The effects of additional tumor cavity sampling at the time of breast-conserving surgery on final margin status, volume of resection, and pathologist workload

Annals of Surgical Oncology

Volumn 17, Issue 1, 2010, Pages 228-234

  Rizzo, Monica ^a,b   Iyengar, Radha ^a,b   Gabram, Sheryl G A ^a,b   Park, Jaemin ^b   Birdsong, George ^b   Chandler, Katherine L ^b   Mosunjac, Marina B ^b  

^a EMORY UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^b EMORY UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; BREAST; BREAST CANCER; BREAST SURGERY; CANCER STAGING; CANCER SURGERY; CONTROLLED STUDY; FEMALE; HUMAN; INTRADUCTAL CARCINOMA; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; REOPERATION; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; WORKLOAD;

BREAST NEOPLASMS; CARCINOMA, INTRADUCTAL, NONINFILTRATING; FEMALE; HUMANS; MASTECTOMY, SEGMENTAL; MIDDLE AGED; NEOPLASM STAGING; PROGNOSIS; REOPERATION; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; SURVIVAL RATE; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 74649084597     PISSN: 10689265     EISSN: 15344681     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1245/s10434-009-0643-x     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. B Fisher S Anderson J Bryant, et al. 2002 Twenty-year follow-up of a randomized trial comparing total mastectomy, lumpectomy, and lumpectomy plus irradiation for the treatment of invasive breast cancer N Engl J Med. 347 1233 1241 10.1056/NEJMoa022152 12393820 (Pubitemid 35176242)
2. U Veronesi N Cascinelli L Mariani, et al. 2002 Twenty-year follow-up of a randomized study comparing breast-conserving surgery with radical mastectomy for early breast cancer N Engl J Med. 347 1227 1232 10.1056/NEJMoa020989 12393819 (Pubitemid 35176241)
3. U Veronesi A Banfi B Salvadori, et al. 1990 Breast conservation is the treatment of choice in small breast cancer: long-term results of a randomized trial Eur J Cancer. 26 668 670 10.1016/0277-5379(90)90113-8 1:STN:280: DyaK3czms1SqtQ%3D%3D 2144152 (Pubitemid 20275096)
4. PI Tartter J Kaplan I Bleiweiss, et al. 2000 Lumpectomy margins, reexcision, and local recurrence of breast cancer Am J Surg. 179 81 85 10.1016/S0002-9610(00)00272-5 1:STN:280:DC%2BD3cvhs1CksQ%3D%3D 10773138 (Pubitemid 30204505)
5. MC Smitt KW Nowels MJ Zdeblick, et al. 1995 The importance of the lumpectomy surgical margin status in long-term results of breast conservation Cancer. 76 259 267 10.1002/1097-0142(19950715)76:2<259::AID- CNCR2820760216>3.0.CO;2-2 1:STN:280:DyaK283itlShtg%3D%3D 8625101
6. SE Singletary 2002 Surgical margins in patients with early-stage breast cancer treated with breast conservation therapy Am J Surg. 184 383 393 10.1016/S0002-9610(02)01012-7 12433599 (Pubitemid 35335942)
7. A Taghian M Mohiuddin R Jagsi, et al. 2005 Current perceptions regarding surgical margin status after breast-conserving therapy: results of a survey Ann Surg. 241 629 639 10.1097/01.sla.0000157272.04803.1b 15798465 (Pubitemid 40397311)
8. SJ Schnitt A Abner R Gelman, et al. 1994 The relationship between microscopic margins of resection and the risk of local recurrence in patients with breast cancer treated with breast-conserving surgery and radiation therapy Cancer. 74 1746 1751 10.1002/1097-0142(19940915)74:6<1746::AID- CNCR2820740617>3.0.CO;2-Y 1:STN:280:DyaK2czmtlKgsQ%3D%3D 8082077 (Pubitemid 24301829)
9. C Dunne JP Burke M Morrow, et al. 2009 Effect of margin status on local recurrence after breast conservation and radiation therapy for ductal carcinoma in situ J Clin Oncol. 27 1615 1620 10.1200/JCO.2008.17.5182 19255332
10. JF Waljee ES Hu LA Newman, et al. 2008 Predictors of re-excision among women undergoing breast-conserving surgery for cancer Ann Surg Oncol. 15 1297 1303 10.1245/s10434-007-9777-x 18259820
11. JF Waljee ES Hu LA Newman, et al. 2008 Predictors of breast asymmetry after breast-conserving operation for breast cancer J Am Coll Surg. 206 274 280 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2007.07.029 18222380
12. MR Bani MP Lux K Heusinger, et al. 2009 Factors correlating with reexcision after breast-conserving therapy Eur J Surg Oncol. 35 32 37 1:STN:280:DC%2BD1M%2FgtVGqtg%3D%3D 18539425
13. CJ Christy D Thorsteinsson BJ Grube, et al. 2009 Preoperative chemotherapy decreases the need for re-excision of breast cancers between 2 and 4 cm diameter Ann Surg Oncol. 16 697 702 10.1245/s10434-008-0268-5 19132447
14. GC Balch SK Mithani JF Simpson, et al. 2005 Accuracy of intraoperative gross examination of surgical margin status in women undergoing partial mastectomy for breast malignancy Am Surg. 71 22 27 15757052 discussion 27-8
15. TP Olson J Harter A Munoz, et al. 2007 Frozen section analysis for intraoperative margin assessment during breast-conserving surgery results in low rates of re-excision and local recurrence Ann Surg Oncol 14 10 2953 2960 1:STN:280:DC%2BD2srmtV2ksg%3D%3D 17674109
16. AO Saarela TK Paloneva TJ Rissanen, et al. 1997 Determinants of positive histologic margins and residual tumor after lumpectomy for early breast cancer: a prospective study with special reference to touch preparation cytology J Surg Oncol. 66 248 253 10.1002/(SICI)1096-9098(199712)66:4<248::AID-JSO5>3.0. CO;2-B 1:STN:280:DyaK1c%2Fos1Cjug%3D%3D 9425328 (Pubitemid 28013699)
17. SE Janes M Stankhe S Singh, et al. 2006 Systematic cavity shaves reduces close margins and re-excision rates in breast conserving surgery Breast. 15 326 330 10.1016/j.breast.2005.10.006 1:STN:280:DC%2BD28zltFeiug%3D%3D 16337123 (Pubitemid 43812228)
18. HZ Malik WD George EA Mallon, et al. 1999 Margin assessment by cavity shaving after breast-conserving surgery: analysis and follow-up of 543 patients Eur J Surg Oncol. 25 464 469 10.1053/ejso.1999.0680 1:STN:280: DyaK1MvlvFaqtQ%3D%3D 10527593 (Pubitemid 29462334)
19. AF Jacobson J Asad SK Boolbol, et al. 2008 Do additional shaved margins at the time of lumpectomy eliminate the need for re-excision? Am J Surg. 196 556 558 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2008.06.007 18809063
20. TL Huston R Pigalarga MP Osborne, et al. 2006 The influence of additional surgical margins on the total specimen volume excised and the reoperative rate after breast-conserving surgery Am J Surg. 192 509 512 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2006. 06.021 16978962 (Pubitemid 44344190)
21. D Cao C Lin SH Woo, et al. 2005 Separate cavity margin sampling at the time of initial breast lumpectomy significantly reduces the need for reexcisions Am J Surg Pathol. 29 1625 1632 10.1097/01.pas.0000180448.08203.70 16327435
22. C Genestie B Zafrani B Asselain, et al. 1998 Comparison of the prognostic value of Scarff-Bloom-Richardson and Nottingham histological grades in a series of 825 cases of breast cancer: major importance of the mitotic count as a component of both grading systems Anticancer Res 18B 1 571 576
23. S Amat F Penault-Llorca H Cure, et al. 2002 Scarff-Bloom-Richardson (SBR) grading: a pleiotropic marker of chemosensitivity in invasive ductal breast carcinomas treated by neoadjuvant chemotherapy Int J Oncol. 20 791 796 1:CAS:528:DC%2BD38XislOqsrw%3D 11894126
24. M Dzierzanowski KA Melville PJ Barnes, et al. 2005 Ductal carcinoma in situ in core biopsies containing invasive breast cancer: correlation with extensive intraductal component and lumpectomy margins J Surg Oncol. 90 71 76 10.1002/jso.20242 15844190 (Pubitemid 40594104)
25. R Marudanayagam R Singhal B Tanchel, et al. 2008 Effect of cavity shaving on reoperation rate following breast-conserving surgery Breast J. 14 570 573 10.1111/j.1524-4741.2008.00649.x 19000040
26. L Barthelmes A Al Awa DJ Crawford 2003 Effect of cavity margin shavings to ensure completeness of excision on local recurrence rates following breast conserving surgery Eur J Surg Oncol. 29 644 648 10.1016/S0748-7983(03)00122-7 1:STN:280:DC%2BD3svltVSktw%3D%3D 14511610 (Pubitemid 37236283)
27. M Morrow EA Strom LW Bassett, et al. 2002 Standard for breast conservation therapy in the management of invasive breast carcinoma CA Cancer J Clin. 52 277 300 10.3322/canjclin.52.5.277 12363326 (Pubitemid 35345499)
28. M Morrow EA Strom LW Bassett, et al. 2002 Standard for the management of ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast (DCIS) CA Cancer J Clin. 52 256 276 10.3322/canjclin.52.5.256 12363325 (Pubitemid 35345498)
29. JJ Guidry LA Aday D Zhang, et al. 1997 Transportation as a barrier to cancer treatment Cancer Pract. 5 361 366 1:STN:280:DyaK1c%2FmtVWjsQ%3D%3D 9397704