Cosmetic results after wire-guided biopsy of benign breast lesions

Hospital costs and cosmetic outcome of benign and high-risk breast lesions managed by vacuum-assisted excision versus surgical excision

Objectives:

Although vacuum-assisted excision (VAE) is a safe and effective alternative to surgical excision (SE), the latter is most commonly used for the management of benign and high-risk breast lesions. To evaluate the healthcare benefit of VAE, hospital costs and cosmetic outcome after VAE were compared to SE. Additionally, the impact of VAE implementation on hospital costs was investigated.

Methods:

This was a single-centre retrospective cohort study with two cohorts: “VAE” and “SE”. All patients with a benign or high-risk lesion excised by VAE or SE from January 2016 up to December 2019 were included. Cosmetic outcome was measured with the BCTOS-cosmetic subscale, and hospital costs were presented as mean (SD) and median (IQR).

Results:

During the study period, 258 patients with 295 excised lesions were included. The initial procedure was VAE in 102 patients and SE in 156 patients. Hospital costs after (median € 2324) were significantly lower than before (median € 3,144) implementation of VAE (mean difference € 1,004, p < 0.001), most likely attributable to the lower costs for patients treated with VAE (mean difference € 1,979, p < 0.001). Mean cosmetic outcome was comparable between VAE (median 1.35) and SE (median 1.44, p = 0.802).

Conclusions:

Implementing VAE as an alternative treatment option for benign and high-risk breast lesions resulted in a large decrease in hospital costs but a cosmetic benefit of VAE could not be demonstrated in this retrospective study.

Advances in knowledge:

Costs associated with the complete patient pathway were included and not only VAE was compared to SE but also the before cohort was compared to the after cohort to demonstrate the benefit of VAE implementation in clinical practice. Additionally, cosmetic outcome was compared between VAE and SE using patient reported outcome measures.

Patient reported cosmetic outcome after vacuum assisted excision of benign breast lesions: a cross-sectional study

OBJECTIVE

Better cosmetic outcome after vacuum assisted excision (VAE) compared to surgical excision of benign breast lesions is suggested in previous studies but has never been evaluated with validated outcome measures. In this study, patient reported cosmetic outcome after VAE was evaluated.

METHODS

Patients who underwent VAE between July 2017 and December 2018 were invited to complete the cosmetic subscale of the Dutch Breast Cancer Treatment Outcome Scale, comparing the treated with the untreated breast. Response mode ranged from 1 (no difference) to 4 (large difference) and cosmetic outcome was calculated as the unweighted mean. Clinical outcomes included: tumor size, number of cores, complications, residual lesions and recurrences.

RESULTS

Response rate was 73.4% (47 of 64 patients). Median tumor size was 15 mm (range 5-51 mm) and median number of cores 6.5 (range 1-85), complete excision was confirmed in all but two patients. Mean cosmetic outcome was good (mean score ≤1.75) in 74% of patients and no patients reported a poor cosmetic outcome (mean score >3.25). A hematoma occurred in five patients (one needed aspiration) and a skin rash in one patient, no patients developed an infection or seroma.

CONCLUSION

In this study VAE is safe and effective for tumors up to 5 cm and patient reported cosmetic outcome was good. Patients with benign lesions could benefit from VAE as an alternative for surgical excision.

ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE

A formal quantitative measurement of cosmetic outcome after vacuum assisted excision for benign breast lesions was still lacking. This study shows that this cosmetic outcome is overall good in benign lesions up to 5 cm.

Intraoperative Ultrasound Can Facilitate the Wire Guided Breast Procedure for Mammographic Abnormalities

Wire guided breast procedures are the most commonly used breast conserving operation for nonpalpable cancers. We did a retrospective review of all patients who underwent the wire guided breast procedure at a county hospital with an associated surgical residency program. Twenty-eight patients underwent the procedure with intraoperative ultrasound from June 2009 to March 2010. Breast cancer patients who underwent a wire-guided lumpectomy with intraoperative ultrasound had a lower rate of positive margins (9% vs 26%, P = 0.28) and a smaller volume of tissue removed (126 cm3 vs 146 cm3, P = 0.57). For wire guided excisional biopsy, the volume of tissue removed was smaller in the intraoperative ultrasound group (30 cm3 vs 44 cm3, P = 0.17) and the targeted area was more likely to be removed in one specimen (1.1 vs 1.5, P = 0.03). Intraoperative ultrasound can improve surgical outcomes of the wire guided breast procedure.

Patient-perceived cosmesis and satisfaction after breast biopsy: comparison of stereotactic incisional, excisional, and wire-localized biopsy techniques

BACKGROUND

Several options exist for obtaining tissue for pathologic diagnosis of nonpalpable breast lesions. They are generally divided into traditional, open wire-localized biopsy through a 3- to 5-cm incision, stereotactic-guided excisional biopsy through a 1- to 2.5-cm incision, and stereotactic-guided incisional biopsy through a puncture wound a few millimeters long. Because all 3 techniques are reliable, cosmesis has been suggested to be a critical issue driving procedure choice. However, no study has surveyed breast biopsy patients themselves as to the importance of this issue.

METHODS

We conducted telephone interviews with 59 women who underwent wire-localized biopsy (WL), stereotactic incisional biopsy with the Mammotome device (Mammo), or stereotactic excisional biopsy with the ABBI device (ABBI). All patients had benign diagnoses, were at least 2 years after procedure, and were matched to age and race. The questions were (1) How would you rate your scar? (2) Were you satisfied or dissatisfied with your biopsy experience? (3) Which is more important to you-complete removal of the abnormality or scar appearance? (4) Do you have any additional comments?

RESULTS

Eighty percent of patients ranked complete removal of the abnormality more important than cosmesis. Ninety-five percent of the ABBI and Mammo patients rated their scar as excellent, whereas only 25% of WL did (P =.02). Ninety percent of WL patients, 80% of Mammo patients, and 75% of ABBI patients were satisfied with their experience (P = not significant). Many of the reasons for dissatisfaction were related to service quality rather than medical quality.

CONCLUSIONS

Complete removal of the mammographic abnormality may be the priority for patients undergoing breast biopsy. There did not seem to be patient-perceived difference in cosmetic result between the Mammo and ABBI patients. Patient satisfaction is multifactorial, and attention must be paid to these issues generally ignored by physicians.

Diagnostic strategies in non-palpable breast lesions

The number of non-palpable breast lesions is growing. Needle-localised breast biopsy (NLBB) is the gold standard for evaluating these lesions. Cost-saving techniques and less invasive alternatives such as core-needle biopsy (LCNB) and fine-needle aspiration (FNA) have emerged. The aim of this study was to find out if the lesions of patients who were sent directly for surgery to undergo a NLBB differed from lesions of patients who were send for a non-operative procedure. Furthermore, if a benign result was obtained, we assessed the total and kind of subsequent diagnostic procedures that were undertaken. A retrospective study on 718 women with 749 non-palpable breast lesions was performed. In 58% of women with non-palpable breast lesion, a non-surgical procedure was chosen. Lesions sent directly for surgery were more frequently not visible on ultrasound (62%) and mainly consisted of microcalcifications only (56%). In 45%, this primary surgical approach could have been avoided. If the non-operative procedure showed a non-malignant result, 41% of these women received an additional surgical diagnostic procedure. These figures obtained from routine daily practice show the importance of protocols in order to standardise diagnostic procedures and prevent unnecessary surgery.