Screening mammography

Radioguided occult lesion localization versus wire-guided localization for non-palpable breast lesions: randomized controlled trial

AIM

This prospective randomized clinical study was conducted to compare radioguided occult lesion localization (ROLL) with wire-guided localization to evaluate optimum localization techniques for non-palpable breast lesions.

METHODS

A total of 108 patients who were undergoing an excisional biopsy for non-palpable breast lesions requiring pathologic diagnosis were randomly assigned to the ROLL group (n = 56) and wire-guided localization group (n = 52). In the study, patients' characteristics, radiological abnormalities, radiological technique of localization, localization time, operation time, weight of the excised specimen, clearance margins, pathological diagnosis and perioperative complications were assessed.

RESULTS

There were no differences between the two groups in terms of age, radiological abnormalities and localization technique (p = non-significant for all). ROLL techniques resulted in 100% retrieval of the lesions; for the wire-guided localization technique, 98%. Both localization time and operation time were significantly reduced with the ROLL technique (p = significant for all). The weight of the specimen was significantly lower in the ROLL group than in the wire-guided localization group (p = significant). The overall complication rate and pathological diagnosis were similar for both groups (p = non-significant for all). Clear margins were achieved in 91% of ROLL patients and in 53% of wire-guided localization patients, and the difference was significant.

CONCLUSIONS

The present study indicated that the ROLL technique is as effective as wire-guided localization for the excision of non-palpable breast lesions. In addition, ROLL improved the outcomes by reducing localization and operation time, preventing healthy tissue excision and achieving clearer margins.

Occult Breast Lesion Localization plus Sentinel Node Biopsy (SNOLL): Experience with 959 Patients at the European Institute of Oncology

BACKGROUND

Non-palpable breast lesions are diagnosed frequently posing the problem of localization and removal. When such lesions are malignant, axillary node status must be determined. We report our experience using radio-guided occult lesion localization (ROLL) for locating and removing non-palpable breast lesions together with sentinel node biopsy (SNB) to assess axillary status. We call the technique SNOLL.

METHODS

From March 1997 to April 2004, 1046 consecutive patients presented suspicious non-palpable breast lesions and were programmed for conservative surgery and SNB. In 87 patients intraoperative histological examination revealed a benign lesion and SNB was not performed. The remaining 959 patients, with cytologically or histologically proven cancer, underwent SNOLL with immobile radiotracer injected under mammographic or ultrasound (US) guidance into the lesion, and subsequent injection of mobile tracer subdermally to localize the sentinel node (SN). Patients then underwent breast surgery and SNB.

RESULTS

Breast lesions were localized by ROLL in 99.6% of cases and were removed radically with negative margins in 91.9% of cases. Sentinel nodes were detected in all but one case. Intraoperative or definitive histological examination revealed 776 invasive/microinvasive carcinomas and 182 with in situ disease. Sentinel nodes were positive in 154 (19.8%) of 776 invasive/microinvasive cancers and in two with ductal intraepithelial neoplasia (1.1%).

CONCLUSIONS

In SNOLL the injection procedures are performed separately, but both lesion and SNs are removed together; axillary dissection is performed if the SN is positive, thus definitive treatment of malignant non-palpable lesions occurs in a single surgical session.

Delay in the diagnosis of breast cancer: medico-legal implications

Delay in the diagnosis of breast cancer is an important cause of medical malpractice claims which if trends continue, will threaten healthcare budgets. Most malpractice claims are made by younger women. Delay is most frequently due to the physician failing to be impressed with the clinical findings, or to a false negative mammogram report. Diagnosis of breast cancer is more difficult in younger women, because of the poor sensitivity of diagnostic tests and the high prevalence of benign disease in this age group. Models of tumour growth suggest that the potential to metastasize may be present before the tumour is clinically detectable and that if the growth rate of a given tumour is constant, any clinical delay is a small proportion of the lifespan of the tumour. Patient delay is generally associated with more advanced lesions at presentation, but the effect of delay on survival or what period of delay is significant remains uncertain. Delay in the diagnosis of breast cancer is likely to cause the patient considerable anxiety, especially when the public understands that the aim of mammographic screening is to diagnose breast cancer at an early stage in order to effect a cure. For a plaintiff to successfully claim in court she must prove that she has suffered an injury, and that the injury was the result of negligent medical practice. It is easier to defend a case of delay in diagnosis if the documentation is in order and all the appropriate tests have been performed.