A comparison of two non-radioactive alternatives to wire for the localization of non-palpable breast cancers

An exploratory clinical trial of preoperative non-invasive localization before breast-conserving surgery using augmented reality technology

PURPOSE

This single-center, randomized, prospective, exploratory clinical trial was conducted to assess the clinical efficacy of an augmented reality (AR)-based breast cancer localization imaging solution for patients with breast cancer.

METHODS

This clinical trial enrolled 20 women who were diagnosed with invasive breast cancer between the ages of 19 and 80, had a single lesion with a diameter ≥ 5 mm but ≤ 30 mm, had no metastases to other organs, and had not received prior chemotherapy. All patients underwent mammography, ultrasound, computed tomography, and magnetic resonance imaging for preoperative assessment. Patients were randomly assigned to ultrasound-guided skin marking localization (USL) and AR-based localization (ARL) groups (n = 10 in each group). Statistical comparisons between USL and ARL groups were made based on demographics, radiologic features, pathological outcomes, and surgical outcomes using chi-square and Student t-tests.

RESULTS

Two surgeons performed breast-conserving surgery on 20 patients. Histopathologic evaluation of all patients confirmed negative margins. Two independent pathologists evaluated the marginal distances, and there were no intergroup differences in the readers' estimates (R1, 6.20 ± 4.37 vs. 5.04 ± 3.47, P = 0.519; R2, 5.10 ± 4.31 vs. 4.10 ± 2.38, P = 0.970) or the readers' average values (5.65 ± 4.19 vs. 4.57 ± 2.84, P = 0.509). In comparing the tumor plane area ratio, there was no statistically significant difference between the two groups in terms of either reader's mean values (R1, 15.90 ± 9.52 vs. 19.38 ± 14.05, P = 0.525; R2, 15.32 ± 9.48 vs. 20.83 ± 12.85, P = 0.290) or the overall mean values of two readers combined (15.56 ± 9.11 vs. 20.09 ± 13.38, P = 0.388). Convenience, safety, satisfaction, and reusability were all superior in the AR localization group (P < 0.001) based on the two surgeons' responses.

CONCLUSION

AR localization is an acceptable alternative to ultrasound-guided skin marking with no significant differences in surgical outcomes.

Evaluation of the SmartClip™ Nonradioactive Seed, a Novel Wireless Localization Method for the Breast: Initial Clinical Experience and Surgical Outcome

INTRODUCTION

Wire localization has been the gold standard for breast localization of non-palpable lesions for decades. This technique remains robust but has disadvantages relative to scheduling, complications of vasovagal reactions in placement, wire migration, or transection. With more modern technologies available, several implantable markers have been developed to allow uncoupling of localization by radiology and the surgical procedure on the same day. This study summarizes our experience with the EnVisio Navigation System™ utilizing SmartClip™ as the implantable tissue localization marker.

METHODS

An IRB-approved retrospective database of benign and malignant breast disease was used to perform a review of 100 consecutive patients who underwent SmartClip™ localized breast and axillary procedures in 2021. Demographic information, localization accuracy, associated surgical procedure(s) with resultant pathology findings, margin status for malignancies, and re-excision rate were collected.

RESULTS

The localized breast lesion or lymph node was excised and SmartClip™ retrieved in all cases, confirmed by intraoperative specimen radiograph. The distribution of gender and race/ethnicity among the patients who underwent surgery reflects the community population and frequency of breast cancer development among men versus women. 45.1% of the cases involved malignancy, as determined pre-operatively. Positive margins requiring re-excision constituted 18.2% of cases. In twenty-six patients, two or three SmartClips™ were placed per case for either a bracketed lesion, two separate breast lesions, and/or a breast lesion and lymph node.

CONCLUSION

Although this study is limited in patient number, it demonstrates safety of this technique and its reliability in guiding the surgeon directly to the lesion(s) of concern.

Systematic review of targeted axillary dissection in node-positive breast cancer treated with neoadjuvant systemic therapy: variation in type of marker and timing of placement

BACKGROUND

In node-positive (cN+) breast cancer treated with neoadjuvant systemic therapy, combining sentinel lymph node biopsy and targeted lymph node excision, that is targeted axillary dissection, increases accuracy. Targeted axillary dissection procedures differ in terms of the targeted lymph node excision technique. This systematic review aimed to provide an overview of targeted axillary dissection procedures regarding definitive marker type and timing of placement: before neoadjuvant systemic therapy (1-step procedure) or after neoadjuvant systemic therapy adjacent to a clip placed before the neoadjuvant therapy (2-step procedure).

METHODS

PubMed and Embase were searched, to 4 July 2023, for RCTs, cohort studies, and case-control studies with at least 25 patients. Studies of targeted lymph node excision only (without sentinel lymph node biopsy), or where intraoperative localization of the targeted lymph node was not attempted, were excluded. For qualitative synthesis, studies were grouped by definitive marker and timing of placement. The targeted lymph node identification rate was reported. Study quality was assessed using a National Institutes of Health quality assessment tool.

RESULTS

Of 277 unique records, 51 studies with a total of 4512 patients were included. Six definitive markers were identified: wire, 125I-labelled seed, 99mTc, (electro)magnetic/radiofrequency markers, black ink, and a clip. Fifteen studies evaluated one-step procedures, with the identification rate of the targeted lymph node at surgery varying from 8 of 13 to 47 of 47. Forty-one studies evaluated two-step procedures, with the identification rate of the clipped targeted lymph node on imaging after neoadjuvant systemic therapy varying from 49 to 100%, and the identification rate of the targeted lymph node at surgery from 17 of 24 to 100%. Most studies (40 of 51) were rated as being of fair quality.

CONCLUSION

Various targeted axillary dissection procedures are used in clinical practice. Owing to study heterogeneity, the optimal targeted lymph node excision technique in terms of identification rate and feasibility could not be determined. Two-step procedures are at risk of not identifying the clipped targeted lymph node on imaging after neoadjuvant systemic therapy.

Surgeon and Radiologist Evaluation of Electromagnetic Chip Localization for Benign and Malignant Breast Lesions

BACKGROUND

SmartClipTM is a food and drug administration-approved, electromagnetic chip (EMC) localization system that provides three-dimensional navigation for the excision of soft tissue lesions. The purpose of this study was to analyze the accuracy and feasibility of EMC radiologic and surgical localization for benign and malignant breast lesions.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

An institutional review board-approved, single institution, prospective study from October 2020 to September 2022 of 38 women undergoing breast conserving surgery with EMC localization of a single lesion > 5 mm on mammogram (MMG) or ultrasound (US) imaging. Surveys from performing breast radiologists and breast surgeons were collected after image-guided localization and surgical excision.

RESULTS

Seventy-six survey responses from nine radiologists and four surgeons were received. The deployment needle and EMC were highly visible in 86.8% and 76.3% of procedures, respectively. There was no difficulty in deployment for 92.1% of procedures. The EMC was in the correct location on postdeployment MMG in 97.4% of cases. Three instances of EMC migration occurred, one 1 cm from target lesion. The targeted mass and EMC were within the surgical specimen in 97.4% of cases. On specimen radiograph, 39.5% of the EMCs were 0-1 mm from the center of the target lesion, 18.4% were within 2-4 mm, and 23.7% were within 5-10 mm. Mean operating room time for all cases was 65 min. One case required US to localize the target due to console malfunction.

CONCLUSION

There was successful EMC deployment by radiologists with accurate visualization and successful surgical excision in most cases. The EnVisioTM SmartClipTM system is a reproducible and accurate localization method for benign and malignant breast lesions.

Advanced Localization Technique for Non-Palpable Breast Cancer: Radiofrequency alone VS Combined Technique with Ultrasound

Breast conservative surgery is the primary therapeutic choice for non-aggressive early breast cancers, and a minimally-invasive approach is strongly recommended. The breast localization represents a modern challenge for surgery. Wire-guided localization is still the gold standard technique, but new wireless systems have been proposed, such as radiofrequency identification with LOCalizerTM (Hologic, Santa Carla, CA, USA), which reports encouraging results. The current study aimed to evaluate the accuracy and efficacy of the combined use of LOCalizerTM and ultrasound compared with the results obtained using LOCalizerTM alone for the detection of non-palpable breast cancer. Ninety-six patients who were candidates for breast localization were enrolled. Group A received a combined localization with LOCalizerTM and US, while group B underwent only LOCalizerTM identification. Oncological radicality was reached in 100% of the patients in Group A and in 89.2% of the patients in Group B, with p = 0.006. The mean specimens' volume was 13.2 ± 0.6 cm3 for Group A and 16.1 ± 1.4 cm3 for Group B, while mean specimen weights were 21.8 ± 2.2 and 24.4 ± 1.8 g, respectively (p = 0.003 and p = 0.004, respectively). LOCalizerTM with ultrasound, in the current series, has resulted in the preferred option for the localization of non-palpable breast cancer, allowing limited resection (in weight and volume), guaranteeing excellent oncological outcomes, and great satisfaction for patients and physicians.

The Impact of an Electromagnetic Seed Localization Device Versus Wire Localization on Breast-Conserving Surgery: A Matched-Pair Analysis

BACKGROUND

For breast-conserving surgery (BCS), several alternatives to wire localization (WL) have been developed. The newest, electromagnetic seed localization (ESL), provides three-dimensional navigation using the electrosurgical tool. This study assessed operative times, specimen volumes, margin positivity, and re-excision rates for ESL and WL.

METHODS

Patients who had ESL-guided breast-conserving surgery between August 2020 and August 2021 were reviewed and matched one-to-one with patients who had WL based on surgeon, procedure type, and pathology. Variables were compared between ESL and WL using Wilcoxon rank-sum and Fisher's exact tests.

RESULTS

The study matched 97 patients who underwent excisional biopsy (n = 20) or partial mastectomy with (n = 53) or without (n = 24) sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) using ESL. The median operative time for ESL versus WL for lumpectomy was 66 versus 69 min with SLNB (p = 0.76) and 40 versus 34.5 min without SLNB (p = 0.17). The median specimen volume was 36 cm3 using ESL versus 55 cm3 using WL (p = 0.001). For the patients with measurable tumor volume, excess tissue was greater using WL versus ESL (median, 73.2 vs. 52.5 cm3; p = 0.017). The margins were positive for 10 (10 %) of the 97 ESL patients and 18 (19 %) of the 97 WL patients (p = 0.17). In the ESL group, 6 (6 %) of the 97 patients had a subsequent re-excision compared with 13 (13 %) of the 97 WL patients (p = 0.15).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite similar operative times, ESL is superior to WL, as evidenced by decreased specimen volume and excess tissue excised. Although the difference was not statistically significant, ESL resulted in fewer positive margins and re-excisions than WL. Further studies are needed to confirm that ESL is the most advantageous of the two methods.

Comparison of 3 Different Systems for Non-wire Localization of Lesions in Breast Cancer Surgery

PURPOSE

Localizing breast lesions by marking tumors and their detection using probes during surgery is a common part of clinical practice. Various nonwire localization systems were intended to be compared from different perspectives.

METHODS

Various measurement experiments were performed. Localization techniques, including radioactive seed (RSLS), magnetically guided (MGLS), or radar (SLS), were compared in signal propagation in water and tissue environments, signal interference by surgical instruments, and the practical experience of surgeons. Individual experiments were thoroughly prospectively planned.

RESULTS

The RSLS signal was detectable at the largest evaluated distance, ie, 60 mm. The SLS and MGLS signal detection was shorter, up to 25 mm to 45 mm and 30 mm, respectively. The signal intensity and the maximum detection distance in water differed slightly depending on the localization marker orientation to the probe, especially for SLS and MGLS. Signal propagation in the tissue was noted to a depth of 60 mm for RSLS, 50 mm for SLS, and 20 mm for MGLS. Except for the expected signal interferences by approaching surgical instruments from any direction for MGLS, the signal interruption for RSLS and SLS was observed only by inserting instruments directly between the localization marker and probe. Moreover, the SLS signal interference by instrument touch was noted. Based on surgeons' results, individual systems did not differ significantly for most measurement condition settings.

CONCLUSION

Apparent differences noted among localization systems can help experts choose an appropriate system for a specific situation or reveal small nuances that have not yet been observed in clinical practice.

Radio-frequency identification (RFID) tag localisation of non-palpable breast lesions a single centre experience

AIM

The purpose of this study is to report the surgical experience and outcomes with pre-operative localisation of non-palpable breast lesions using the RFID tag system.

METHODS

The cohort for this prospective study included patients over the age of 18 with biopsy proven, non-palpable indeterminate lesions, DCIS or breast cancer requiring pre-operative localisation before surgical excision between September 2020 and July 2022.

RESULTS

A total of 312 RFID tags were placed in 299 consecutive patients. Indications for localisation included non-palpable invasive cancer in 255 (85.3%) patients, in situ disease in 38 (12.7%) and indeterminate lesions requiring surgical excision in 6 (2.0%). Both in situ and invasive lesions had a median size of 13 mm (range 4-100 mm) on pre-operative imaging. The RFID tags were in situ for a median time of 21 days before surgery (range 0-233 days). Of the 213 tags, 292 (93.6%) were introduced using ultrasound (USS) guidance and stereotactically in 20 (6.4%). In 3 (1.0%) cases the RFID tag was either not satisfactorily deployed at the intended target or retrieved intra-operatively. Following discussion of post-operative histology by the multi-disciplinary team, further surgery for close or involved margins was for 26 (8.7%) patients.

CONCLUSION

The Hologic RFID tag system can be used for accurate pre-operative localisation of non-palpable masses as well as diffuse abnormalities such as mammographic distortions and calcifications. It has advantages of flexibility for scheduling image-guided insertion independently of scheduled operating lists and can be placed to localise lesions prior to initiating neoadjuvant systemic treatment.

Fluoroscopic Intraoperative Breast Neoplasm and Node Detection

BACKGROUND

Preoperative localization is necessary for nonpalpable breast lesions. A novel procedure, fluoroscopic intraoperative neoplasm and node detection (FIND), obviates the preoperative painful and potentially expensive localization by using intraoperative visualization of the standard clip placed during diagnostic biopsy. We hypothesized FIND would improve negative margin rates.

STUDY DESIGN

This is an IRB-approved retrospective study (September 2016 to March 2021). Electronic chart review identified breast and axillary node procedures using wire localization (WL) or FIND. Primary outcome was margin status. Secondary outcomes included re-excision rate, specimen weight, surgery time, and axillary node localization rate.

RESULTS

We identified 459 patients, of whom 116 (25.3%) underwent FIND and 343 (74.7%) WL. Of these, 68.1% of FIND and 72.0% of WL procedures were for malignant lesions. Final margin positivity was 5.1% (4 of 79) for FIND and 16.6% (41 of 247) for WL (p = 0.008). This difference lost statistical significance on multivariable logistic regression (p = 0.652). Re-excision rates were 7.6% and 14.6% for FIND and WL (p = 0.125), with an equivalent mean specimen weight (p = 0.502), and mean surgery time of 177.5 ± 81.7 and 157.1 ± 66.8 minutes, respectively (mean ± SD; p = 0.022). FIND identified all (29 of 29) targeted axillary nodes, and WL identified only 80.1% (21 of 26) (p = 0.019).

CONCLUSIONS

FIND has lower positive margin rates and a trend towards lower re-excision rates compared with WL, proving its value in localizing nonpalpable breast lesions. It also offers accurate localization of axillary nodes, valuable in the era of targeted axillary dissection. It is a method of visual localization, using a skill and equipment surgeons already have, and saves patients and medical systems an additional schedule-disruptive, painful procedure, especially valuable when using novel localization devices is cost-prohibitive.

Radiofrequency Identification—RFID using LOCalizer-Tag in Non-palpable Breast Lump

For many years, wire-guided localization represented the gold standard method for the detection of non-palpable breast lesions, despite the acknowledged limitations. LOCalizer™ is the most recent and promising radiofrequency identification system, characterized by the capability of measuring the distance from the tagged lesion in millimeters and the association of each marker with a unique code. A 45-year-old woman with two lesions suspected of cancer in the same breast was referred to our department. She underwent double localization with LOCalizer™ (Hologic, Santa Carla, CA, USA) of the lumps into opposite quadrants. We performed a mini-invasive and oncologically safe surgical excision through a tunneling approach after a peri-areolar incision. The surgical technique realized with Localizer™ could be an effective method for locating multiple non-palpable breast lesions and is able to offer excellent oncological and cosmetic results, as also confirmed by several reports in the literature.

Comparison of Wireless Localization Alternatives with Wire Localization for Nonpalpable Breast Lesions

BACKGROUND

Radiofrequency identification tag localization (TL) and magnetic seed localization (MSL) are alternatives to wire localization (WL) for excision of nonpalpable breast lesions. We sought to compare localization methods with respect to operative time, specimen volume, and re-excision rate.

STUDY DESIGN

A retrospective cohort analysis was performed on TL, MSL, and WL lumpectomies and excisional biopsies at a single institution. Association between localization method and operative time, specimen volume, and re-excision rate was assessed by multiple logistic regression using odds ratios (ORs) and 95% CIs.

RESULTS

A total of 506 procedures were included: 147 TL (29.0%), 140 MSL (27.7%), and 219 WL (43.3%). On logistic regression analysis, MSL was associated with longer operative times than WL for excisional biopsies only (OR 4.24, 95% CI 1.92 to 9.34, p < 0.001). Mean excisional biopsy time was 39.1 minutes for MSL and 33.0 minutes for WL. Specimen volume did not vary significantly across surgery types between localization methods. In an analysis of all lumpectomies with an indication of carcinoma, marker choice was not associated with rate of re-excision (TL vs WL OR 0.64, 95% CI 0.26 to 1.60, p = 0.342; MSL vs WL OR 1.22, 95% CI 0.60 to 2.49, p = 0.587; TL vs MSL OR 0.65, 95% CI 0.26 to 1.64, p = 0.359).

CONCLUSION

TL, MSL, and WL are comparable in performance for excision of nonpalpable breast lesions. Although increased operative time associated with MSL vs WL excisional biopsies is statistically significant, clinical significance warrants additional study. With similar outcomes, physicians may choose the marker most appropriate for the patient and setting.

Clinical Outcomes Using Magnetic Seeds as a Non-wire, Non-radioactive Alternative for Localization of Non-palpable Breast Lesions

BACKGROUND

Nonpalpable breast lesions require precise preoperative localization to facilitate negative margins with breast-conserving therapy. The traditional use of wires has several challenges including patient discomfort, wire migration, and coordination of schedules between radiology and the operating room. Radioactive seed localization overcomes some of these challenges, but radiation safety requirements have limited adoption of this technology. The authors examined their institutional experience with Magseed as an alternative technology for localization and compared outcomes with those of wire and radioactive seed localization.

METHODS

An institutional review board (IRB)-approved retrospective study was performed to evaluate patients who underwent excisional biopsy or segmental mastectomy after wire-guided localization (WGL), radioactive seed localization (RSL), or Magseed localization (ML). The clinical and pathologic factors of the three groups were assessed with a negative margin rate as the primary outcome measure.

RESULTS

Of the 1835 patients in the study, 825 underwent WGL, 449 underwent RSL, and 561 underwent ML. For the patients with either multiple lesions or a large lesion that required bracketing, multiple localization devices were placed in 31% of the WGL patients, 28% of the RSL patients, and 23% of the ML patients (p = 0.006). Negative margins were achieved in 91% of the WGL patients, 89% of the RSL patients, and 89% of the ML patients (p = 0.4).

CONCLUSION

Localization of non-palpable breast lesions using Magseed is a safe and effective alternative to WGL and RSL that overcomes radiation safety limitations and increases radiology and surgery scheduling efficiency.

SAVI SCOUT® localization of metastatic axillary lymph node prior to neoadjuvant chemotherapy for targeted axillary dissection: a pilot study

PURPOSE

In clinically node-positive breast cancer, axillary staging after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) is optimized with targeted axillary dissection (TAD), which includes removal of the biopsy-proven metastatic lymph node (LN) in addition to sentinel lymph nodes (SLN). Localization of the clipped node is currently performed post-NAC; however, technical limitations can make detection and localization of the treated LN challenging. We prospectively evaluated the feasibility of localizing the metastatic LN with a SAVI SCOUT® reflector (SAVI) prior to NAC for targeted removal at surgery.

METHODS

Twenty-five patients with stage 2/3 breast cancer underwent ultrasound-guided localization of the biopsy-proven LN with SAVI prior to NAC. After NAC, patients with clinical response underwent TAD. Primary outcome measures were rate of successful localization, days between insertion of SAVI and axillary surgery, frequency of retrieval of clipped node, and frequency of SAVI-LN as SLN.

RESULTS

After NAC, 23/25 (92%) had clinical axillary down-staging and underwent TAD. Two patients with persistent palpable axillary disease underwent ALND for initial staging. Axillary surgery was performed at an average of 141 days post-SAVI insertion and the SAVI was successfully retrieved in all cases. Among 23 patients undergoing TAD, the SAVI was retrieved within a LN in all patients, whereas clip migration was observed in two patients. The median SLN removed was 4, and SAVI-LN was SLN in 22/23 patients. Axillary pCR rate was 44%.

CONCLUSION

Localizing a metastatic LN with SAVI reflector prior to NAC for targeted removal at surgery is feasible and may provide technical and logistical advantages over axillary localization post-NAC.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRY

Clinical trials.gov identifier: NCT03411070.

Nationwide registry study on trends in localization techniques and reoperation rates in non-palpable ductal carcinoma in situ and invasive breast cancer

BACKGROUND

There is a transition from wire-guided localization (WGL) of non-palpable breast cancer to other localization techniques. Multiple prospective studies have sought to establish superior clinical outcomes for radioactive-seed localization (RSL), but consistent and congruent evidence is missing.

METHODS

In this study, female patients with breast cancer operated with breast-conserving surgery after tumour localization of a non-palpable breast cancer or ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) were included. The cohort was identified from the nationwide Netherlands Breast Cancer Audit conducted between 2013 and 2018. Trends in localization techniques were analysed. Univariable and multivariable analyses were performed to assess the association between the localization technique and the probability of a reoperation.

RESULTS

A total of 28 370 patients were included in the study cohort. The use of RSL increased from 15.7 to 61.1 per cent during the study years, while WGL decreased from 75.4 to 31.6 per cent. The localization technique used (RSL versus WGL) was not significantly associated with the odds of a reoperation, regardless of whether the lesion was DCIS (odds ratio 0.96 (95 per cent c.i. 0.89 to 1.03; P = 0.281)) or invasive breast cancer (OR 1.02 (95 per cent c.i. 0.96 to 1.10; P = 0.518)).

CONCLUSION

RSL is rapidly replacing WGL as the preoperative localization technique in breast surgery. This large nationwide registry study found no association between the type of localization technique and the odds of having a reoperation, thus confirming the results of previous prospective cohort studies.

The Evolving Role of Radiofrequency Guided Localisation in Breast Surgery: A Systematic Review

Wire-guided localisation (WGL) has been the gold-standard for localising non-palpable breast lesions before excision. Due to its drawbacks, various wireless alternatives have been developed, including LOCalizer™, which is based on radio-frequency identification (RFID) technology. In this systematic review, we consulted EMBASE, Medline and PubMed databases using appropriate search terms regarding the use of RFID technology in the localisation of occult breast lesions. Retrospective and prospective studies were included if they quoted the number of patients, rate of successful placement, retrieval rate, margin positivity rate and the re-excision rate. In addition, studies comparing RFID to WGL were also included and analysed separately. Seven studies were included in this systematic review spanning 1151 patients and 1344 tags. The pooled deployment rate was 99.1% and retrieval rate was 100%. Re-excision rate was 13.9%. One complication was identified. Two studies compared RFID with WGL (128 vs. 282 patients respectively). For both techniques the re-excision rate was 15.6% (20/128 vs. 44/282 respectively, p value is 0.995). Based on our review, LOCalizer™ is safe and non-inferior to WGL in terms of successful localisation and re-excision rates. However, further research is required to assess the cost effectiveness of this approach and its impact on the aesthetic outcome compared with WGL and other wire free technologies to better inform decision making in service planning and provision.

Image-guided Localization Techniques for Nonpalpable Breast Lesions: An Opportunity for Multidisciplinary Patient-centered Care

Selection of a localization method for nonpalpable breast lesions offers an opportunity for institutions to seek multidisciplinary input to promote value-based, patient-centered care. The diverse range of nonpalpable breast and axillary pathologies identified through increased utilization of screening mammography often necessitates image-guided preoperative localization for accurate lesion identification and excision. Preoperative localization techniques for breast and axillary lesions have evolved to include both wire and nonwire methods, the latter of which include radioactive seeds, radar reflectors, magnetic seeds, and radiofrequency identification tag localizers. There are no statistically significant differences in surgical outcomes when comparing wire and nonwire localization devices. Factors to consider during selection and adoption of image-guided localization systems include physician preference and ease of use, workflow efficiency, and patient satisfaction.

Evolving Trends in Surgical Management of Breast Cancer: An Analysis of 30 Years of Practice Changing Papers

The management of breast cancer has evolved into a multidisciplinary evidence-based surgical speciality, with emphasis on conservative surgery. A number of landmark trials have established lumpectomy followed by radiation as the standard of care for many patients. The aim of this study is to construct a narrative review of recent developments in the surgical management of breast cancer and how such developments have impacted surgical practice. A comprehensive literature search of Pubmed was conducted. The latest search was performed on October 31^st, 2020. Search terms “breast cancer” were used in combinations with specific key words and Boolean operators relating to surgical management. The reference lists of retrieved articles were comprehensively screened for additional eligible publications. Articles were selected and reviewed based on relevance. We selected publications in the past 10 years but did not exclude commonly referenced and highly regarded previous publications. Review articles and book chapters were also cited to provide reference on details not discussed in the academic literature. This article reviews the current evidence in surgical management of early-stage breast cancer, discusses recent trends in surgical practice for therapeutic and prophylactic procedures and provides commentary on implications and factors associated with these trends.

From the Reading Room to Operating Room: Retrospective Data and Pictorial Review After 806 SCOUT Placements

OBJECTIVE

Non-wire localization techniques are becoming more common. SCOUT surgical guidance system has been shown to increase flexibility in scheduling patients for surgery. The objective of this article is to provide institutional experiences with pictorial review after placement of 806 SCOUT devices.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Radiology procedure reports of SCOUT device placements from January 11, 2018 to May 19, 2020 were reviewed to assess demographics of patient population, imaging method of placement, size of reflector delivery system used, placement approach, and time spent in the radiology suite or Turn Around Time (TAT). TAT was compared to that of wire placement using a Two-tailed Mann-Whitney U Test. Reports were assessed for those with absent signal at time of placement. In cases where signal was absent, migration was found, or complications noted, further case review was performed using the Electronic Medical Record to assess whether the devices were successfully retrieved.

RESULTS

There were 806 total SCOUT placements identified from radiology procedure reports in patients aged 12-92 with 64.3% (518/806) placed using ultrasound-guidance and 35.7% (288/806) by mammographic-guidance. The most common delivery device was a 7.5 cm needle. Only 0.9% (7/806) of SCOUT reflectors were >1cm from target, all of which were successfully excised. After radiology placement, signal was not heard in 1.4% (9/806) of cases and individual case review revealed that all were successfully excised. In 2019, TATs of SCOUT procedures were significantly lower than TATs from wire localizations (P = 0.00024).

CONCLUSIONS

SCOUT localization for breast surgery can provide solutions to problems encountered by patients and providers. A year after implementation, SCOUT use was found to result in shorter TATs in radiology. In addition, 100% of devices that were either migrated or inaudible at the time of radiology placement were successfully excised.

Preoperative non-palpable breast lesion localization, innovative techniques and clinical outcomes in surgical practice: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Pre-operative localization of non-palpable breast lesions with non-wired non-ionizing (NWNI) techniques may improve clinical outcomes as reoperation rate, cosmetic outcome and contribute to organizational aspects improvement in breast-conserving surgery (BCS). However only limited literature is available and clinical studies involving these forefront devices are often small and non-randomized. Furthermore, there is a lack of consensus on free margins and cosmetic outcomes definitions. The objective of the present meta-analysis was to determine the crude clinical outcomes reported for the NWNI techniques on BCS. A literature search was performed of PubMed, Embase and Scopus databases up to February 2021 in order to select all prospective or retrospective clinical trials on pre-operative breast lesion localization done with NWNI devices. All studies were assessed following the PRISMA recommendations. Continuous outcomes were described in averages corrected for sample size, while binomial outcomes were described using the weighted average proportion. Twenty-seven studies with a total of 2103 procedures were identified. The technique is consolidated, showing for both reflectors' positioning and localization nearly the 100% rate of success. The re-excision and clear margins rates were 14% (95% CI, 11-17%) and 87% (80-92%), respectively. Overall, positive margins rates were 12% (8-17%). In studies that compared NWNI and wire localization techniques, positive margin rate is lower for the first techniques (12%, 6-22% vs 17%, 12-23%) and re-excision rate is slightly higher using the latter (13%, 9-19% vs 16%, 13-18%). Pre-operative NWNI techniques are effective in the localization of non-palpable breast lesions and are promising in obtaining clear (or negative) margins minimizing the need for re-excision and improving the cosmetic outcomes. Randomized trials are needed to confirm these findings.

Comparison of Multiple Wire, Radioactive Seed, and Savi Scout® Radar Localizations for Management of Surgical Breast Disease

BACKGROUND

Radioactive seed localization (RSL) and the Savi Scout^® radar (SSR) are newer alternatives to wire-guided localization (WL) for nonpalpable breast lesions.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to compare three localization devices when multiple devices were used for preoperative localization for breast surgery.

METHODS

Between July 2017 and July 2018, 68 patients had a partial mastectomy (n = 54) or breast biopsy (n = 14) with preoperative image-guided localization using multiple wires or device placement for nonpalpable lesions. Operative timing, outcomes, and 30-day complications were evaluated.

RESULTS

Overall, 41 patients (60%) had WL, 11 patients (16%) had RSL, and 16 patients (24%) had SSR localization. Fifty-four patients (79.4%) had localization of two lesions and 13 patients (19.1%) had localization of three lesions. Twenty-three patients (33.8%) had a lesion that was bracketed. There was no difference in retained biopsy clip among the groups (average 7.4%; p = 0.962). For operations performed in the hospital, there was no difference in operative time among the groups, with a median of 77.5 min (p = 0.705) or total perioperative time of 508 min (p = 0.210). Among operations with delayed start times, there was a longer average delay of 95.5 min in WL, compared with 42 min in SSR (p = 0.004). A greater volume of tissue was excised in the WL group (29.5 g WL vs. 15.9 g RSL vs. 12.1 g SSR; p = 0.022). There was no difference in positive margin rate and 30-day complications among groups.

CONCLUSION

SSR and RSL can be used to localize multiple breast lesions, with no difference in positive margin rates or complications and less tissue excised compared with WL.