Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

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

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Pathology & Oncology Research

Abstract

To investigate the most commonly used technique, the wire-guided localization (WGL) in non-palpable breast cancer. To analyze the effective factors on positive surgical margins in our practice and determine the surgical learning curve of this method. Prospective consecutive study was performed from January 2005 to December 2011. Inclusion criteria was a non-palpable breast lesion with malignancy on preoperative histology. All lesions were localized by ultrasound or stereotactic guided wire placement. Margins 1 mm or closer were accepted as positive margins which required re-excision. To determine the learning curve of WGL method we investigated the change in the reoperation rate after primary procedure performed by “high-volume” surgeon. Two hundred and fourteen consecutive patients were enrolled. In 23 patients (10.7 %) reexcision was needed. Positive surgical margins were significantly influenced by the patient’s age (p = 0.03), tumor volume (p < =0.001), proportion of tumor volume/specimen volume (p < 0.001), presence of DCIS (p < 0.001), multifocality (p = 0.03) and the learning curve (p = 0.006) with univariate analysis. Only the tumor volume, presence of DCIS and the learning curve were proved as independent prognostic factor for reoperation by multivariate analysis. The reoperation rate decreased below 20 % after the fortieth operation. Results of our single institutional study suggest, that this localization technique can be performed safely with very good results after 40 procedures as a learning curve for surgeons.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Parkin M, Bray F, Ferlay J, Pisani P (2002) Global cancer statistics. Cancer J Clin 55:74–108

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Skinner KA, Silberman H, Sposto R, Silverstein MJ (2001) Palpable breast cancers are inherently different from nonpalpable breast cancers. Ann Surg Oncol 8(9):705–710

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Blanks RG, Moss SM, McGahan CE, Quinn MJ, Babb PJ (2000) Effect of NHS breast screening programme on mortality from breast cancer in England and Wales, 1990–8: comparison of observed with predicted mortality. BMJ 321:665–669

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Gray RJ, Salud C, Nguyen K et al (2001) Randomized prospective evaluation of a novel technique for biopsy or lumpectomy of nonpalpable breast lesions: radioactive seed versus wire localization. Ann Surg Oncol 8(9):711–715

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Medina-Franco H, Abarca-Pérez L, García-Alvarez MN, Ulloa-Gómez JL, Romero-Trejo C, Sepúlveda-Méndez J (2008) Radioguided occult lesion localization (ROLL) versus wire-guided lumpectomy for non-palpable breast lesions: a randomized prospective evaluation. J Surg Oncol 97(2):108–111

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Ocal K, Dag A, Turkmenoglu O, Gunay EC, Yucel E, Duce MN (2011) Radioguided occult lesion localization versus wire-guided localization for non-palpable breast lesions: randomized controlled trial. Clinics (Sao Paulo) 66(6):1003–1007

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Lovrics PJ, Cornacchi SD, Farrokhyar F et al (2009) The relationship between surgical factors and margin status after breast-conservation surgery for early stage breast cancer. Am J Surg 197(6):740–746

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Tóth D, Sebő É, Sarkadi L, Kovács I, Kiss C, Damjanovich L (2012) Role of core needle biopsy in the treatment of radial scar. Breast 21(6):761–763

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Postma EL, Witkamp AJ, van den Bosch MA, Verkooijen HM, van Hillegersberg R (2011) Localization of nonpalpable breast lesions. Expert Rev Anticancer Ther 11(8):1295–1302

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Besic N, Zgajnar J, Hocevar M et al (2002) Breast biopsy with wire localization: factors influencing complete excision of nonpalpable carcinoma. Eur Radiol 12(11):2684–2689

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Davis PS, Wechsler RJ, Feig SA, March DE (1988) Migration of breast biopsy localization wire. AJR Am J Roentgenol 150(4):787–788

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Rahusen FD, Bremers AJ, Fabry HF, van Amerongen AH, Boom RP, Meijer S (2002) Ultrasound-guided lumpectomy of nonpalpable breast cancer versus wire-guided resection: a randomized clinical trial. Ann Surg Oncol 9:994–998

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Homer MJ (1983) Transection of the localization hooked wire during breast biopsy. Am J Roentgenol 141:929–930

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Tykka H, Castren-Person M, Sjoblom M (1993) Pneumothorax caused by hooked wire localization of an impalpable breast lesion detected by mammography. Breast 2:52–53

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Jeevan R, Cromwell DA, Trivella M et al (2012) Reoperation rates after breast conserving surgery for breast cancer among women in England: retrospective study of hospital episode statistics. BMJ 345:e4505

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Takács T, Paszt A, Simonka Z et al (2013) Radioguided occult lesion localisation versus wire-guided lumpectomy in the treatment of non-palpable breast lesions. Pathol Oncol Res 19(2):267–273

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Bernardi S, Bertozzi S, Londero AP, Gentile G, Giacomuzzi F, Carbone A (2012) Incidence and risk factors of the intraoperative localization failure of nonpalpable breast lesions by radio-guided occult lesion localization: a retrospective analysis of 579 cases. World J Surg 36(8):1915–1921

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Wazer DE, Schmidt-Ullrich RK, Ruthazer R et al (1999) The influence of age and extensive intraductal component histology upon breast lumpectomy margin assessment as a predictor of residual tumor. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 45(4):885–891

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Smitt MC, Horst K (2007) Association of clinical and pathologic variables with lumpectomy surgical margin status after preoperative diagnosis or excisional biopsy of invasive breast cancer. Ann Surg Oncol 14(3):1040–1044

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Sanchez C, Brem RF, McSwain AP, Rapelyea JA, Torrente J, Teal CB (2010) Factors associated with re-excision in patients with early-stage breast cancer treated with breast conservation therapy. Am Surg 76(3):331–334

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Lovrics PJ, Cornacchi SD, Vora R, Goldsmith CH, Kahnamoui K (2011) Systematic review of radioguided surgery for non-palpable breast cancer. Eur J Surg Oncol 37(5):388–397

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Del Turco MR, Ponti A, Bick U, Biganzoli L et al (2010) Quality indicators in breast cancer care. Eur J Cancer 46(13):2344–2356

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Ahmed M, Douek M (2013) Radioactive seed localisation (RSL) in the treatment of non-palpable breast cancers: systematic review and meta-analysis. Breast 22(4):383–388

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Postma EL, Verkooijen HM, van Esser S et al (2012) Efficacy of ‘radioguided occult lesion localisation’ (ROLL) versus ‘wire-guided localisation’ (WGL) in breast conserving surgery for non-palpable breast cancer: a randomised controlled multicentre trial. Breast Cancer Res Treat 136(2):469–478

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Cleffken B, Postelmans J, Olde Damink S, Nap M, Schreutelkamp I, van der Bijl H (2007) Breast-conserving therapy for palpable and nonpalpable breast cancer: can surgical residents do the job irrespective of experience? World J Surg 31(9):1731–1736

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Landheer ML, Hoorntje LE, Klinkenbijl JH, Borel Rinkes IH (2004) The surgical treatment of nonpalpable breast carcinoma in a university teaching hospital and a general teaching hospital by residents-in-training and surgeons; comparable results. Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd 148(35):1724–1727

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Edge SB, Byrd DR, Compton CC et al (eds) (2010) AJCC cancer staging manual, 7th edn. Springer, New York, pp 347–376

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of General Surgery, Kenézy Teaching Hospital, 2-26 Bartók Street, Debrecen, 4031, Hungary

    Dezső Tóth & Zsolt Varga

  2. Kenézy Breast Center, Kenézy Teaching Hospital, 21 Jerikó Street, Debrecen, 4032, Hungary

    Éva Sebő

  3. Department of Pathology, Kenézy Teaching Hospital, 2-26 Bartók Street, Debrecen, 4031, Hungary

    Miklós Török & Ilona Kovács

Authors
  1. Dezső Tóth
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Zsolt Varga
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Éva Sebő
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Miklós Török
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Ilona Kovács
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Dezső Tóth.

Ethics declarations

Ethical Approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed Consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Tóth, D., Varga, Z., Sebő, É. 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. 22, 209–215 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12253-015-9999-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12253-015-9999-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation