Pathologic features of initial biopsy specimens associated with residual intraductal carcinoma on reexcision in patients with ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast referred for breast-conserving therapy.

The histologic criteria for determining which patients require a reexcision after an initial excisional biopsy for ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) of the breast are poorly defined. The authors examined the initial biopsy specimens of 98 patients with inked margins and determined the amount of DCIS on reexcision to help clarify which histologic criteria are useful in judging the need for reexcision. Features in initial biopsy specimens that were associated with an increasing number of slides with DCIS on reexcision were an increasing number of slides with DCIS, an increasing number of DCIS ducts or terminal duct lobular units (TDLUs) with "cancerization" of lobules (COL) within 0.42 cm of the inked margin, and multifocal positive margins. In patients with negative (>0.2 cm) initial biopsy specimen margins, an increasing number of DCIS ducts or TDLUs with COL near the initial biopsy specimen margin were also associated significantly with an increasing number of slides with DCIS on reexcision. Six or more slides with DCIS or 11 or more DCIS ducts or TDLUs with COL within 0.42 cm of the inked margin in the initial biopsy specimens were associated with 6 or more slides with DCIS on reexcision. These results suggest that the amount of DCIS in initial biopsy specimens and the amount of DCIS near the margin are associated with the quantity of DCIS remaining in the breast after an initial excisional biopsy. Pathologists can use these factors when assisting clinicians in evaluating the need for a reexcision.     

Evaluation of margin status in lumpectomy specimens and residual breast carcinoma

Residual disease leads to most local recurrences, especially in those patients treated with breast-conserving therapy (BCT). This study evaluates whether assessment of excisional biopsy margins accurately predicts the presence or absence of residual tumor in the lumpectomy bed. The margin status of 201 consecutive lumpectomy specimens of 178 infiltrating and 23 in situ breast carcinomas followed by reexcision were evaluated microscopically and classified as "positive" (tumor at the inked margins), "negative" (tumor more than 0.1 cm from the inked margins), "close" (tumor within 0.1 cm of the inked margins, but not transecting it), and "indeterminate" (biopsy not inked or fragmented). Tumor size and grade were also analyzed, as potential predictors for residual disease. Residual tumor was found in 41% of the patients: in 21% of the cases with negative margins, in 63% with positive margins, in 30% with close margins, and in 56% with indeterminate margins. In 37% of the positive and 70% of the close margin cases, no tumor was found in reexcised specimens. In 24% of the cases the residual disease was composed entirely of an in situ component of the same histologic type as the initial biopsy. No relationship was found between tumor size or grade and residual disease. For breast tumors, histologically negative and "close" biopsy margins do not guarantee complete excision. A number of factors seem to be responsible for the discrepancy between the margin status and the presence/absence of residual cancer in the lumpectomy bed.     

Accuracy of intraoperative gross examination of surgical margin status in women undergoing partial mastectomy for breast malignancy

Margin status is an important prognostic factor for local recurrence after partial mastectomy for breast malignancy. Options for intraoperative evaluation of margin status include gross examination of the specimen, frozen section, and "touch preparation" cytology. This study evaluates the accuracy of gross examination without other intraoperative pathological analysis as a method of determining margin status. Records of 254 consecutive patients undergoing partial mastectomy for 255 breast malignancies (199 invasive, 56 DCIS) over 6 years were analyzed retrospectively. All women underwent en bloc excision of the primary lesion with gross examination of margin status by the surgeon and pathologist. All suspicious areas were reexcised, and the specimen was inked, serially sectioned at 2-3 mm intervals and examined with hematoxylin and eosin (H&E) stains. Specimens with tumor <2 mm from a margin were considered margin-positive and those with all tumor > or =2 mm from the margin were designated margin-negative. One hundred fourteen (45%) of the 255 segmental resections were considered to have grossly tumor-free margins, and intraoperative reexcision was not performed. Ninety-six (84%) of these specimens had histologically negative margins. Gross examination prompted intraoperative reexcision in 141 (55%) cases. Ninety-five (67%) of these 141 resections had tumor-free margins on histopathology. Overall, the final margin was involved in 64 of the 255 partial mastectomies. Seventeen (27%) women with initially margin-positive resections underwent mastectomy, while 46 (72%) underwent reexcision, which was margin-negative in 41 (89%). After a median follow-up of 42 months, there have been eight (3.5%) local recurrences. The initial margin-positive rate was similar in ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) (30%) and invasive carcinoma (24%). Margin status was correlated with nodal status; there was no correlation with age, tumor size, grade hormone receptor status, or type of diagnostic biopsy. Gross examination of the resection specimen does not reflect margin status in at least 25 per cent of women undergoing partial mastectomy for breast malignancy. Other techniques for evaluation of margin status should be considered to reduce the need for reexcision of involved margins. We are currently designing a prospective clinical trial to examine the efficacy of new techniques for intraoperative evaluation of margin status.     

Effect of reexcision on the success of breast-conserving surgery

Background: The success of lumpectomy and radiotherapy is dependent on minimizing the residual tumor burden in the breast. Histologic margin status is one measure of the extent of residual tumor. This study was undertaken to determine the success rate of a single conservative lumpectomy in obtaining negative margins and to evaluate the incidence of residual tumor after biopsies with positive or unknown margins. Methods: This is a retrospective study covering a 5-year period (June 1988–June 1993). Results: Three hundred sixteen women had lumpectomies. In 239, lumpectomy was the initial operation after a positive fine-needle aspiration or as a diagnostic procedure. Thirteen cases had positive margins. Reexcision was performed in 90 cases. The indication for reexcision was a positive margin in 42 cases (4 with gross tumor) and unknown margin status in 48. Nineteen of the reexcisions for positive margins and 20 of the reexcisions for unknown margins contained residual tumor. Eighty-six (96%) of the 90 reexcised patients underwent breast preserving surgery. Patient age, menopausal status, histologic tumor type, tumor size, and clinical presentation were not predictive of residual tumor. Conclusions: The need for reexcision does not preclude breast preservation. Because single-stage lumpectomy is successful in achieving negative margins in 95% of patients, diagnostic biopsy without margin evaluation should be abandoned to avoid routine reexcision.Results of this study were presented at the 47th Annual Meeting of The Society of Surgical Oncology, March 17–20, 1994, Houston, Texas, USA.     

Value of Three-Dimensional Helical CT Image-Guided Planning for Made-to-Order Lumpectomy in Breast Cancer Patients

The authors reviewed Niigata Cancer Center Hospital's experience treating patients with lumpectomy to evaluate the utility of three-dimensional helical computed tomography (3D-CT) image-guided made-to-order lumpectomy and determine a positive margin rate. From April 1993 to September 2000, 251 breasts in 248 patients were treated with lumpectomy with a 1 cm macroscopic free margin. In 213 breasts (85%), 3D-CT image-guided made-to-order lumpectomy was performed. Thirty-eight breasts (15%) underwent a lumpectomy without 3D-CT. The lumpectomy specimen was sectioned at 5 mm intervals. Margin status was classified as negative (no invasive or ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) within 2 mm from the cut surface) or positive. Positive margins were classified as focally positive (invasive or DCIS transected at the margin within 5 mm or one slide) or massively positive. With 3D-CT image-guided lumpectomy, 21% (45/213) of lesions had a positive margin and 42% (16/38) of lesions without 3D-CT image-guided lumpectomy had a positive margin (p = 0.0055). For lesions with massively positive margins, the rates were 9% (4/45) for 3D-CT image-guided lumpectomy and 38% (6/16) for lumpectomy without 3D-CT (p = 0.0152). 3D-CT image-guided made-to-order lumpectomy decreased the positive surgical margin rate. Among patients with positive margins, those with 3D-CT image-guided lumpectomy have less residual cancer than those without 3D-CT.     

Defining negative margins in DCIS patients treated with breast conservation therapy: The University of Chicago experience

Management of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) has been evolving and the majority of women are now being treated with breast-conserving surgery and radiation therapy (i.e. breast conservation therapy [BCT]). Controversies still exist regarding the histologic features and margin status that are associated with local recurrence. The goal of this study was to review our institution's experience in patients diagnosed with DCIS and treated with BCT to determine pathologic features that can predict local recurrence, with particular emphasis on the final surgical margin status. We analyzed 103 consecutive patients with DCIS who were treated with BCT between 1986 and 2000. The slides were reviewed to determine the final margin status, type of DCIS, size of DCIS, nuclear grade, presence of necrosis and calcification, and volume of excised specimen. Margins were considered positive when DCIS touched or was transected at an inked margin. Negative margins were further categorized as close (less than 1 mm), 1--5 mm, and more than 5 mm. The size of the DCIS was determined based on either the maximal dimension on a slide or from the number of consecutive slides containing DCIS. Morphology and immunohistochemical profiles of the recurrent DCIS cases were compared with original DCIS. All patients were treated uniformly with external beam radiation therapy to the entire breast (median dose 46 Gy) with a boost to the tumor bed (median dose 14 Gy). The median follow-up was 63 months (range 7--191 months). The actuarial 5-year local control rate was 89%. The median time to local recurrence was 55 months. There were 13 local recurrences, of which 9 recurred as pure DCIS and 4 as invasive ductal carcinomas. Univariate analysis showed a significant association with local recurrence for positive margin (p=0.008), high nuclear grade (p=0.02), and young age at diagnosis (p=0.03). If margins were negative, the 5-year local control was 93%, as compared to 69% if margins were positive. A multivariate analysis showed that early age at diagnosis, positive margin status, and high nuclear grade were independently associated with local recurrence. The morphology and immunohistochemical stains of all nine recurrent DCIS were similar to those of the original DCIS. Breast conservation can be achieved with excellent local control by obtaining microscopically negative margins as strictly defined by DCIS not touching the inked surgical margins, and postoperative radiation that includes boost therapy to the tumor bed.     

The Superficial Margin of the Skin-Sparing Mastectomy for Breast Carcinoma: Factors Predicting Involvement and Efficacy of Additional Margin Sampling

Background No study has systematically evaluated the significance of involvement of the superficial specimen margin in skin-sparing mastectomies (SSMs). Methods 168 SSMs with a small, additional superficial margin (ASM) specimen taken directly over the tumor to the dermis intraoperatively were studied. Results 64 SSMs (38%) had a positive superficial specimen margin but only 13 (20%) of these had residual breast carcinoma in ASMs. Only 1 of 104 SSMs with a negative superficial specimen margin had residual breast carcinoma in its ASM (P < 0.05). ASM sampling rendered the final true margin directly over the tumor negative in 54 of 58 (93%) SSMs with a focally positive superficial specimen margin, but did not negate the nonfocally positive superficial specimen margin in six other cases. In SSMs with a positive superficial specimen margin, multivariate analysis revealed that the presence of extensive ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) in the SSM and a thicker ASM specimen were the only independent factors predictive of residual breast carcinoma in ASM. Eighty-nine (53%) ASMs contained benign breast tissue. Conclusions Superficial specimen margins in SSMs are often microscopically positive and approximately half of ASMs contain benign breast tissue, likely reflecting the difficulty in completely removing breast tissue near the skin flaps in SSMs. ASM sampling effectively decreases positive superficial specimen margins directly over the tumor in SSMs, but fails to account for positive superficial specimen margins in other quadrants in patients with multicentric disease, especially extensive DCIS. Patients whose superficial margins remain positive could potentially represent a subset of patients for whom postmastectomy radiation is beneficial.     

Current perceptions regarding surgical margin status after breast-conserving therapy: results of a survey

OBJECTIVE: The surgical margin status after breast-conserving surgery is considered the strongest predictor for local failure. The purpose of this study is to survey how radiation oncologists in North America (NA) and Europe define negative or close surgical margins after lumpectomy and to determine the factors that govern the decision to recommend reexcision based on the margins status. METHODS: A questionnaire was sent to active members of the European Society of Therapeutic Radiation Oncology and the American Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology who had completed training in radiation oncology. Respondents were asked whether they would characterize margins to be negative or close for a variety of scenarios. A second survey was sent to 500 randomly selected radiation oncologists in the United States to assess when a reexcision would be recommended based on surgical margins. RESULTS: A total of 702 responses were obtained from NA and 431 from Europe to the initial survey. An additional 130 responses were obtained from the United States to the second survey regarding reexcision recommendations. Nearly 46% of the North American respondents required only that there be "no tumor cells on the ink" to deem a margin negative (National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project definition). A total of 7.4% and 21.8% required no tumor cells seen at <1 mm and <2 mm, respectively. The corresponding numbers from European respondents were 27.6%, 11.2%, and 8.8%, respectively (P <0.001). Europeans more frequently required a larger distance (>5 mm) between tumor cells and the inked edges before considering a margin to be negative. CONCLUSION: This study revealed significant variation in the perception of negative and close margins among radiation oncologists in NA and Europe. Given these findings, a universal definition of negative margins and consistent recommendations for reexcision are needed.     

High resolution intra-operative two-dimensional specimen mammography and its impact on second operation for re-excision of positive margins at final pathology after breast conservation surgery

Background

In the United States, about 50% to 66% of women undergoing breast conservation surgery for cancer undergo subsequent mastectomy for positive margins on initial lumpectomy. This is despite the fact that screening mammography has resulted in a decrease in the size of newly diagnosed breast cancer to <2 cm.

Methods

A retrospective review of 128 patients who underwent breast conservation surgery for early breast cancer was performed using intraoperative 2-dimensional Faxitron high-resolution specimen mammography without specimen compression as the only margin assessment technique. Of these, 29 patients had histories of lumpectomy with positive margins.

Results

A total of 131 procedures were performed. Margins were histologically clear at initial breast conservation surgery in 84.3% of patients who underwent primary lumpectomy. Subsequent reexcision for positive margins was required in 14.7% of patients. Two-dimensional Faxitron mammographically guided intraoperative reexcision cleared the margins in 95.8% of patients (23 of 24) who would have otherwise required subsequent reexcision.

Conclusions

Intraoperative 2-dimensional Faxitron high-resolution specimen mammography can decrease rates of margin positivity and has the potential to diminish the number of subsequent undesired mastectomies for positive margins.     

Location and extent of positive resection margins and ductal carcinoma in situ in lumpectomy specimens of ductal breast carcinoma examined with a microscopic three-dimensional view

The location of positive margins in lumpectomy specimens for ductal carcinoma could be predicted due to the common pattern of the geographic relationship between the intraductal and invasive carcinomas. To test this hypothesis, 62 lumpectomy specimens for ductal carcinoma of the breast were submitted for this study. The specimens were microscopically examined by serially sectioning them into giant sections in a plane parallel to the chest wall (frontal plane). The margins were identified as proximal (closest to the nipple), distal (opposite to proximal), and peripheral (nonproximal or distal). We found that the location of positive or close margins was proximal in 6 cases, peripheral in 13 cases, and none were found to be distal. Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) was found to be located in the area adjacent to the invasive carcinoma. The invasive carcinoma was located at the periphery of the intraductal carcinoma. All six specimens with invasive carcinoma without DCIS had free margins. Nine of 16 specimens (56%) with extensive intraductal carcinoma (EIC) component and 7 of 40 (18%) with DCIS but negative EIC contained positive or close margins involved by DCIS. One case with multifocal invasive carcinoma measuring 3.5 cm in diameter and with DCIS but EIC negative had margins involved by both DCIS and invasive carcinoma. In conclusion, in ductal carcinoma, invasive carcinoma arose at the peripheral areas of the DCIS. DCIS tends to spread toward the nipple and the peripheral margins of the resected specimens. Incomplete excision of the ductal carcinoma and the wide positive margins are most likely caused by the failure to estimate the extent and location of DCIS.     

Role of Specimen Radiography in Patients Treated With Skin-Sparing Mastectomy for Ductal Carcinoma In Situ of the Breast

Background: Specimen radiography is an important part of breast conservation surgery for ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). The objective of this study was to determine whether mastectomy specimen radiography could help in obtaining negative resection margins in patients with DCIS undergoing skin-sparing mastectomy (SSM) with immediate breast reconstruction (IBR).Methods: Of 95 patients treated at our institution with SSM and IBR for DCIS, 35 had specimen radiography. The mastectomy specimen was first examined grossly and then inked, serially sectioned, and sent for radiographic assessment. Tissue slices containing calcifications were identified for pathologic evaluation. Additional tissue was excised if tumor was found near the inked margins or if calcifications were found near the radiographic margins.Results: Of the 35 patients who had specimen radiography, the radiographic margins were free of calcifications in 30 patients (86%); of these patients, the margins on the final histologic examination were free of tumor in 27 and within 1 mm in 3. The other five patients (14%) had calcifications close to the radiographic margin; four underwent an intraoperative re-excision, but the margin for one of those four patients was still positive on final histologic examination. Margins were found to be negative by both mastectomy specimen radiography and histology in 77% of the patients. Of the 95 patients with DCIS, three patients (3%), none of whom had specimen radiography, developed local recurrences. One of these was successfully re-treated, one died as a result of synchronous distant metastases, and one was lost to follow-up. At a median follow-up time of 3.7 years, 93 patients (98%) were alive and free of disease.Conclusions: Intraoperative radiography of mastectomy specimens may be useful for assessing margin status and for identifying the location of microcalcifications within tissue slices.     

The role of reexcision for positive margins in optimizing local disease control after breast-conserving surgery for cancer

One of the most important factors associated with local recurrence after lumpectomy in breast cancer patients is the status of the surgical margin. Standard surgical practice is to obtain clear margins even if this requires a second surgical procedure. It is assumed that reexcision to achieve clear margins when positive margins are present at initial excision is as effective as complete tumor removal at a single procedure; however, the efficacy of reexcision in this context has not been well studied. A retrospective search of the Henrietta Banting Breast Centre database from 1987 to 1997 identified 1430 patients who underwent lumpectomy for invasive breast cancer: 1225 patients (group A) had negative margins at the initial surgery and 152 patients (group B) underwent one or more reexcisions to achieve negative margins. Fifty-three patients had positive margins at final surgery, but no reexcision was done (group C). Logistic regression was used to identify factors that were predictive of a positive margin; predictors of local recurrence in women whose tumors were completely resected were determined using Cox's proportional hazards model. Patients in groups A, B, and C differed with respect to mean age at diagnosis (58 years, 51 versus, and 56 years, respectively, p < 0.0001), mean tumor size (19 mm, 16 mm, and 26 mm, respectively, p < 0.0001), node positivity (30%, 22%, and 41%, respectively, p = 0.004), and the presence of a ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) component (60%, 64%, and 79%, respectively, p = 0.007). The mean follow-up period was similar for the three groups (8 years, 8 years, and 9 years, respectively, p = 0.17). Young age was the only variable predictive of positive margins. Among patients undergoing complete tumor excision, there was a suggestion of a higher 10 year local recurrence rate in reexcision group B, but the difference did not reach statistical significance (11.6% versus 16.6%, p = 0.11). Cox's multivariate regression analyses identified older age, smaller tumor size, receiving radiation therapy, and tamoxifen use as significantly decreasing the rate of local recurrence in patients with negative margins at initial surgery or after reexcision. Our data confirm the results of previous studies indicating that young age is an independent predictor of positive margins after lumpectomy for invasive breast cancer. The only independent predictor of local recurrence in our study cohort was large tumor size. There was a trend toward a higher local recurrence rate if more than one procedure was required to secure clear margins, although this effect was not independent of other factors. Reexcision to clear involved margins is an important surgical intervention for both younger and older women.     

Relationship between initial margin status for invasive breast cancer and residual carcinoma after re-excision

Little data exists addressing the relationship between initial margin status in a specimen from an excisional biopsy and the presence of residual carcinoma in a subsequent specimen from lumpectomy or mastectomy. We sought to determine the relationship between initial margin status and the presence of residual invasive cancer, and to identify any relationship to other variables. This study was a retrospective review of pathology reports of 582 early-stage invasive duct carcinomas with open excisional biopsies. The initial specimen was classified into one of six margin categories: multiply focally positive (n = 174), focally positive (n = 132), margins < 1 mm (n = 98), margins 1 to 2 mm (n = 20), margins > 2 mm (n = 46), and margins undetermined (n = 90). All patients had a subsequent definitive second procedure. Pathology reports from the second procedure revealed the presence of residual invasive cancer by initial margin status as follows: in 30 per cent of the initial procedures with multiply focally positive margins, in 22 per cent with focally positive margins, in 8 per cent, 15 per cent, and 4 per cent with margins of < 1 mm, 1 to 2 mm, and > 2 mm, respectively, and in 28 per cent with undetermined margins. Women with palpable tumors, larger tumor size, and positive axillary nodes were more likely to have multiply focal and focally positive margins. Multiply focally positive and focally positive margins had similar residual invasive carcinoma rates and should be re-excised. All clear margins were equivalent; thus, re-excision was not necessary.     

The influence of additional surgical margins on the total specimen volume excised and the reoperative rate after breast-conserving surgery

BACKGROUND: It is unclear whether the additional removal of breast tissue during breast-conserving therapy (BCT) for breast cancer beyond the standard lumpectomy reduces the incidence of inadequate microscopic margins found at pathological examination and subsequent reoperation. This study compares the reoperative rates after initial BCT in 3 groups of patients who underwent lumpectomy with complete resection of 4 to 6 additional margins, lumpectomy with selective resection of 1 to 3 additional margins, or standard lumpectomy. METHODS: Retrospective data were reviewed from 171 selected cases of BCT, from May 2000 to February 2006. Forty-five cases involved lumpectomy with complete resection of 4 to 6 additional margins; 77 involved lumpectomy with selective resection of 1 to 3 additional margins, whereas 49 involved standard lumpectomy. All samples underwent pathologic analysis of inked resection margins by permanent section. The 3 groups were compared for patient demographics, tumor size and histologic subtype, tumor stage, margin status, excised specimen volume, and eventual subsequent reoperation. Adequate surgical margin was defined as any negative margin greater than 2 mm. RESULTS: The group with complete resection of 4 to 6 additional margins had a subsequent reoperation rate of 17.7%, whereas the group with selective resection of 1 to 3 additional margins and the standard lumpectomy group had a subsequent reoperation rate of 32.5% and 38.7%, respectively, because of inadequate margins. The mean total excised specimen volume in the 3 groups was 129.19, 46.04, and 37.44 cm3, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The complete resection of 4 to 6 additional margins during the initial BCT resulted in the lowest subsequent reoperation rate, and the largest total volume specimen excised among the 3 techniques studied.     

Intraoperative margin assessment reduces reexcision rates in patients with ductal carcinoma in situ treated with breast-conserving surgery

BACKGROUND: Reported rates of reexcision for margin control after breast-conserving surgery for ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) range from 48% to 59%. The optimal technique for intraoperative margin assessment in patients with DCIS has yet to be defined. We sought to determine whether intraoperative multidisciplinary evaluation using gross tissue assessment and sectioned-specimen radiography reduces the need for reoperation for margin control in DCIS. METHODS: A prospectively compiled database was used to identify patients who had DCIS diagnosed by core needle biopsy and were treated with breast-conserving surgery at our institution between July 1999 and July 2002. All patients had intraoperative gross margin assessment and specimen radiography of both the whole and sliced specimen for calcifications. RESULTS: Four hundred two patients with DCIS were evaluated at our institution during the study period. Of these, 160 had excisional biopsy for diagnosis prior to referral, 92 had mastectomy as their initial procedure, 40 were seen for a second opinion only, and 1 patient refused surgery. The remaining 109 patients formed the study population. The median age was 55 years (range 34 to 81). The median pathologic size of DCIS was 1.2 cm (range 0.2 to 8.0 cm). Fifty-nine patients had positive (less than 1 mm) or close (less than 5 mm) margins on intraoperative assessment. Final pathology agreed with intraoperative assessment of a positive or close margin in 43 of the 59 patients (P = 0.00005). Seventy-five percent of those thought to have a positive or close margin at the time of surgery (n = 44) underwent intraoperative reexcision. Of the total 109 patients, 31 (34%) had an intraoperative reexcision that resulted in a change in margin status from positive on intraoperative evaluation to negative on final pathologic evaluation (P < 0.00001). A second procedure for margin control was necessary in only 24 patients (22%). The decision to excise additional tissue at the first surgery on the basis of intraoperative assessment resulted in significantly fewer second procedures for margin control (P = 0.029). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with DCIS, intraoperative margin assessment by gross pathological examination and sliced specimen radiography significantly affects intraoperative decision making, and excision of further tissue on the basis of intraoperative assessment results in a substantial decrease in second procedures for margin control.     

Histopathological study of local residual carcinoma after simulated lumpectomy

From 1989 to 1991, 24 patients with invasive ductal carcinoma underwent simulated lumpectomy at Tokyo Women's Medical College Daini Hospital. The mastectomy specimens were then examined histopathologically in serial sections for the presence of residual tumors or multicentricity. Lumpectomy specimens from cancer foci at resected margins were also examined. In this study, 23 of 24 patients demonstrated positive resection margins (95.8%). Residual tumors were found in mastectomy specimens from 16 patients (66.7%); unilateral multifocal carcinomas were found in 2 of these patients (8.3%). The incidence and severity of residual tumors did not correlate with primary tumor size or the distance between the nipple and the primary tumor but directly correlated with the severity of intraductal spread of the primary tumor. Tumors with central necrosis were associated with a higher incidence of residual tumors. Our study thus indicates that there is a high risk that some residual tumor will be left in the conserved breast when lumpectomy is performed. Multifocal carcinoma and tumors showing severe intraductal spread and central necrosis are thus associated with extensive residual tumors and are likely to cause local recurrence.     

A prospective, randomized, controlled, multicenter study of a real-time, intraoperative probe for positive margin detection in breast-conserving surgery

BACKGROUND: This randomized, double-arm trial was designed to study the benefit of a novel device (MarginProbe, Dune Medical Devices, Caesarea, Israel) in intraoperative margin assessment for breast-conserving surgery (BCS) and the associated reduction in reoperations. METHODS: In the device group, the probe was applied to the lumpectomy specimen and additional tissue was excised according to device readings. Study arms were compared by reoperation rates and by correct surgical reaction confirmed by histology. RESULTS: Three hundred patients were enrolled. Device use was associated with improved correct surgical reaction, defined as additional re-excision in all histologically detected positive margins, with tumor within 1 mm of inked margin. The repeat lumpectomy rate was significantly reduced by 56% in the device arm: 5.6% versus 12.7% in the control arm. There were no differences in excised tissue volume or cosmetic outcome. CONCLUSIONS: Intraoperative use of the MarginProbe for positive margin detection is safe and effective in BCS and decreases the rate of repeat operations.     

Understanding the mechanisms creating false positive lumpectomy margins

OBJECTIVE: All breast surgeons deal with the frustration of initial pathologic close or positive margins that have no residual cancer upon re-excision. To understand the mechanisms that create false positive margins, specimen handling was standardized in a single surgeon's practice and margin issues were tracked. METHODS: Prospectively over a 3.5-year period, needle-localized lumpectomies for the management of early-stage breast cancer were standardized in all aspects of specimen handling, including surgeon inking and specimen compression for specimen radiography for quality assurance. The current study reviews 220 such cases where the original lumpectomy included a small piece of overlying skin from over the target lesion. All specimen radiography was performed with compression at the skin to deep level to bias the "pancaking" effect of pushing tumor to specimen surface to the deep margin. RESULTS: Of the 220 therapeutic lumpectomies performed for clinical stage 0-2 breast cancer in this fashion, 175 (79.5%) had negative margins by a distance of 10 mm or more. Margins less than 10 mm were classified as close and were present in 20 (9.1%) of cases. These were heavily biased toward margins closer than 2 mm. Positive initial margins accounted for 25 (11.4%) of cases. Of the 45 close or positive margin cases, 12 involved the deep margin only, and on re-excision none was found to have residual tumor. When other single margins were involved, re-excision found tumor in 5 of 14 cases (35.7%). When multiple margins were close or positive, 9 of 19 cases (47.3%) were found to have residual tumor at re-excision. CONCLUSIONS: Specimen compression increases the incidence of false margin positivity. The best predictors of true margin positivity are multiple close or positive margins or margin positivity in a direction not associated with specimen ex vivo compression.     

Intraoperative inking is superior to suture marking for specimen orientation in breast cancer

Margin status is an important indicator of residual disease after breast‐conserving surgery (BCS). Intraoperatively, surgeons orient specimens to aid assessment of margins and guide re‐excision of positive margins. We performed a retrospective review of BCS cases from 2013 to 2017 to compare the two specimen orientation methods: suture marking and intraoperative inking. Patients with ductal carcinoma in situ, T1/T2 invasive cancer treated with BCS were included. Rates of positive margins and residual disease at re‐excision were evaluated. 189 patients underwent BCS; 83 had suture marking, 103 had intraoperative inking and 3 had un‐oriented specimens. The incidence of positive margins was 29% (24 patients) in the suture marked group and 20% (21 patients) in the intraoperative inked group (P = .18). Among the 45 patients with positive margins, 60% of tumors were stage T1, 76% were node negative, 36% were palpable with median tumor size of 1.5 cm. Residual disease was identified on re‐excision in 21% of the suture marked specimens and 57% of intraoperative inked specimens (P = .028). The incidence of residual cancer at re‐excision for positive margins was higher for intraoperatively inked versus suture marked specimens. This finding suggests that intraoperative inking is more effective at guiding re‐excision of positive margins.     

Surgical margins after needle-localization breast biopsy

: The use of needle-localization breast biopsy (NLBB) for the early diagnosis of breast cancer is common. The therapeutic adequacy of tumor-free margins following NLBB is unknown. We hypothesized that the presence of residual tumor after reexcision (mastectomy, tylectomy, or quadrantectomy) does not depend on the margin status following NLBB. : Retrospective cohort analysis was performed on 890 consecutive NLBBs executed between January 1990 and June 1994. Patients with invasive breast neoplasia were divided into two groups based on the tumor margins after NLBB. Group 1 were the women with positive margins, and group 2 had negative margins. Breast specimens after reexcision were reviewed for evidence of residual invasive carcinoma. : Invasive neoplasia was present in 107 patients (12%). Surgical margins and definitive records of care were avaliable for 96 of them (90%). All 45 patients in group 1 and 38 (75%) of 51 patients in group 2 underwent reexcision of the initial biopsy site (P = 0.36). Residual invasive carcinoma was present in 10 patients (22%) in group 1 and 3 (8%) in group 2 (P = 0.13). : Invasive breast neoplasia diagnosed by NLBB requires reexcision regardless of tumor margins to achieve complete local surgical eradication of tumor.