Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Advances in Intraoperative Margin Assessment for Breast Cancer

  • Breast Cancer Surgery (J. Tchou, Section Editor)
  • Published:
Current Surgery Reports Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Breast-conserving therapy including partial mastectomy and radiation is commonly performed for patients who are surgical candidates for breast cancer. Although it is as effective as mastectomy for the treatment of early breast cancer, re-excision for positive or close margins is common. This is costly, inconvenient for patients and delays initiation of adjuvant therapies. Commonly used methods for breast tumor localization and optimization of margin assessment include preoperative wire or seed localization, precise specimen orientation, specimen radiography, and cavity shaving. Unfortunately, these techniques do not assess margins on a microscopic scale in real time. Our report reviews the current and experimental techniques of intraoperative microscopic margin assessment including frozen section, cytologic imprint analysis, ultrasound, micro-CT, MarginProbe®, near-infrared imaging, and spectroscopy.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

Recently published papers of particular interest have been highlighted as: • Of importance

  1. Jeevan R, Cromwell DA, Trivella M, Lawrence G, Kearins O, Pereira J, et al. Reoperation rates after breast conserving surgery for breast cancer among women in England: retrospective study of hospital episode statistics. BMJ. 2012;345:e4505. doi:10.1136/bmj.e4505.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. Wilke LG, Czechura T, Wang C, Lapin B, Liederbach E, Winchester DP, et al. Repeat surgery after breast conservation for the treatment of stage 0 to II breast carcinoma: a report from the National Cancer Data Base, 2004-2010. JAMA Surg. 2014;149(12):1296–305. doi:10.1001/jamasurg.2014.926.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Singletary SE. Surgical margins in patients with early-stage breast cancer treated with breast conservation therapy. Am J Surg. 2002;184(5):383–93.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Menes TS, Tartter PI, Bleiweiss I, Godbold JH, Estabrook A, Smith SR. The consequence of multiple re-excisions to obtain clear lumpectomy margins in breast cancer patients. Ann Surg Oncol. 2005;12(11):881–5. doi:10.1245/ASO.2005.03.021.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Munshi A, Kakkar S, Bhutani R, Jalali R, Budrukkar A, Dinshaw KA. Factors influencing cosmetic outcome in breast conservation. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol). 2009;21(4):285–93. doi:10.1016/j.clon.2009.02.001.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. • Pleijhuis RG, Graafland M, de Vries J, Bart J, de Jong JS, van Dam GM. Obtaining adequate surgical margins in breast-conserving therapy for patients with early-stage breast cancer: current modalities and future directions. Ann Surg Oncol. 2009;16(10):2717–30. doi:10.1245/s10434-009-0609-z. This review presents modalities for margin review used in breast conserving therapy at the time of publishing.

  7. Blair SL, Thompson K, Rococco J, Malcarne V, Beitsch PD, Ollila DW. Attaining negative margins in breast-conservation operations: is there a consensus among breast surgeons? J Am Coll Surg. 2009;209(5):608–13. doi:10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2009.07.026.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Cabioglu N, Hunt KK, Sahin AA, Kuerer HM, Babiera GV, Singletary SE, et al. Role for intraoperative margin assessment in patients undergoing breast-conserving surgery. Ann Surg Oncol. 2007;14(4):1458–71. doi:10.1245/s10434-006-9236-0.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. • Olson TP, Harter J, Munoz A, Mahvi DM, Breslin T. Frozen section analysis for intraoperative margin assessment during breast-conserving surgery results in low rates of re-excision and local recurrence. Ann Surg Oncol. 2007;14(10):2953–60. doi:10.1245/s10434-007-9437-1. This study included 290 patients and showed that intraoperative frozen section allowed for resection of suspicious or positive margins during initial lumpectomy. It was also associated with low rates of recurrence and re-excision.

  10. Fukamachi K, Ishida T, Usami S, Takeda M, Watanabe M, Sasano H, 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. doi:10.1093/jjco/hyq006.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Osako T, Nishimura R, Nishiyama Y, Okumura Y, Tashima R, Nakano M, et al. Efficacy of intraoperative entire-circumferential frozen section analysis of lumpectomy margins during breast-conserving surgery for breast cancer. Int J Clin Oncol. 2015;20(6):1093–101. doi:10.1007/s10147-015-0827-2.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Camp ER, McAuliffe PF, Gilroy JS, Morris CG, Lind DS, Mendenhall NP, et al. Minimizing local recurrence after breast conserving therapy using intraoperative shaved margins to determine pathologic tumor clearance. J Am Coll Surg. 2005;201(6):855–61. doi:10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2005.06.274.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Jaafar H. Intra-operative frozen section consultation: concepts, applications and limitations. Malays J Med Sci. 2006;13(1):4–12.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Klimberg VS, Westbrook KC, Korourian S. Use of touch preps for diagnosis and evaluation of surgical margins in breast cancer. Ann Surg Oncol. 1998;5(3):220–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. D’Halluin F, Tas P, Rouquette S, Bendavid C, Foucher F, Meshba H, et al. Intra-operative touch preparation cytology following lumpectomy for breast cancer: a series of 400 procedures. Breast. 2009;18(4):248–53. doi:10.1016/j.breast.2009.05.002.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Esbona K, Li Z, Wilke LG. Intraoperative imprint cytology and frozen section pathology for margin assessment in breast conservation surgery: a systematic review. Ann Surg Oncol. 2012;19(10):3236–45. doi:10.1245/s10434-012-2492-2.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. Cortes-Mateos MJ, Martin D, Sandoval S, Ruidiaz ME, Messmer D, Wang-Rodriguez J, et al. Automated microscopy to evaluate surgical specimens via touch prep in breast cancer. Ann Surg Oncol. 2009;16(3):709–20. doi:10.1245/s10434-008-0274-7.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. Kaufman CS, Jacobson L, Bachman B, Kaufman LB. Intraoperative ultrasonography guidance is accurate and efficient according to results in 100 breast cancer patients. Am J Surg. 2003;186(4):378–82.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Tang R, Buckley JM, Fernandez L, Coopey S, Aftreth O, Michaelson J, et al. Micro-computed tomography (Micro-CT): a novel approach for intraoperative breast cancer specimen imaging. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2013;139(2):311–6. doi:10.1007/s10549-013-2554-6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Tang R, Coopey SB, Buckley JM, Aftreth OP, Fernandez LJ, Brachtel EF, et al. A pilot study evaluating shaved cavity margins with micro-computed tomography: a novel method for predicting lumpectomy margin status intraoperatively. Breast J. 2013;19(5):485–9. doi:10.1111/tbj.12146.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Tang R, Saksena M, Coopey SB, Fernandez L, Buckley JM, Lei L, et al. Intraoperative micro-computed tomography (micro-CT): a novel method for determination of primary tumour dimensions in breast cancer specimens. Br J Radiol. 1058;2016(89):20150581. doi:10.1259/bjr.20150581.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Golshan M, Sagara Y, Wexelman B, Aydogan F, Desantis S, Elise Min H, et al. Pilot study to evaluate feasibility of image-guided breast-conserving therapy in the advanced multimodal image-guided operating (AMIGO) suite. Ann Surg Oncol. 2014;21(10):3356–7. doi:10.1245/s10434-014-3926-9.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  23. Pappo I, Spector R, Schindel A, Morgenstern S, Sandbank J, Leider LT, et al. Diagnostic performance of a novel device for real-time margin assessment in lumpectomy specimens. J Surg Res. 2010;160(2):277–81. doi:10.1016/j.jss.2009.02.025.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Allweis TM, Kaufman Z, Lelcuk S, Pappo I, Karni T, Schneebaum 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(4):483–9. doi:10.1016/j.amjsurg.2008.06.024.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Schnabel F, Boolbol SK, Gittleman M, Karni T, Tafra L, Feldman S, 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. doi:10.1245/s10434-014-3602-0.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  26. • Keating JJ, Nims S, Venegas O, Jiang J, Holt D, Kucharczuk JC, et al. Intraoperative imaging identifies thymoma margins following neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Oncotarget. 2015. doi:10.18632/oncotarget.6578. This research introduces intraoperative molecular imaging of thymomas and margin assessment. The same concepts apply for all solid tumors, and therefore is a promising and new modality for intraoperative margin assessment for breast cancer.

  27. Keating J, Tchou J, Okusanya O, Fisher C, Batiste R, Jiang J, et al. Identification of breast cancer margins using intraoperative near-infrared imaging. J Surg Oncol. 2016;. doi:10.1002/jso.24167.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Mohs AM, Mancini MC, Singhal S, Provenzale JM, Leyland-Jones B, Wang MD, et al. Hand-held spectroscopic device for in vivo and intraoperative tumor detection: contrast enhancement, detection sensitivity, and tissue penetration. Anal Chem. 2010;82(21):9058–65. doi:10.1021/ac102058k.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Jiang JX, Keating JJ, Jesus EM, Judy RP, Madajewski B, Venegas O, et al. Optimization of the enhanced permeability and retention effect for near-infrared imaging of solid tumors with indocyanine green. Am J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2015;5(4):390–400.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  30. Karanlik H, Ozgur I, Sahin D, Fayda M, Onder S, Yavuz E. Intraoperative ultrasound reduces the need for re-excision in breast-conserving surgery. World J Surg Oncol. 2015;13:321.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Surgery, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, 3400 Spruce Street, Philadelphia, PA, 19104, USA

    Jane J. Keating, Carla Fisher & Sunil Singhal

  2. Department of Pathology, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, 3400 Spruce Street, Philadelphia, PA, 19104, USA

    Rebecca Batiste

  3. Center for Precision Surgery, Abramson Cancer Center, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, 3400 Spruce Street, Philadelphia, PA, 19104, USA

    Jane J. Keating, Carla Fisher & Sunil Singhal

Authors
  1. Jane J. Keating
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Carla Fisher
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Rebecca Batiste
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Sunil Singhal
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jane J. Keating.

Additional information

This article is part of the Topical Collection on Breast Cancer Surgery.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Keating, J.J., Fisher, C., Batiste, R. et al. Advances in Intraoperative Margin Assessment for Breast Cancer. Curr Surg Rep 4, 15 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40137-016-0136-3

Download citation

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40137-016-0136-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation