ﺑﺎﺯﮔﺸﺖ ﺑﻪ ﺻﻔﺤﻪ ﻗﺒﻠﯽ
خرید پکیج
تعداد آیتم قابل مشاهده باقیمانده : 3 مورد
نسخه الکترونیک
medimedia.ir

Localization techniques for nonpalpable breast tumors[1]

Localization techniques for nonpalpable breast tumors[1]
Localization technique Advantages Disadvantages Margin clearance rate (%)
Wire localization
  • Familiarity, readily available in most centers
  • Placed same day, may delay operating room start
  • May traverse breast
54 to 90[2-7]
Radio-occult lesion localization
  • No wire traversing breast; can be combined with SLNB
  • Requires same-day injection; may delay operating room start
66.7 to 87[7-10]
Radioactive seed localization
  • Can be placed days prior to surgery
  • Radiation safety concerns
  • Lack of good depth perception of sensor
74 to 96[9-16]
Infrared radar (eg, SaviScout)
  • Can be placed days prior to surgery
  • No radiation concerns
  • Cost
  • May not produce a signal if >4.5 cm depth
88.9[17]
Magnetic seed device (eg, MAGSEED)
  • Can be placed days prior to surgery
  • No radiation concerns
  • May not produce a signal if >4 cm depth
  • Signal void artifact with MRI
No data
Radiofrequency identification tag
  • Can be placed days prior to surgery
  • No radiation concerns
  • Not yet available for use off trial
73[18]
Hematoma/ultrasound-guided localization
  • No preoperative localization required
  • Hematoma and/or clip must be ultrasonographically visible to surgeon
76 to 94.3[19-26]
SLNB: sentinel lymph node biopsy; MRI: magnetic resonance imaging.
References:
  1. Hayes MK. Update on preoperative breast localization. Radiol Clin North Am 2017; 55:591.
  2. Gray RJ, Pockaj BA, Karstaedt PJ, Roarke MC. Radioactive seed localization of nonpalpable breast lesions is better than wire localization. Am J Surg 2004; 188:377.
  3. Kanat NB, Tuncel M, Aksoy T, et al. Comparison of wire-guided localization and radio-guided occult lesionlocalization in preoperative localization of nonpalpable breast lesions. Turk J Med Sci 2016; 46:1829.
  4. Tardioli S, Ballesio L, Gigli S, et al. Wire-guided localization in non-palpable breast cancer: Results from monocentric experience. Anticancer Res 2016; 36:2423.
  5. Toth D, Varga Z, Sebo E, et al. Predictive factors for positive margin and the surgical learning curve in non-palpable breast cancer after wire-guided localization - prospective study of 214 consecutive patients. Pathol Oncol Res 2016; 22:209.
  6. Luiten JD, Beek MA, Voogd AC, et al. Iodine seed- versus wire-guided localization in breast-conserving surgery for non-palpable ductal carcinoma in situ. Br J Surg 2015; 102:1665.
  7. Postma EL, Witkamp AJ, van den Bosch MA, et al. Localization of nonpalpable breast lesions. Expert Rev Anticancer Ther 2011; 11:1295.
  8. Duarte C, Bastidas F, de los Reyes A, et al. Randomized controlled clinical trial comparing radioguided occult lesion localization with wire-guided lesion localization to evaluate their efficacy and accuracy in the localization of nonpalpable breast lesions. Surgery 2016; 159:1140.
  9. van der Noordaa ME, Pengel KE, Groen E, et al. The use of radioactive iodine-125 seed localization in patients with non-palpable breast cancer: A comparison with the radioguided occult lesion localization with 99m technetium. Eur J Surg Oncol 2015; 41:553.
  10. Donker M, Drukker CA, Valdes Olmos RA, et al. Guiding breast-conserving surgery in patients after neoadjuvant systemic therapy for breast cancer: A comparison of radioactive seed localization with the ROLL technique. Ann Surg Oncol 2013; 20:2569.
  11. Gray RJ, Salud C, Nguyen K, et al. Randomized prospective evaluation of a novel technique for biopsy or lumpectomy of nonpalpable breast lesions: Radioactive seed versus wire localization. Ann Surg Oncol 2001; 8:711.
  12. Rarick J, Kimler BF, Tawfik O. Comparison of margin status and lesional size between radioactive seed localized vs conventional wire localized breast lumpectomy specimens. Ann Diagn Pathol 2016; 21:47.
  13. Bloomquist EV, Ajkay N, Patil S, et al. A randomized prospective comparison of patient-assessed satisfaction and clinical outcomes with radioactive seed localization versus wire localization. Breast J 2016; 22:151.
  14. Sharek D, Zuley ML, Zhang JY, et al. Radioactive seed localization versus wire localization for lumpectomies: A comparison of outcomes. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2015; 204:872.
  15. Murphy JO, Moo TA, King TA, et al. Radioactive seed localization compared to wire localization in breast-conserving surgery: Initial 6-month experience. Ann Surg Oncol 2013; 20:4121.
  16. Hughes JH, Mason MC, Gray RJ, et al. A multi-site validation trial of radioactive seed localization as an alternative to wire localization. Breast J 2008; 14:153.
  17. Cox CE, Russell S, Prowler V, et al. A prospective, single arm, multi-site, clinical evaluation of a nonradioactive surgical guidance technology for the location of nonpalpable breast lesions during excision. Ann Surg Oncol 2016; 23:3168.
  18. Dauphine C, Reicher JJ, Reicher MA, et al. A prospective clinical study to evaluate the safety and performance of wireless localization of nonpalpable breast lesions using radiofrequency identification technology. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2015; 204:W720.
  19. Rahusen FD, Bremers AJ, Fabry HF, et al. Ultrasound-guided lumpectomy of nonpalpable breast cancer versus wire-guided resection: A randomized clinical trial. Ann Surg Oncol 2002; 9:994.
  20. Eggemann H, Costa SD, Ignatov A. Ultrasound-guided versus wire-guided breast-conserving surgery for nonpalpable breast cancer. Clin Breast Cancer 2016; 16:e1.
  21. James TA, Harlow S, Sheehey-Jones J, et al. Intraoperative ultrasound versus mammographic needle localization for ductal carcinoma in situ. Ann Surg Oncol 2009; 16:1164.
  22. Moore MM, Whitney LA, Cerilli L, et al. Intraoperative ultrasound is associated with clear lumpectomy margins for palpable infiltrating ductal breast cancer. Ann Surg 2001; 233:761.
  23. Krekel NM, Haloua MH, Lopes Cardozo AM, et al. Intraoperative ultrasound guidance for palpable breast cancer excision (COBALT trial): A multicentre, randomised controlled trial. Lancet Oncol 2013; 14:48.
  24. Karanlik H, Ozgur I, Sahin D, et al. Intraoperative ultrasound reduces the need for re-excision in breast-conserving surgery. World J Surg Oncol 2015; 13:321.
  25. Fisher CS, Mushawah FA, Cyr AE, et al. Ultrasound-guided lumpectomy for palpable breast cancers. Ann Surg Oncol 2011; 18:3198.
  26. Davis KM, Hsu CH, Bouton ME, et al. Intraoperative ultrasound can decrease the re-excision lumpectomy rate in patients with palpable breast cancers. Am Surg 2011; 77:720.
Graphic 117265 Version 1.0

آیا می خواهید مدیلیب را به صفحه اصلی خود اضافه کنید؟