Intraoperative Assessment of Final Margins with a Handheld Optical Imaging Probe During Breast-Conserving Surgery May Reduce the Reoperation Rate: Results of a Multicenter Study

Annals of Surgical Oncology

Volumn 22, Issue 10, 2015, Pages 3356-3362

  Zysk, Adam M ^a   Chen, Kai ^b,c   Gabrielson, Edward ^b   Tafra, Lorraine ^d   May Gonzalez, Evelyn A ^b   Canner, Joseph K ^b   Schneider, Eric B ^b   Cittadine, Andrew J ^a   Scott Carney, P ^a   Boppart, Stephen A ^a,e   Tsuchiya, Kimiko ^b   Sawyer, Kristen ^d   Jacobs, Lisa K ^b  

^a Diagnostic Photonics Inc   (United States)

^b JOHNS HOPKINS HOSPITAL   (United States)

^c SUN YAT SEN MEMORIAL HOSPITAL OF SUN YAT SEN UNIVERSITY   (China)

^d ANNE ARUNDEL MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^e UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT URBANA CHAMPAIGN   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; BODY MASS; BREAST CANCER; BREAST CARCINOMA; BREAST DENSITY; CANCER STAGING; CANCER SURGERY; CHINA; CLINICAL ARTICLE; FEMALE; FLUORESCENCE IMAGING; HEALTH CARE QUALITY; HISTOPATHOLOGY; HUMAN; IMAGE PROCESSING; INTRADUCTAL CARCINOMA; INTRAOPERATIVE PERIOD; MONTE CARLO METHOD; MULTICENTER STUDY; OPTICAL COHERENCE TOMOGRAPHY; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PARTIAL MASTECTOMY; PREDICTIVE VALUE; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; REOPERATION; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; VERY ELDERLY; BREAST NEOPLASMS; CARCINOMA, DUCTAL, BREAST; CARCINOMA, LOBULAR; CLINICAL TRIAL; FEASIBILITY STUDY; FOLLOW UP; MICROSURGERY; MIDDLE AGED; PATHOLOGY; PROCEDURES; PROGNOSIS; STATISTICS AND NUMERICAL DATA; TUMOR INVASION;

ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; BREAST NEOPLASMS; CARCINOMA, DUCTAL, BREAST; CARCINOMA, LOBULAR; FEASIBILITY STUDIES; FEMALE; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; HUMANS; INTRAOPERATIVE PERIOD; MASTECTOMY, SEGMENTAL; MICROSURGERY; MIDDLE AGED; NEOPLASM INVASIVENESS; NEOPLASM STAGING; PROGNOSIS; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; REOPERATION; TOMOGRAPHY, OPTICAL COHERENCE;

EID: 84940447745     PISSN: 10689265     EISSN: 15344681     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1245/s10434-015-4665-2     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. Singletary SE. Surgical margins in patients with early-stage breast cancer treated with breast conservation therapy. Am J Surg. 2002;184(5):383–93.
2. Moran MS, et al. Society of Surgical Oncology-American Society for Radiation Oncology consensus guideline on margins for breast-conserving surgery with whole-breast irradiation in stages I and II invasive breast cancer. Ann Surg Oncol. 2014;21(3):704–16.
3. McCahill LE, et al. Variability in reexcision following breast conservation surgery. J Am Med Assoc. 2012;307(5):467–75.
4. Morrow M, et al. Surgeon recommendations and receipt of mastectomy for treatment of breast cancer. J Am Med Assoc. 2009;302(14):1551–6.
5. Mullen R, et al. Involved anterior margins after breast conserving surgery: is re-excision required? Eur J Surg Oncol. 2012;38(4):302–6.
6. Fukamachi K, et al. Total-circumference intraoperative frozen section analysis reduces margin-positive rate in breast-conservation surgery. Jpn J Clin Oncol. 2010;40(6):513–20.
7. Osborn JB, et al. Cost-effectiveness analysis of routine frozen-section analysis of breast margins compared with reoperation for positive margins. Ann Surg Oncol. 2011;18(11):3204–9.
8. Butler-Henderson K, et al. Intraoperative assessment of margins in breast conserving therapy: a systematic review. Breast. 2014;23(2):112–9.
9. Tengher-Barna, I, et al. Cavity margins examination in breast-conserving therapy. Diagn Histopathol. 2011;17(5):232–7.
10. Karni T, et al. A device for real-time, intraoperative margin assessment in breast-conservation surgery. Am J Surg. 2007;194(4):467–73.
11. Schnabel F, et al. A randomized prospective study of lumpectomy margin assessment with use of MarginProbe in patients with nonpalpable breast malignancies. Ann Surg Oncol. 2014;21(5):1589–95.
12. Thill M, Baumann K, Barinoff J. Intraoperative assessment of margins in breast conservative surgery: still in use? J Surg Oncol. 2014;110(1):15–20.
13. Boppart SA, et al. In vivo cellular optical coherence tomography imaging. Nat Med. 1998;4(7):861–5.
14. Huang D, et al. Optical coherence tomography. Science. 1991;254(5035):1178–81.
15. Ralston TS, et al. Interferometric synthetic aperture microscopy. Nat Phys. 2007;3(2):129–34.
16. Nguyen FT, et al. Intraoperative evaluation of breast tumor margins with optical coherence tomography. Cancer Res. 2009;69(22):8790–6.
17. Parvez E, et al. Survey of american and canadian general surgeons’ perceptions of margin status and practice patterns for breast conserving surgery. Breast J. 2014;20(5):481–8.
18. Hewes JC, et al. Importance of routine cavity sampling in breast conservation surgery. Br J Surg. 2009;96(1):47–53.
19. Molina MA, et al. Breast specimen orientation. Ann Surg Oncol. 2009;16(2):285–8.
20. Ralston TS, et al. Cross-validation of interferometric synthetic aperture microscopy and optical coherence tomography. Opt Lett. 2010;35(10):1683–5.
21. Carlsen JF, et al. Strain elastography ultrasound: an overview with emphasis on breast cancer diagnosis. Diagnostics. 2013;3(1):117–25.
22. Qvistgaard E, et al. Reproducibility and inter-reader agreement of a scoring system for ultrasound evaluation of hip osteoarthritis. Ann Rheum Dis. 2006;65(12):1613–9.
23. Hanley JA, McNeil BJ. The meaning and use of the area under a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. Radiology, 1982;143(1):29–36.
24. DeLong ER, DeLong DM, Clarke-Pearson DL. Comparing the areas under two or more correlated receiver operating characteristic curves: a nonparametric approach. Biometrics. 1988;44(3):837–45.
25. Shrout PE, Fleiss JL. Intraclass correlations: uses in assessing rater reliability. Psychol Bull. 1979;86(2):420–8.
26. Cronbach LJ. Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika. 1951;16(3):297–334.
27. United States Food and Drug Administration Executive Summary Prepared for the June 21, 2012 Meeting of the General and Plastic Surgery Devices Panel (P110014) Dune Medical Devices, Inc. MarginProbe™ System.
28. Huang SY, et al. The characterization of breast anatomical metrics using dedicated breast CT. Med Phys. 2011;38(4):2180–91.
29. Dunne C, et al. Effect of margin status on local recurrence after breast conservation and radiation therapy for ductal carcinoma in situ. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27(10):1615–20.
30. Allweis TM, 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(4): 483–9.
31. Erickson-Bhatt SJ, et al. In vivo assessment of the surgical cavity during breast-conserving surgery with a handheld optical imaging probe. Cancer Res. in press.
32. Hooley RJ, LM Scoutt, Philpotts LE. Breast ultrasonography: state of the art. Radiology. 2013;268(3):642–59.