Separate cavity margins excision as a complement to conservative breast cancer surgery

European Journal of Surgical Oncology

Volumn 36, Issue 7, 2010, Pages 632-638

  Zavagno, G ^a   Dona M ^a   Orvieto, E ^a   Mocellin, S ^a   Pasquali, S ^a   Goldin, E ^a   Lo Mele, M ^a   Belardinelli, V ^a   Nitti, D ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF PADOVA   (Italy)

Author keywords

Breast cancer; Breast conservation surgery; Local recurrence; Margins; Re excision

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BREAST CANCER; CANCER SURGERY; CONTROLLED STUDY; DIAGNOSTIC VALUE; FOLLOW UP; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; PARTIAL MASTECTOMY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REOPERATION; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY;

ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; BREAST NEOPLASMS; FEMALE; HUMANS; MASTECTOMY, SEGMENTAL; MIDDLE AGED; NEOPLASM RECURRENCE, LOCAL; NEOPLASM, RESIDUAL; REOPERATION; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES;

EID: 77953912763     PISSN: 07487983     EISSN: 15322157     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejso.2010.05.018     Document Type: Article

References (22)

1. Fisher B., Anderson S., Bryant J., et al. 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 (2002) 1233-1241
2. Veronesi U., Cascinelli N., Mariani L., et al. Twenty year follow-up of a randomized study comparing breast-conserving surgery with radical mastectomy for early breast cancer. N Engl J Med 347 (2002) 1227-1232
3. Schnitt S.J. Risk factors for local recurrence in patients with invasive breast cancer and negative surgical margins of excision: where are we and where are we going?. Am J Clin Pathol 120 (2003) 485-488
4. Singletary S.E. Surgical margins in patients with early-stage breast cancer treated with breast conservation therapy. Am J Surg 184 (2002) 383-393
5. Cellini C., Hollembeck S.T., Cristos P., et al. Factors associated with residual breast cancer after re-excision for close or positive margins. Ann Surg Oncol 11 (2004) 915-920
6. Scopa C.D., Aroukatos P., Tsamandas A.C., and Aletra C. Evaluation of margin status in lumpectomy specimens and residual breast carcinoma. Breast J 12 (2006) 150-153
7. Dillon M.F., Hill A.D.K., Quinn C.M., McDermott E.W., and O'Higgins N.O. A pathologic assessment of adequate margin status in breast-conserving therapy. Ann Surg Oncol 13 (2006) 333-339
8. Zavagno G., Goldin E., Mencarelli R., et al. Role of resection margins in patients treated with breast conservation surgery. Cancer 112 (2008) 1923-1931
9. Graham R.A., Homer M.J., Katz J., Rothschild J., Safaii H., and Supran S. The pancake phenomenon contributes to the inaccuracy of margin assessment in patients with breast cancer. Am J Surg 184 (2002) 89-93
10. Dooley W.C., and Parker J. Understanding the mechanisms creating false positive lumpectomy margins. Am J Surg 190 (2005) 606-608
11. Cao D., Lin C., Woo S.H., Vang R., Tsangaris T.N., and Argani P. Separate cavity margin sampling at the time of initial breast lumpectomy significantly reduces the need of reexcisions. Am J Surg Pathol 29 (2005) 1625-1632
12. Keskek M., Kothari M., Ardehali B., Betambeau N., Nasiri N., and Gui G.P.H. Factors predisposing to cavity margin positivity following conservation surgery for breast cancer. Eur J Surg Oncol 30 (2004) 1058-1064
13. Huston T.L., Pigalarga R., Osborne M.P., and Tousimis E. The influence of additional surgical margins on the total specimen volume excised and the reoperative rate after breast-conserving surgery. Am J Surg 192 (2006) 509-512
14. Marudanayagam R., Singhal R., Tanchel B., O'Connor B., Balasubramanian B., and Paterson I. Effect of cavity shaving on reoperation rate following breast-conserving surgery. Breast J 14 (2008) 570-573
15. Jacobson A.F., Asad J., Boolbol S.K., Osborne M.P., Boachie-Adjej K., and Feldman S.M. Do additional shaved margins at the time of lumpectomy eliminate the need for re-excision?. Am J Surg 196 (2006) 556-558
16. Tengher-Barna I., Hequet D., Reboul-Marty J., et al. Prevalence and predictive factors for the detection of carcinoma in cavity margin performed at the time of breast lumpectomy. Mod Pathol 22 (2009) 299-305
17. Rizzo M., Iyengar R., Gabram S.G.A., et al. The effects of additional tumor cavity sampling at the time of breast-conserving surgery on final margin status, volume of resection and pathologist workload. Ann Surg Oncol (2009) Epub ahead of print
18. Holland R., Velig S.H., Mravunac M., and Hendriks J.H. Histologic multifocality of Tis, T1-T2 breast carcinomas. Implications for clinical trials of breast-conserving surgery. Cancer 56 (1985) 979-990
19. Vaida J.S., Vijas J.J., Chinoy R.F., Merchant M., Sharma O.P., and Mittra I. Multicentricity of breast cancer: whole organ analysis and clinical implications. Br J Cancer 74 (1996) 820-824
20. Hewes J.C., Imkampe A., Haji A., and Bates T. Importance of routine cavity sampling in breast conservation surgery. Br J Surg 96 (2009) 47-53
21. Peterson M.E., Schultz D.J., Reynolds C., and Solin L.J. Outcomes in breast cancer patients relative to margin status after treatment with breast-conserving surgery and radiation therapy: the University of Pennsylvania experience. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 43 (1999) 1029-1035
22. Park C.C., Mitsumori M., Nixon A., et al. Outcome at 8 years after breast-conserving surgery and radiation therapy for invasive breast cancer: influence of margin status and systemic therapy on local recurrence. J Clin Oncol 18 (2000) 1668-1675