Evaluation of the sonographic visibility and sonographic appearance of the breast biopsy marker (UltraClip®) placed in phantoms and patients

Sonographic visibility of the UltraCorTM TwirlTM tissue marker

BACKGROUND

Tissue markers are inserted into the breast after percutaneous biopsy to mark the site of the lesion to facilitate potential re-localisation. Tissue markers are increasingly developed with improved sonographic visibility due to benefits conferred by ultrasound-guided localisation.

OBJECTIVES

We aim to study the sonographic visibility of the recently-introduced UltracorTM TwirlTM tissue marker and feasibility of its pre-operative localisation under ultrasound guidance.

METHODS

All patients who underwent insertion of the UltracorTM TwirlTM tissue marker in our institution from July 2017 to December 2018 were reviewed. Retrospective data including sonographic visibility, evidence of migration and rate of successful surgical excision were collected.

RESULTS

All tissue markers were visible on subsequent ultrasound with 198 (85.0%) well-visualised with high degree of confidence while 35 (15.0%) were moderately well-visualised with moderate level of confidence. None of the tissue markers were poorly visualised and none demonstrated migration. No statistical difference in sonographic visibility is seen based on interval duration between deployment and subsequent ultrasound assessment or depth of tissue marker.

CONCLUSION

UltracorTM TwirlTM demonstrates consistent sonographic visibility, identifiable with a high or moderate level of confidence with no associated migration. Its use in pre-operative localisation with ultrasound guidance is therefore both reliable and feasible.

Current status of biopsy markers for the breast in clinical settings

INTRODUCTION

A breast biopsy marker is a very small object that is introduced into the breast to serve as a tissue marker. The placement of a breast marker following a biopsy or to mark an abnormality in the breast has become standard practice in the clinical setting. Breast biopsy markers offer a wide range of benefits which includes the prevention of re-biopsy of a benign tumor, differentiating multiple lesions within the breast, evaluation of the extent of a tumor, and increased precision during surgery.

AREAS COVERED

This review article presents a range of breast biopsy markers used in clinical practice. First, an overview of the necessity of breast markers in healthy breast management. Second, it summarizes the diversity in composition, shape, unique properties and features, and bio-absorbable carriers of breast biopsy markers. Finally, it also discusses the possible use of clinically approved breast biopsy markers in various scenarios and their implications.

EXPERT OPINION

This review serves as a guide in the selection of an appropriate breast marker. We believe that some of the common drawbacks associated with current breast biopsy markers can be overcome by developing novel polymer-metal and composite-based breast biopsy markers.

Ultrasound visibility of select breast biopsy markers for targeted axillary node localization following neoadjuvant treatment: simulation using animal tissue models

PURPOSE

To compare ultrasound visibility of selected biopsy markers in animal tissue models simulating axillary echotexture.

METHODS

Four breast biopsy markers were selected based on size, shape, and composition and compared to an institutional standard for testing in beef steak and pork loin phantoms. BD® UltraCor™ Twirl™; Hologic® Tumark® Professional series Q, Vision, and X; and BD® UltraClip™ Dual Trigger wing-shaped (institutional standard) biopsy markers were deployed at superficial (0-2.0 cm) and deep (2.1-4.0 cm) depths in the animal models. An animal model without a biopsy marker served as control. Four participating breast imagers blinded to marker shape and location assessed ultrasound visibility of each biopsy marker using a handheld 5-12 MHz linear array transducer with a 4-point grading system (0, not visible; 1, unsure if visible; 2, visible with difficulty; 3, definite visibility). Each breast imager was asked to select the three most easily visualized biopsy markers.

RESULTS

Total visibility scores with the four-point grading system demonstrate highest score for the Twirl™ (48/48 points), followed by the Tumark® Q (42/48) and Tumark® Vision (41/48) biopsy markers. Overall individual accuracy scores across all biopsy marker types ranged from 83.3 to 95.8%. Visibility scores based on subjective radiologist assessment also demonstrate the highest vote for the Twirl™ (11), followed by the Tumark® Vision (7) and Tumark® Q (6) biopsy markers. The wing-shaped biopsy marker had the lowest visibility and voter score.

CONCLUSION

The Twirl™ followed by the Tumark® Q and Vision biopsy markers demonstrates the highest visibility scores using a four-point grading system and by radiologist vote.

Biopsy Marker Standardization: What's in a Name?

OBJECTIVE. The purposes of this study were to compile mammographic images in various projections showing commercially available breast biopsy site markers and to provide a standardized nomenclature and marker guide to improve physician communication and patient care. MATERIALS AND METHODS. A retrospective review of all breast biopsy markers encountered at one institution was conducted from January 2012 to January 2018. Markers placed at the facility and those placed at outside institutions with the patient subsequently referred to the study institution were included. Additional drawings and photographs and biopsy marker information were compiled from manufacturers and the literature. Intrinsic properties, features, pitfalls, and biopsy marker mimics were recorded from the institution's experience and the literature. RESULTS. Thirty-eight different biopsy marker shapes available from six manufacturers were identified, and mammograms of 37 were compiled and organized by manufacturer. Nomenclature was compiled on the basis of the manufacturer names of each marker. Potential pitfalls and mimics were identified. Manufacturer-reported marker material composition and carrier properties were summarized, including decreased marker migration, enhanced ultrasound visibility, and varying MRI susceptibility. CONCLUSION. Variability in the appearance and nomenclature of breast biopsy site markers may contribute to misinterpretation, miscommunication, and possibly removal of the incorrect lesion. A comprehensive guide to breast biopsy marker nomenclature is clinically useful, and standardization is necessary.

Comparison of breast tissue markers for tumor localization in breast cancer patients undergoing neoadjuvant chemotherapy

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to compare the visibility of breast tissue markers in cases of breast cancer on ultrasonography (US) after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) and to analyze whether the type of marker affected the choice of localization method after NAC.

METHODS

We included 153 tissue markers inserted within breast cancers that showed pathologically complete response (pCR) after NAC from January 2012 to April 2017. One of three types of markers (a surgical clip, Cormark, or UltraClip) was inserted. Medical records and imaging findings were retrospectively reviewed. We compared the visibility of the different types of tissue markers on US after NAC, and also compared the imaging modalities used in the preoperative localization. The chi-square test, Fisher exact test, and multiple logistic regression were used for analysis.

RESULTS

Of the 153 tissue markers, 56 were surgical clips, 61 Cormark, and 36 UltraClip. After NAC, residual lesions were not seen on US in 42 cases (27.5%). In multivariate analysis, the visibility of the surgical clips and Cormark markers was better than that of the UltraClip markers (odds ratio [OR], 5.467; 95% confidence interal [CI], 1.717 to 17.410; P=0.004 and OR, 3.045; 95% CI, 1.074 to 8.628; P=0.036, respectively). Among the 131 cases where localization targeting the marker was required, the proportion of US-guided localizations was significantly higher when a surgical clip was used than when an UltraClip marker was used (OR, 5.566; 95% CI, 1.610 to 19.246; P=0.007) in the multivariate analysis.

CONCLUSION

The type of breast tissue marker affected its visibility on US in cases with pCR after NAC, which in turn affected the localization methodology.

Histological changes secondary to wire coil placement in breast tissue and lymph nodes

We describe the histological and immunohistochemical features of the changes produced by spiral coil localization wires in the breast parenchyma and lymph nodes of a total of 100 patients undergoing surgery for different breast lesions. Coil wires produced cystic lesions containing a hyaline, mucous-like, PAS-negative fluid. Cavities were lined by cells of variable morphology ranging from synovial-like cells (with a conspicuous epithelial appearance) to mononuclear or multinucleate histiocytic cells that expressed CD68, but were negative for keratins. CD3-positive/CD8-positive T lymphocytes predominated in the inflammatory reaction. Pathologists should be aware of these changes in order to differentiate coil-related lesions from other granulomatous or epithelial lesions, including mucocele-like and ductal carcinoma in situ lesions.

Evaluation of the dislocation and long-term sonographic detectability of a hydrogel-based breast biopsy site marker

PURPOSE

To evaluate the usefulness of the HydroMARK, a hydrogel-based breast biopsy site marker for ultrasound localization of breast lesions, we investigated the tendency for dislocation and sonographic detectability of the marker placed in patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The marker was placed in lesions that were expected to become obscured after biopsy for a suspicious breast lesion or after neoadjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer. The patients consented to return for a repeat ultrasound ± mammography examination, and the degree of displacement of the marker was measured as the marker-to-residual lesion distance.

RESULTS

The marker was placed after stereotactic biopsy, ultrasound-guided biopsy, and before/during neoadjuvant chemotherapy, in 11, 22, and 7 lesions, respectively. Surgical resection was performed for 22 of the 40 lesions, while remaining 18 benign lesions were followed. The marker was sonographically detectable in 89.7% (35/39), 100% (35/35), and 100% (18/18) of the cases, respectively, at a median of 8 days, 13 weeks, and 11 months after the deployment. The degree of displacement was lower in the ultrasound-guided placement group than in the stereotactic placement group (median displacement: 0 vs. 4.3 mm; p = 0.001), it was also lower in the core-needle biopsy and neoadjuvent therapy cases than in the vacuum-assisted biopsy cases (p = 0.003). At a median interval of 2.5 months after deployment, the marker remained unchanged in location in all cases (n = 18, p = NS).

CONCLUSIONS

The HydroMARK appears to be a safe and effective marker with the advantageous characteristics of a low tendency for dislocation with time and long-term sonographic detectability.

Using a New Marker Clip System in Breast Cancer: Tumark Vision® Clip - Feasibility Testing in Everyday Clinical Practice

Background

This study presents first feasibility experiences with a new 3-dimensional (3D) marker clip system in clinical practice. The rate of clinical complete responses in the treatment of breast cancer patients is increasing; additionally, a change to targeted axillary dissection is being considered after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT). Consequently, marker clips are needed which are reliable and easy to handle even in the axillary lymph node system.

Methods

A total of 50 patients from the Breast Care Unit of the Kliniken Essen Mitte were included. Clip marking of all 50 primary breast cancer lesions as well as 23 lymph nodes was performed using the Tumark Vision® clip. Following application, the position and visibility of the marker clip were monitored and documented in 2 axes.

Results

The feasibility of the Tumark Vision clip was excellent in everyday clinical practice as none of the markers dislocated. After clip marking of the tumor region and/or suspicious lymph nodes, all Tumark Vision clips could be detected in both axes. The 3D shape could be observed in all cases after application.

Conclusion

The new 3D-shaped marker clip seems to be a promising tool for marking breast cancer lesions and even lymph nodes before NACT. As there are many studies ongoing to prove the feasibility of a shift from standard axillary dissection after NACT towards targeted axillary dissection, the Tumark Vision clip seems to provide good visibility even in lymph nodes after NACT. Further studies are warranted.

Hygroscopic sonographically detectable clips form characteristic breast and lymph node pseudocysts

The use of hygroscopic sonographically detectable clips (HSDCs) has dramatically increased during the last years, especially in breast cancer patients who undergo neoadjuvant chemotherapy. The aims of this study are to define the appearance of HSDC sites in histopathological specimens, and to enable pathologists to recognize these sites and differentiate them from other lesions. We examined 124 breast cancer specimens in which the application of HSDCs was documented, 88 breast tissues and 36 lymph nodes, and analyzed the appearance of the clip site in these tissues. The clip site was clearly detected histologically in 79/88 (90%) of the breast specimens and in 29/36 (81%) of lymph node specimens. In most of the specimens, the HSDC site had a specific characteristic appearance of a pseudocyst, lined by layers of epithelioid histiocytes, sometimes with pseudopapillary formation, and with minimal or no fibrosis. This was the appearance in 69 of the breast specimens and in 23 of the lymph node specimens. In other specimens, scarring, scattered foamy macrophages and abundant siderophages were the predominant findings, as usually found in sites of other clips. As non-palpable breast lesions become more frequent, clips play a major role in the treatment of breast cancer, making them an important component of the communication among radiologists, surgeons, pathologists, and oncologists. HSDCs in tissues have a characteristic appearance with an epithelioid component. Pathologists should be able to recognize this finding, differentiate it from other breast lesions and include it in the pathology report.