Ultrasound-Guided Versus Wire-Guided Breast-Conserving Surgery for Nonpalpable Breast Cancer

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.

Ultrasound-guided breast-conserving surgery compared to conventional breast-conserving surgery

PURPOSE

The goal of breast-conserving surgery is to achieve negative tumor margins, since insufficient marginal distance is associated with more local and distant recurrences. This study investigates whether IOUS (intraoperative ultrasound) can reduce the re-resection rate compared to standard breast surgery, regardless of tumor biology and focality.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The present study is a monocentric, prospective, randomized, and non-blinded parallel group study conducted between 7/2015 and 2/2018. Patients with sonographically visible breast cancer were randomized into two study arms: 1) breast-conserving surgery with IOUS; 2) conventional arm.

RESULTS

364 patients were included in the study and underwent surgery. Tumor biology, size, and focality were equally distributed in both groups (p = 0.497). The study arms did not differ significantly in the proportion of preoperative wire markings (p= 0.084), specimen weight (p = 0.225), surgery duration (p = 0.849), and the proportion of shavings taken intraoperatively (p = 0.903). Positive margins were present in 16.6% of the cases in the IOUS arm and in 20.8% in the conventional arm (p = 0.347). Re-operation was necessary after intraoperative shavings in 14.4% of cases in the US arm and in 21.3% in the conventional arm (p = 0.100).

CONCLUSION

Although the present study showed a clear difference in the rate of positive tumor margins with IOUS compared to conventional breast surgery without IOUS, this was not statistically significant in contrast to the current literature. This could be due to the high expertise of the breast surgeons, the precise wire marking, or the fact that the IOUS technique was not standardized.

Diagnostic accuracy of radiography, digital breast tomosynthesis, micro-CT and ultrasound for margin assessment during breast surgery: A systematic review and meta-analysis

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES

Achieving adequate resection margins in breast conserving surgery is challenging and often demands more than one surgical procedure. We evaluated pooled diagnostic sensitivity, and specificity of radiological methods for intraoperative margin assessment and their impact on repeat surgery rate.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We included studies using radiography, digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT), micro-CT, and ultrasound for intraoperative margin assessment with the histological assessment as the reference method. A systematic search was performed in PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Scopus, and Web of Science. Two investigators screened the studies for eligibility criteria and extracted data of the included studies independently. The quality assessment on diagnostic accuracy studies (QUADAS)-2 tool was used. A bivariate random effect model was used to obtained pooled sensitivity and specificity of the index tests in the meta-analysis.

RESULTS

The systematic search resulted in screening of 798 unique records. Twenty-two articles with 29 radiological imaging methods were selected for meta-analysis. Pooled sensitivity and specificity and area under the curve were calculated for each of the 4 subgroups in the meta-analysis respectively: Radiography; 52%, 77%, 60%, DBT; 67%, 76%, 76%, micro-CT; 68%, 69%, 72%, and ultrasound; 72%, 78%, 80%. The repeat surgery rate was poorly reported in the included studies.

CONCLUSION

Ultrasound showed the highest and radiography the lowest diagnostic performance for intraoperative margin assessment. However, the heterogeneity between studies was high and the subgroups small. The radiological methods for margin assessment need further improvement to provide reliable guidance in the clinical workflow and to prevent repeat surgeries.

Intraoperative Ultrasound-Guided Excision of Non-Palpable and Palpable Breast Cancer: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Wire-guided localization (WGL) is the most frequently used localization technique in non-palpable breast cancer (BC). However, low negative margin rates, patient discomfort, and the possibility of wire dislocation have been discussed as potential disadvantages, and re-operation due to positive margins may increase relapse risk. Intraoperative ultrasound (IOUS)-guided excision allows direct visualization of the lesion and the resection volume and reduces positive margins in palpable and non-palpable tumors. We performed a systematic review on IOUS in breast cancer and 2 meta-analyses of randomized clinical trials (RCTs). In non-palpable BC, 3 RCTs have shown higher negative margin rates in the IOUS arm compared to WGL. Meta-analysis confirmed a significant difference between IOUS and WGL in terms of positive margins favoring IOUS (risk ratio 4.34, p < 0.0001, I2 = 0%). 41 cohort studies including 3291 patients were identified, of which most reported higher negative margin and lower re-operation rates if IOUS was used. In palpable BC, IOUS was compared to palpation-guided excision in 3 RCTs. Meta-analysis showed significantly higher rates of positive margins in the palpation arm (risk ratio 2.84, p = 0.0047, I2 = 0%). In 13 cohort studies including 942 patients with palpable BC, negative margin rates were higher if IOUS was used, and tissue volumes were higher in palpation-guided cohorts in most studies. IOUS is a safe noninvasive technique for the localization of sonographically visible tumors that significantly improves margin rates in palpable and non-palpable BC. Surgeons should be encouraged to acquire ultrasound skills and participate in breast ultrasound training.

Intraoperative Margin Trials in Breast Cancer

Purpose of Review

Obtaining negative margins in breast conservation surgery continues to be a challenge. Re-excisions are difficult for patients and expensive for the health systems. This paper reviews the literature on current strategies and intraoperative clinical trials to reduce positive margin rates.

Recent Findings

The best available data demonstrate that intraoperative imaging with ultrasound, intraoperative pathologic assessment such as frozen section, and cavity margins have been the most successful intraoperative strategies to reduce positive margins. Emerging technologies such as optical coherence tomography and fluorescent imaging need further study but may be important adjuncts.

Summary

There are several proven strategies to reduce positive margin rates to < 10%. Surgeons should utilize best available resources within their institutions to produce the best outcomes for their patients.

Intraoperative ultrasound is associated with low re-excision rates following breast conserving surgery for non-palpable invasive breast cancers

BACKGROUND

Wire localized breast biopsy (WLB) is the most commonly performed procedure for the removal of non-palpable breast cancer. It is associated with patient discomfort and high re-excision rates. Intraoperative ultrasound (IOUS) is an alternative technique that may improve patient experience and have lower re-excision rates.

METHODS

A retrospective, single surgeon experience with IOUS is compared with WLB. Case matching for variables known to impact re-excision rates is performed. Fisher's exact test was performed for categorical variables, and a T-test for continuous variables.

RESULTS

28 patients underwent IOUS and WLB. Re-excision rates were the same in patients undergoing IOUS and WLB (10.7% vs 0%; p = 0.24). The calculated resection ratio was lower with IOUS than WLB (2.99 vs 3.46; p = 0.37), but did not reach statistical significance.

CONCLUSION

In selected patients, intra-operative ultrasound can be performed with a favourable re-excision rate, and comparable amounts of tissue compared to wire localized breast biopsy.

Outcomes of intraoperative versus preoperative ultrasound-guided wire localization of nonpalpable breast lesions

Background: Nonpalpable breast lesions require localization, the gold standard for which is preoperative ultrasound-guided wire localization (PUGWL). Our unit also employs intraoperative ultrasound-guided wire localization (IUGWL). Here we evaluate PUGWL and IUGWL outcomes between 2014 and 2018. Primary outcomes were reoperation rates, complication rates and average specimen weights. Trainee feedback and cost analysis assessed IUGWL viability. Methods: Prospectively recorded data were collected. 511 patients were included (241 PUGWL and 270 IUGWL). Results: Reoperation rates: PUGWL 17.7% versus IUGWL 13.9% (p = 0.28) . Complication rates: PUGWL 5.8% versus IUGWL 6.6% (p = 0.72) . Average specimen weight: PUGWL 34.2 g versus IUGWL 24.3 g (p < 0.0001) . Trainees needed 15 supervised cases to be IUGWL competent. Performing IUGWL saves £289 per localization. Conclusion: IUGWL outcomes are comparable to those of PUGWL. IUGWL is cost-effective, patient-friendly and easy to learn and replicate. IUGWL merits wider dissemination and further planned research.

Breast-conserving surgery with 3D-printed surgical guide: a single-center, prospective clinical study

To facilitate precise tumor resection at the time of breast-conserving surgery (BCS), we developed and implemented a magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-based three-dimensional-printed (3DP) breast surgical guide (BSG). This prospective cohort study was conducted at a single institution from July 2017 to February 2019 on women with breast cancer who underwent partial breast resection using patient-specific 3DP BSGs. Eighty-eight patients with invasive cancer were enrolled, of whom 1 patient had bilateral breast cancer. The mean size of the tumor long-axis on MRI before surgery was 2.8 ± 0.9 cm, and multiple tumors were observed in 34 patients. In 16 cases (18.0%), the resection margin was tumor-positive according to intraoperative frozen biopsy; all of these tumors were ductal carcinoma in situ and were re-excised intraoperatively. In 93.3% of the cases, the resection margin was tumor-free in the permanent pathology. The mean pathological tumor size was 1.7 ± 1.0 cm, and the mean distance from the tumor to the border was 1.5 ± 1.0 cm. This exploratory study showed that the tumor area on the MRI could be directly displayed on the breast when using a 3DP BSG for BCS, thereby allowing precise surgery and safe tumor removal.

Trial Registration Clinical Research Information Service (CRIS) Identifier (No. KCT0002375, KCT0003043).

Clinical Value of Ultrasound-Guided Minimally Invasive Biopsy in the Diagnosis or Treatment of Breast Nodules

Purpose

To explore the clinical value of ultrasound-guided minimally invasive biopsy of breast nodules for diagnosis and treatment of patients with no positive clinical signs on manual breast examination.

Methods

We performed a retrospective review of 136 patients with no signs on breast palpation who underwent ultrasound-guided minimally invasive biopsy. A total of 63 patients underwent breast nodule resection from October 2018 to December 2019 at the General Hospital of Central Theater Command of the People's Liberation Army. Clinical data, including indications for minimally invasive biopsy or resection, pathological and surgical results were retrospectively analyzed.

Results

A total of 199 patients were studied; 136 underwent minimally invasive biopsy and 63 underwent resection. No severe surgical complications occurred. Minimally invasive biopsy of breast nodules was superior to resection with respect to operation time, incision length, and postoperative complication rate.

Conclusion

Ultrasound-guided minimally invasive biopsy of breast nodules is feasible for treatment of patients with negative breast nodules and can achieve accurate diagnosis and satisfactory resection.

A decade of intraoperative ultrasound guided breast conservation for margin negative resection - Radioactive, and magnetic, and Infrared Oh My…

BACKGROUND

The oncologic goal of margin-negative breast conservation requires adequate localization of tumor. Intraoperative ultrasound remains most feasible but under-utilized method to localize the tumor and assess margins.

METHODS

A prospectively maintained breast cancer database over a decade was queried for margin status in breast cancer patients undergoing breast conservation. Techniques of tumor localization, margin re-excision and closest margins were analyzed. Rate of conversion to mastectomy was determined.

RESULTS

Of the 945 breast cancer patients treated at a university-based Breast Center of Excellence between January 1, 2009 and December 31, 2018, 149(15.8%) had ductal carcinoma in situ; 712(75.3%) had invasive ductal carcinoma, and 63(6.7%) had invasive lobular carcinoma. Clinical stage distribution was: T1 = 372(39.4%); T2 = 257(27.2%); T3 = 87(9.2%). Five hundred and eighty three (61.7%) patients underwent breast conservation. The median (25th -75th centile) closest margin was 6(2.5, 10.0) mm. Thirty five (6.0%) patients underwent margin re-excision, of which 9(25%) were converted to mastectomy. Tumor localization was achieved with ultrasound in 521(89.4%) patients and with wire localization in 62(10.6%) patients. The median (25th-75th centile) closest margin with wire localization was 5.0(2.0, 8.5) mm versus 5.0 (2.0, 8.0) mm with ultrasound guidance [p = 0.6635]. The re-excision rate with wire localization was 14.5% versus 4.9% with ultrasound guidance [p = 0.0073]. The unadjusted Odds Ratio (95% CI) for margin revision in wire localized group compared with ultrasound was 3.2 (7.14, 1.42) [p = 0.0045]; multivariate adjusted OR (95%) was 4(9.09, 1.7) [p = 0.0013].

CONCLUSIONS

Ultrasound guidance for localization of breast cancer remains the most effective option for margin negative breast conservation.

Minimally invasive breast cancer excision using the breast lesion excision system under ultrasound guidance

Purpose

To assess the feasibility of completely excising small breast cancers using the automated, image-guided, single-pass radiofrequency-based breast lesion excision system (BLES) under ultrasound (US) guidance.

Methods

From February 2018 to July 2019, 22 patients diagnosed with invasive carcinomas ≤ 15 mm at US and mammography were enrolled in this prospective, multi-center, ethics board-approved study. Patients underwent breast MRI to verify lesion size. BLES-based excision and surgery were performed during the same procedure. Histopathology findings from the BLES procedure and surgery were compared, and total excision findings were assessed.

Results

Of the 22 patients, ten were excluded due to the lesion being > 15 mm and/or being multifocal at MRI, and one due to scheduling issues. The remaining 11 patients underwent BLES excision. Mean diameter of excised lesions at MRI was 11.8 mm (range 8.0–13.9 mm). BLES revealed ten (90.9%) invasive carcinomas of no special type, and one (9.1%) invasive lobular carcinoma. Histopathological results were identical for the needle biopsy, BLES, and surgical specimens for all lesions. None of the BLES excisions were adequate. Margins were usually compromised on both sides of the specimen, indicating that the excised volume was too small. Margin assessment was good for all BLES specimens. One technical complication occurred (retrieval of an empty BLES basket, specimen retrieved during subsequent surgery).

Conclusions

BLES allows accurate diagnosis of small invasive breast carcinomas. However, BLES cannot be considered as a therapeutic device for small invasive breast carcinomas due to not achieving adequate excision.

Surgeon-led Intraoperative Ultrasound Localization for Nonpalpable Breast Cancers: Results of 5 Years of Practice

BACKGROUND

The uptake of breast screening has led to a rise in the number of nonpalpable breast cancer diagnoses. Breast conserving therapy (BCT) is the treatment of choice for early breast cancer, and this requires localization of the lesion. Commonly detection is achieved by wire-guided localization in the radiology department. This technique has complications and requires utilization of a radiologist. Intraoperative ultrasound (IOUS) has been shown to be a safe alternative, but there is little data on its use. The aim of this study is to report the use of surgeon-led IOUS over the past 5 years, assessing the ability to detect lesions and the re-excision rate for involved margins.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A retrospective observational study was performed on consecutive patients undergoing IOUS-marked BCT between 2014 and 2018. The technique is described, and patients' records were reviewed to assess the histologic specimen reports and need for subsequent re-excision.

RESULTS

Ninety-five IOUS BCT operations were performed. Every cancer was identified by IOUS and removed. Fourteen margins were positive and required re-excision. Of these, only 2 contained residual tumor.

CONCLUSION

This is the first data from the United Kingdom for IOUS skin marking without wire localization. IOUS is a safe method of localization in BCT. It offers advantages both to the patient and the unit as it reduces pressure on the radiology department.

Proof-of-Concept Study of 3-D-Printed Mold-Guided Breast-Conserving Surgery in Breast Cancer Patients

PURPOSE

In this proof-of-concept study, we proposed 3-D-printed mold-guided breast-conserving surgery (BCS) in breast cancer patients.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Pathologically confirmed and eligible breast cancer patients received magnetic resonance imaging examinations before BCS. The information on the shape, size, and location of the tumor relative to the nipple was extracted and analyzed. We used a 3-D printing technique to produce a mold to guide BCS for breast cancer patients.

RESULTS

We performed 3-D-printed mold-guided BCS in 8 breast cancer patients. All of the patients had negative surgical margins, confirmed by intraoperative and postoperative pathologic examinations.

CONCLUSION

The 3-D-printed mold-guided BCS approach is a feasible way to achieve negative surgical margins. A prospective designed cohort study, with more patients included and a longer follow-up, is needed to further confirm its long-term oncologic safety.

Utilization of iron (III)-doped nanoshells for in vivo marking of nonpalpable tumors using a VX2 rabbit model

BACKGROUND

We aimed to evaluate the potential for ultrasound (US) visible biodegradable nanoshells (NS) as an alternative to wire-guided localization for nonpalpable tumors in vivo.

METHODS

VX2 tumor was injected in bilateral thighs of 22 New Zealand rabbits and after 5 to 10 days, 1 tumor was marked with a wire as a control and the contralateral tumor was injected with 1 mL of 500 nm gas-filled silica NS under Doppler US. Tumors were excised after 24 hours. Chi-square was used for significance, P = .05.

RESULTS

One rabbit was excluded on postoperative day 1 due to equipment failure, no ill effects were observed from the NS. The NS were used to localize and resect 100% of marked tissue, 4/21 wires were displaced (P < .05).

CONCLUSIONS

We have shown that preoperatively injected US visible silica NS can be successfully used to mark nonpalpable tumors in vivo more consistently than WL.

Ultrasound-guided breast-conserving surgery for early-stage palpable and nonpalpable invasive breast cancer: decreased excision volume at unchanged tumor-free resection margin

Ultrasound guidance (USG) during breast-conserving surgery improves tumor-free surgical resection margins. The objective of this study was to evaluate whether USG reduces resection volumes without compromising margin status. 134 patients with palpable or nonpalpable T1-2N0-1 invasive breast cancer were treated with USG and compared with a historical reference control group (CON) consisting of palpation-guided (PAG) or wire-guided localization (WIG) breast-conserving surgery. Primary outcomes were excess resection volume and clear margin status, and secondary outcome was re-excision rate. 66 patients underwent USG. In the CON group (n = 68), PAG was performed in 24 (35 %) and WIG in 44 (64 %) patients. Median excision volume [39 (IQR 20-66) vs 56 (38-94) cm(3); p = 0.001] and median calculated resection ratio [1.7 (1.0-2.9) vs 2.8 (1.4-4.6) (p = 0.005)] were significantly smaller in the USG than in the CON group. Median minimal distance to the resection margin [4 mm (IQR 2-5 mm) vs 2 mm (1-4 mm), p = 0.004] was significantly larger. Clear resection margins were achieved in 58 of the USG patients (88 %) and in 58 of the CON patients (86 %) (p = 0.91); this was true in patients with palpable as well as nonpalpable lesions. Reexcision was needed in 6.1 and 7.2 % respectively. Relative risk for re-excision in the USG group was 0.82 (95 % CI 0.23-2.93). In patients with palpable and nonpalpable breast cancers, USG allows for lower excision volume and reduced resection of healthy breast tissue, without increased re-excision rate.