. Nyayapathi N, Xia J. Photoacoustic imaging of breast cancer: a mini review of system design and image features. J Biomed Opt. 2019; 24(12): 1–13.
  42. Tummers QR, Verbeek FPR, Schaafsma BE, et al. Real-time intraoperative detection of breast cancer using near-infrared fluorescence imaging and Methylene Blue. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2014; 40(7): 850–858.
  43. Lamberts LE, Koch M, de Jong JS, et al. Tumor-Specific Uptake of Fluorescent Bevacizumab-IRDye800CW Microdosing in Patients with Primary Breast Cancer: A Phase I Feasibility Study. Clin Cancer Res. 2017; 23(11): 2730–2741.
  44. Xie W, Chen Ye, Wang Yu, et al. Microscopy with ultraviolet surface excitation for wide-area pathology of breast surgical margins. J Biomed Opt. 2019; 24(2): 1–11.
  45. Goh Y, Balasundaram G, Moothanchery M, et al. Ultrasound Guided Optoacoustic Tomography in Assessment of Tumor Margins for Lumpectomies. Transl Oncol. 2020; 13(2): 254–261.
  46. St John ER, Balog J, McKenzie JS, et al. Rapid evaporative ionisation mass spectrometry of electrosurgical vapours for the identification of breast pathology: towards an intelligent knife for breast cancer surgery. Breast Cancer Res. 2017; 19(1): 59.
  47. John ESt, Rossi M, Balog J, et al. Real time intraoperative classification of breast tissue with the intelligent knife. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2016; 42(5): S25.
  48. Hall NC, Povoski SP, Murrey DA, et al. Combined approach of perioperative 18F-FDG PET/CT imaging and intraoperative 18F-FDG handheld gamma probe detection for tumor localization and verification of complete tumor resection in breast cancer. World J Surg Oncol. 2007; 5: 143.
  49. Dixon JM, Newlands C, Dodds C, et al. Association between underestimation of tumour size by imaging and incomplete excision in breast-conserving surgery for breast cancer. Br J Surg. 2016; 103(7): 830–838.

Important: This website uses cookies. More >>

The cookies allow us to identify your computer and find out details about your last visit. They remembering whether you've visited the site before, so that you remain logged in - or to help us work out how many new website visitors we get each month. Most internet browsers accept cookies automatically, but you can change the settings of your browser to erase cookies or prevent automatic acceptance if you prefer.

Wydawcą serwisu jest VM Media sp. z o.o. VM Group sp.k., ul. Świętokrzyska 73, 80–180 Gdańsk

tel.:+48 58 320 94 94, faks:+48 58 320 94 60, e-mail: viamedica@viamedica.pl