Journals / JAREM / 2020 / Cilt: 10 - Sayı: 1

Radioguided Occult Lesion Localization Versus Wireguided Localization of Nonpalpable Breast Lesions: A Comparative Analysis

Nonpalpabl Meme Lezyonlarında Meme İşaretleme Teli ve Radyoaktif Madde ile Lezyon Lokalizasyonu Yöntemlerinin Karşılaştırılması

Journal
JAREM
Pages
88–93
Publication Date
2022-11-05
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The operation time for ROLL procedures at our institutionwill likely decrease as clinicians become more familiar with the procedure.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Objective: Wire-guided localization (WGL) is the preoperative localization method most commonly used before the surgical excision of non-palpablebreast lesions (NPBLs).
📊
Key Findings & Data:We sought to compare the efficacyof ROLL with that of WGL for the preoperative localization of NPBLs and to assess our experience encountered as ROLL is implemented at our institution.Methods: We retrospectively identified reports of patients with NPBLs who underwent mammography- or ultrasonography-guided ROLL or WGLbetween January 2014 and March 2017.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The operation time for ROLL procedures at our institutionwill likely decrease as clinicians become more familiar with the procedure.
🔬Design:Review & Systematic Survey
📍Scope:2014 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Objective: Wire-guided localization (WGL) is the preoperative localization method most commonly used before the surgical excision of non-palpablebreast lesions (NPBLs). Recently, radioguided occult lesion localization (ROLL) has emerged as an alternative to WGL. We sought to compare the efficacyof ROLL with that of WGL for the preoperative localization of NPBLs and to assess our experience encountered as ROLL is implemented at our institution.Methods: We retrospectively identified reports of patients with NPBLs who underwent mammography- or ultrasonography-guided ROLL or WGLbetween January 2014 and March 2017. Medical records were reviewed to compare radiologic and pathologic findings, rates of accurate localization,specimen volumes, lengths of operation, creation of positive surgical margins, number of simultaneous sentinel lymph node biopsies (SLNB) performed,complication rates, and lengths of hospital stay.Results: Our search identified 67 women (mean age, 52.7 years; range, 32-69 years) diagnosed with NPBLs during the study period. ROLL was usedin 25 patients; WGL was used in 42 patients. Both methods had a high accurate localization rate (ROLL, 96%; WGL, 98%). The length of operation waslonger in the ROLL group than in the WGL group (p=0.001), and more SLNBs were performed in the ROLL group than in the WGL group. No significantdifferences were seen between the groups in terms of radiologic and pathologic findings, specimen volumes, positive surgical margins, complicationrates, or lengths of hospital stay.Conclusion: ROLL is a promising alternative to WGL for preoperative localization of NPBLs. The operation time for ROLL procedures at our institutionwill likely decrease as clinicians become more familiar with the procedure.

Özet

Amaç: Telle işaretleme (WGL) non-palpabl meme lezyonlarının (NPBLs) cerrahi öncesi yerinin belirlenmesinde yaygın olarak kullanılan bir yöntemdir. Son zamanlarda geliştirilen bir teknik olan radyonüklid okült lezyon lokalizasyonu (ROLL) telle işaretlemeye önemli bir alternatiftir. Çalışmadaki amacımız bu iki yöntemi karşılaştırmak ve kliniğimizde son zamanlarda uygulanmaya başlanan ROLL yöntemi ile ilgili deneyimlerimizi paylaşmaktır. Yöntemler: NPBLs olup 2014-2017 yıllarında kliniğimizde cerrahi öncesi işaretleme yapılan hastaların raporları retrospektif olarak tarandı. Hastaların medikal kayıtları kontrol edilip, patolojik ve radyolojik bulguları, doğru lezyon lokalizasyonu, spesmen boyutu, operasyon süresi, cerrahi sinir pozitifliği, simultane sentinel lenf nodu biyopsi sayısı, komplikasyon oranları, hospitalizasyon süreleri karsılaştırıldı. Results: NPBLs olan 67 kadın (ortalama yaş, 52,7; yaş aralığı, 32-69 ) calışmaya alındı. ROLL uygulanan 25 hasta ve WGL uygulanan 42 hasta saptandı. Bu iki metodun da doğru lezyon lokalize etme oranları benzer yükseklikte bulundu (ROLL, 96%; WGL, 98%). ROLL tekniğinde operasyon süresi WGL grubuna göre daha uzun sürdü (p=0,001) ve sentinel lenf nod biyopsi sayısının ROLL grubunda daha fazla olduğu bulundu. Patolojik ve radyolojik bulgular, spesmen boyutu, cerrahi sinir pozitifliği, komplikasyon oranları, hospitalizasyon süreleri larşılaştırıldığında anlamlı fark bulunmadı. Sonuç: Non-palpabl meme lezyonlarında, ROLL ile işaretleme yöntemi oğrenme aşamasında dahi verdiği sonuçlarla telle işaretleme yöntemine alternatif olabilecek umut vaadeden bir yöntemdir. ROLL ile operasyon süresi klinisyenlerin alışması ile giderek kısalacaktır.

🔖

Cite This Article

İNCİ, E., ÇOLAK, C., YABUL, F. Ç., KAPAN, S., KOYUNCU, A. (2022). Radioguided Occult Lesion Localization Versus Wireguided Localization of Nonpalpable Breast Lesions: A Comparative Analysis. JAREM, Cilt: 10 - Sayı: 1, 88–93. https://ajindex.com/articles/652214

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (14)

  1. Markopoulos C, Kakisis J, Kouskos S, Kontzoglou K, Koufopoulos K, Gogas J. Management of nonpalpable, mammographically detectable breast lesions. World J Surg 1999; 23: 434-8
  2. Altomare V, Guerriero G, Giacomelli L, Battista C, Carino R, Montesano M, et al. Management of nonpalpable breast lesions in a modern functional breast unit. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2005; 93: 85-9
  3. Cady B, Stone MD, Schuler JG, Thakur R, Wanner MA, Lavin PT. The new era in breast cancer. Invasion, size, and nodal involvement dramatically decreasing as a result of mammographic screening. Arch Surg 1996; 131: 301-8
  4. Wilson M, Boggis CR, Mansel RE, Harland RN. Non-invasive ultrasound localization of impalpable breast lesions. Clin Radiol 1993; 47: 337-8
  5. Ahmed M, Rubio IT, Klaase JM, Douek M. Surgical treatment of nonpalpable primary invasive and in situ breast cancer. Nat Rev Clin Oncol 2015; 12: 645-63
  6. Marinovich ML, Azizi L, Macaskill P, Irwig L, Morrow M, Solin LJ, et al. The association of surgical margins and local recurrence in women with ductal carcinoma in situ treated with breast-conserving therapy: a metaanalysis. Ann Surg Oncol 2016; 23: 3811-21
  7. Li CI, Daling JR, Malone KE. Age-specific incidence rates of in situ breast carcinomas by histologic type, 1980 to 2001. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2005; 14: 1008-11
  8. Perdue P, Page D, Nellestein M, Salem C, Galbo C, Ghosh B. Early detection of breast carcinoma: a comparison of palpable and nonpalpable lesions. Surgery 1992; 111: 656-9
  9. Harvey JA, Nicholson BT, Cohen MA. Finding early invasive breast cancers: a practical approach. Radiology 2008; 248: 61-76
  10. Frank HA, Hall FM, Steer ML. Preoperative localization of nonpalpable breast lesions demonstrated by mammography. N Engl J Med 1976; 295: 259-60
  11. Homer MJ, Smith TJ, Safaii H. Prebiopsy needle localization. Methods, problems, and expected results. Radiol Clin North Am 1992; 30: 139-53
  12. Rappaport W, Thompson S, Wong R, Leong S, Villar H. Complications associated with needle localization biopsy of the breast. Surg Gynecol Obstet 1991; 172: 303-6
  13. Mariscal Martinez A, Solà M, de Tudela AP, Julián JF, Fraile M, Vizcaya S, et al. Radioguided localization of nonpalpable breast cancer lesions: randomized comparison with wire localization in patients undergoing conservative surgery and sentinel node biopsy. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2009; 193: 1001-9
  14. Bernardi S, Bertozzi S, Londero AP, Gentile G, Giacomuzzi F, Carbone A. Incidence and ris