Intraoperative ultrasound guidance for palpable breast cancer excision (COBALT trial): A multicentre, randomised controlled trial

The Lancet Oncology

Volumn 14, Issue 1, 2013, Pages 48-54

  Krekel, Nicole MA ^a   Haloua, Max H ^a   Lopes Cardozo, Alexander MF ^b   de Wit, Roos H ^b   Bosch, Anne Marie ^c   de Widt Levert, Louise M ^d   Muller, Sandra ^e   van der Veen, Henk ^e   Bergers, Elisabeth ^a   de Lange de Klerk, Elly SM ^a   Meijer, Sybren ^a   van den Tol, M Petrousjka ^a  

^a VU UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^b Location Alkmaar   (Netherlands)

^c GELDERSE VALLEI HOSPITAL   (Netherlands)

^d Waterland Hospital   (Netherlands)

^e RED CROSS HOSPITAL   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ACCURACY; ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; BREAST CANCER; BREAST CARCINOMA; CANCER RADIOTHERAPY; CANCER STAGING; CANCER SURGERY; CONTROLLED STUDY; FEMALE; HEMATOMA; HUMAN; HUMAN TISSUE; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MECHANICAL PROBE; MULTICENTER STUDY; ONCOLOGICAL PARAMETERS; OPERATION DURATION; PALPATION GUIDED SURGERY; PARTIAL MASTECTOMY; PEROPERATIVE ECHOGRAPHY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY OF LIFE; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; REOPERATION; SURGICAL INFECTION; TUMOR FREE MARGIN; TUMOR LOCALIZATION; TUMOR VOLUME;

ADULT; AGED; BREAST NEOPLASMS; FEMALE; HUMANS; INTRAOPERATIVE PERIOD; MASTECTOMY, SEGMENTAL; MIDDLE AGED; NEOPLASM STAGING; PALPATION; TREATMENT OUTCOME; ULTRASONOGRAPHY, MAMMARY;

EID: 84871717451     PISSN: 14702045     EISSN: 14745488     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S1470-2045(12)70527-2     Document Type: Article

References (40)

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 2002, 347:1233-1241.
2. Gøtzsche PC, Nielsen M Screening for breast cancer with mammography. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2009, 1. CD001877.
3. Veronesi U, Banfi A, Salvadori B, et al. Breast conservation is the treatment of choice in small breast cancer: long-term results of a randomized trial. Eur J Cancer 1990, 26:668-670.
4. Kaufmann M, Morrow M, von Minckwitz G, Harris JR Locoregional treatment of primary breast cancer: consensus recommendations from an International Expert Panel. Cancer 2010, 116:1184-1191.
5. Singletary SE Surgical margins in patients with early-stage breast cancer treated with breast conservation therapy. Am J Surg 2002, 184:383-393.
6. Poortmans PM, Collette L, Horiot JC, et al. Impact of the boost dose of 10 Gy versus 26 Gy in patients with early stage breast cancer after a microscopically incomplete lumpectomy: 10-year results of the randomised EORTC boost trial. Radiother Oncol 2009, 90:80-85.
7. Park CC, 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 2000, 18:1668-1675.
8. Al-Ghazal SK, Fallowfield L, Blamey RW Does cosmetic outcome from treatment of primary breast cancer influence psychosocial morbidity?. Eur J Surg Oncol 1999, 25:571-573.
9. Waljee JF, Hu ES, Ubel PA, et al. Effect of esthetic outcome after breast-conserving surgery on psychosocial functioning and quality of life. J Clin Oncol 2008, 26:3331-3337.
10. Taylor ME, Perez CA, Halverson KJ, et al. Factors influencing cosmetic results after conservation therapy for breast cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1995, 31:753-764.
11. Vrieling C, Collette L, Fourquet A, et al. The influence of patient, tumor and treatment factors on the cosmetic results after breast-conserving therapy in the EORTC 'boost vs no boost' trial. Radiother Oncol 2000, 55:219-232.
12. Jacobs L Positive margins: the challenge continues for breast surgeons. Ann Surg Oncol 2008, 15:1271-1272.
13. Krekel N, Zonderhuis B, Muller S, et al. Excessive resections in breast-conserving surgery: a retrospective multicentre study. Breast J 2011, 17:602-609.
14. Davis KM, Hsu CH, Bouton ME, Wilhelmson KL, Komenaka IK Intraoperative ultrasound can decrease the re-excision lumpectomy rate in patients with palpable breast cancers. Am Surg 2011, 77:720-725.
15. Fortunato L, Penteriani R, Farina M, Vitelli CE, Piro FR Intraoperative ultrasound is an effective and preferable technique to localize non-palpable breast tumors. Eur J Surg Oncol 2008, 34:1289-1292.
16. Haid A, Knauer M, Dunzinger S, et al. Intra-operative sonography: a valuable aid during breast-conserving surgery for occult breast cancer. Ann Surg Oncol 2007, 14:3090-3101.
17. Harlow SP, Krag DN, Ames SE, Weaver DL Intraoperative ultrasound localization to guide surgical excision of nonpalpable breast carcinoma. J Am Coll Surg 1999, 189:241-246.
18. Krekel NMA, Zonderhuis BM, Stockmann HBAC, et al. A comparison of three methods for nonpalpable breast cancer excision. Eur J Surg Oncol 2011, 37:109-115.
19. Rahusen FD, Bremers AJA, Fabry HFJ, et al. Ultrasound-guided lumpectomy of nonpalpable breast cancer versus wire-guided resection: a randomized clinical trial. Ann Surg Oncol 2002, 9:994-998.
20. Moore MM, Whitney LA, Cerilli L, et al. Intraoperative ultrasound is associated with clear lumpectomy margins for palpable infiltrating ductal breast cancer. Ann Surg 2001, 233:761-768.
21. Schulz KF, Altman DG, Moher D CONSORT 2010 statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. Int J Surg 2011, 9:672-677.
22. Krekel N, Zonderhuis B, Schreurs H, et al. Ultrasound-guided breast-sparing surgery to improve cosmetic outcomes and quality of life: a prospective multicentre randomised controlled clinical trial comparing ultrasound-guided surgery to traditional palpation-guided surgery (COBALT trial). BMC Surg 2011, 11:8.
23. Krekel NM, Lopes Cardozo AM, Muller S, et al. Optimising surgical accuracy in palpable breast cancer with intra-operative breast ultrasound: feasibility and surgeons' learning curve. Eur J Surg Oncol 2011, 37:1044-1050.
24. Borgstein PJ, Pijpers R, Comans EF, et al. Sentinel lymph node biopsy in breast cancer: guidelines and pitfalls of lymphoscintigraphy and gamma probe detection. J Am Coll Surg 1998, 186:275-283.
25. Giuliano AE, Hunt KK, Ballman KV, et al. Axillary dissection vs no axillary dissection in women with invasive breast cancer and sentinel node metastasis: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA 2011, 305:569-575.
26. Richtlijn mammacarcinoom: hoofdstuk 3-loc(oregion)ale behandeling (pp 76-113) Kwaliteitsinstituut voor de gezondheidszorg CBO, (accessed Nov 12, 2012). http://www.fysionet.nl/kennisplein/vakinhoud/multidisciplinaire-richtlijnen/mammacarcinoom.pdf.
27. Krekel NM, van Slooten HJ, Barbe E, et al. Is breast specimen shrinkage really a problem in breast-conserving surgery?. J Clin Pathol 2012, 65:224-227.
28. Altman DG, Machin D, Bryant TN, Gardner MJ Statistics with confidence 2000, BMJ Books, London. 2nd edn.
29. Schwartz GF, Goldberg BB, Rifkin MD, D'Orazio SE Ultrasonography: an alternative to x-ray-guided needle localization of nonpalpable breast masses. Surgery 1988, 104:870-873.
30. James TA, Harlow S, Sheehey-Jones J, et al. Intraoperative ultrasound versus mammographic needle localization for ductal carcinoma in situ. Ann Surg Oncol 2009, 16:1164-1169.
31. Eichler C, Hubbel A, Zarghooni V, et al. Intraoperative ultrasound: improved resection rates in breast-conserving surgery. Anticancer Res 2012, 32:1051-1056.
32. Olsha O, Shemesh D, Carmon M, et al. Resection margins in ultrasound-guided breast-conserving surgery. Ann Surg Oncol 2011, 18:447-452.
33. Fisher CS, Mushawah FA, Cyr AE, Gao F, Margenthaler JA Ultrasound-guided lumpectomy for palpable breast cancers. Ann Surg Oncol 2011, 18:3198-3203.
34. Davis KM, Hsu CH, Bouton ME, Wilhelmson KL, Komenaka IK Intraoperative ultrasound can decrease the re-excision lumpectomy rate in patients with palpable breast cancers. Am Surg 2011, 77:720-725.
35. Thill M, Roder K, Diedrich K, Dittmer C Intraoperative assessment of surgical margins during breast conserving surgery of ductal carcinoma in situ by use of radiofrequency spectroscopy. Breast 2011, 20:579-580.
36. Allweis TM, Kaufman Z, Lelcuk S, et al. A prospective, randomized, controlled, multicenter study of a real-time, intraoperative probe for positive margin detection in breast-conserving surgery. Am J Surg 2008, 196:483-489.
37. Rahusen FD, Taets van Amerongen AH, van Diest PJ, et al. Ultrasound-guided lumpectomy of nonpalpable breast cancers: a feasibility study looking at the accuracy of obtained margins. J Surg Oncol 1999, 72:72-76.
38. Holmes DR, Silverstein MJ A minimally invasive breast biopsy clinic: an innovative way to teach breast fellows how to perform breast ultrasound and ultrasound-guided breast procedures. Am J Surg 2006, 192:439-443.
39. Morrow M, Harris JR, Schnitt SJ Surgical margins in lumpectomy for breast cancer: bigger is not better. N Engl J Med 2012, 367:79-82.
40. Moore MM, Borossa G, Imbrie JZ, et al. Association of infiltrating lobular carcinoma with positive surgical margins after breast-conservation therapy. Ann Surg 2000, 231:877-882.