Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress 2023 EHA Congress 2023 ASCO Annual Meeting
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

A round-up of the ONWARDS phase 3 clinical trials evaluating the novel weekly insulin icodec in people with diabetes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Annals of Surgical Oncology
Published in: Annals of Surgical Oncology 11/2007

01-11-2007 | Breast Oncology

Intra-operative Sonography: A Valuable Aid During Breast-Conserving Surgery for Occult Breast Cancer

Authors: Anton Haid, MD, Michael Knauer, MD, Stephanie Dunzinger, MD, Zerina Jasarevic, MD, Roswitha Köberle-Wührer, MD, Antonius Schuster, MD, Michael Toeppker, MD, Bernhard Haid, MD, Etienne Wenzl, MD, FRCS, Felix Offner, MD

Published in: Annals of Surgical Oncology | Issue 11/2007

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Breast cancer is increasingly detected during an early non-palpable stage. Together with pre-operative marking of the mass, intra-operative imaging provides invaluable clues. This study was designed to evaluate the usefulness of intra-operative sonography in the hands of the surgeon.

Methods

Between July 2001 and October 2006, 567 patients underwent treatment for operable breast cancer at the landeskrankenhaus (LHK) Feldkirch. Three hundred and sixty lesions were not palpable. Two hundred and ninety-nine patients with poorly definable or non-definable lesions well seen by ultrasound imaging underwent intra-operative sonography (group 1), while 61 patients with non-palpable lesions only seen on mammography (group 2) were subjected to pre-operative needle localization.
The study was non-randomized with prospective data acquisition

Results

All lesions were identified by both sonography and pre-operative needle localization. In the ultrasound group (group 1) 81% of the lesions were successfully removed by primary intention without metachronous secondary surgery versus 62% in group 2 (p < 0.00228). Eighty-eight percent of the lesions in group 1 were eligible for breast-conserving surgery versus 75% in group 2. The mean clear margin in group 1 was substantially smaller (4.8 mm) than in group 2 (7.2 mm) (p < 0.0001).

Conclusion

Intra-operative sonography proved to be a reliable and helpful tool in the hands of the surgeon, not only for tumor localization, but also for orientation during tumor excision. It simplifies organizational work and spares the patient the discomfort of pre-operative needle localization.
Literature
1.
Duffy SW, Tabar L, Vitak B, et al. The Swedish Two-County Trial of mammographic screening: cluster randomisation and end point evaluation. Ann Oncol 2003; 14(8):1196–8
2.
Olsen AH, Njor SH, Vejborg I, et al. Breast cancer mortality in Copenhagen after introduction of mammography screening: cohort study. BMJ 2005; 330(7485):220PubMedCrossRef
3.
4.
Gallagher WJ, Cardenosa G, Rubens JR, et al. Minimal-volume excision of nonpalpable breast lesions. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1989; 153(5):957–61PubMed
5.
Buchberger W, Niehoff A, Obrist P, et al. Clinically and mammographically occult breast lesions: detection and classification with high-resolution sonography. Semin Ultrasound CT MR 2000; 21(4):325–36PubMedCrossRef
6.
Buman SJ, Clark DA. Breast intraoperative ultrasound: prospective study in 112 patients with impalpable lesions. ANZ J Surg 2005; 75(3):124–7PubMedCrossRef
7.
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(5):870–3PubMed
8.
di Giorgio A, Arnone P, Canavese A. Ultrasound guided excisional biopsy of non-palpable breast lesions: technique and preliminary results. Eur J Surg 1998; 164(11):819–24PubMedCrossRef
9.
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(2):72–6PubMedCrossRef
10.
Henry-Tillman R, Johnson AT, Smith LF, Klimberg VS. Intraoperative ultrasound and other techniques to achieve negative margins. Semin Surg Oncol 2001; 20(3):206–13PubMedCrossRef
11.
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(6):761–8PubMedCrossRef
12.
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):378–82PubMedCrossRef
13.
Bennett IC, Greenslade J, Chiam H. Intraoperative ultrasound-guided excision of nonpalpable breast lesions. World J Surg 2005; 29(3):369–74PubMedCrossRef
14.
Goldhirsch A, Glick JH, Gelber RD, et al. Meeting highlights: international expert consensus on the primary therapy of early breast cancer 2005. Ann Oncol 2005; 16(10):1569–83PubMedCrossRef
15.
Konstantiniuk P KE, Haid A, Bauer C, Steindorfer Peter. Das MCDBP (multi center database project). Acta Chir Austriaca 2001; 33:200–2001
16.
Decker T, Ruhnke M, Schneider W. Standardized pathologic examination of breast excision specimen. Relevance within an interdisciplinary practice protocol for quality management of breast saving therapy. Pathologe 1997; 18(1):53–9PubMedCrossRef
17.
Obrist P, Brunhuber T, Ensinger C, et al. Pathological examination of breast biopsy specimens. Radiologe 2002; 42(1):1–5PubMedCrossRef
18.
Madjar H, Ohlinger R, Mundinger A, et al. BI-RADS-analogue DEGUM criteria for findings in breast ultrasound–consensus of the DEGUM Committee on Breast Ultrasound. Ultraschall Med 2006; 27(4):374–9PubMedCrossRef
19.
Madjar H, Mundinger A, Degenhardt F, et al. Quality control in breast sonography. Ultraschall Med 2003; 24(3):190–4PubMedCrossRef
20.
Buzdar AU, Ibrahim NK, Francis D, et al. Significantly higher pathologic complete remission rate after neoadjuvant therapy with trastuzumab, paclitaxel, and epirubicin chemotherapy: results of a randomized trial in human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive operable breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2005; 23(16):3676–85PubMedCrossRef
21.
Peintinger F, Symmans WF, Gonzalez-Angulo AM, et al. The safety of breast-conserving surgery in patients who achieve a complete pathologic response after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Cancer 2006
22.
Nurko J, Mancino AT, Whitacre E, Edwards MJ. Surgical benefits conveyed by biopsy site marking system using ultrasound localization. Am J Surg 2005; 190(4):618–22PubMedCrossRef
23.
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(3):241–6PubMedCrossRef
24.
Snider HC Jr., Morrison DG. Intraoperative ultrasound localization of nonpalpable breast lesions. Ann Surg Oncol 1999; 6(3):308–14PubMedCrossRef
25.
Smith LF, Rubio IT, Henry-Tillman R, et al. Intraoperative ultrasound-guided breast biopsy. Am J Surg 2000; 180(6):419–23PubMedCrossRef
26.
Arriagada R, Le MG, Rochard F, Contesso G. Conservative treatment versus mastectomy in early breast cancer: patterns of failure with 15 years of follow-up data. Institut Gustave-Roussy Breast Cancer Group. J Clin Oncol 1996; 14(5):1558–64PubMed
27.
Blichert-Toft M RC, Andersen JA, Overgaard M, Axelsson CK, Andersen KW, Mouridsen HT. Danish randomized trial comparing breast conservation therapy with mastectomy: six years of life-table analysis. Danish Breast Cancer Cooperative Group. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr 1992:19–25
28.
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(16):1233–41PubMedCrossRef
29.
van Dongen JA VA, Fentimen IS, Legrand C, Sylvester RJ, Tong D, van der Schueren E, Helle PA, van Zijl K, Bartelink H. Long-term results of a randomized trial comparing breast-conserving therapy with astectomy: European Organization for Research and treatment of Cancer 10801 Trial. J Natl Cancer Inst 2000; 92:1143–50PubMedCrossRef
30.
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 2002; 347(16):1227–32PubMedCrossRef
31.
Jacobson JA, Danforth DN, Cowan KH, et al. Ten-year results of a comparison of conservation with mastectomy in the treatment of stage I and II breast cancer. N Engl J Med 1995; 332(14):907–11PubMedCrossRef
32.
Veronesi U, Marubini E, Del Vecchio M, et al. Local recurrences and distant metastases after conservative breast cancer treatments: partly independent events. J Natl Cancer Inst 1995; 87(1):19–27PubMedCrossRef
33.
Smitt MC, Nowels KW, Zdeblick MJ, et al. The importance of the lumpectomy surgical margin status in long-term results of breast conservation. Cancer 1995; 76(2):259–67PubMedCrossRef
34.
35.
Meric F, Mirza NQ, Vlastos G, et al. Positive surgical margins and ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence predict disease-specific survival after breast-conserving therapy. Cancer 2003; 97(4):926–33PubMedCrossRef
36.
Taghian A, Mohiuddin M, Jagsi R, et al. Current perceptions regarding surgical margin status after breast-conserving therapy: results of a survey. Ann Surg 2005; 241(4):629–39PubMedCrossRef
37.
Holland R, Veling SH, Mravunac M, Hendriks JH. Histologic multifocality of Tis, T1-2 breast carcinomas. Implications for clinical trials of breast-conserving surgery. Cancer 1985; 56(5):979–90PubMedCrossRef
38.
Dillon MF, Hill AD, Quinn CM, et al. A pathologic assessment of adequate margin status in breast-conserving therapy. Ann Surg Oncol 2006; 13(3):333–9PubMedCrossRef
39.
Schwartz GF, Veronesi U, Clough KB, et al. Consensus conference on breast conservation, Milan, Italy, April 28-May 1, 2005. Breast J 2006; 12(4):398–407PubMedCrossRef
40.
Greene T, Tartter PI, Smith SR, Estabrook A. The significance of surgical margins for patients with atypical ductal hyperplasia. Am J Surg 2006; 192(4):499–501PubMedCrossRef
41.
Boyages J, Delaney G, Taylor R. Predictors of local recurrence after treatment of ductal carcinoma in situ: a meta-analysis. Cancer 1999; 85(3):616–28PubMedCrossRef
42.
Wong JS. Is radiotherapy boost needed in young patients with ductal carcinoma-in-situ? Lancet Oncol 2006; 7(8):615–7PubMedCrossRef
43.
Singletary SE. Surgical margins in patients with early-stage breast cancer treated with breast conservation therapy. Am J Surg 2002; 184(5):383–93PubMedCrossRef
44.
Leong C, Boyages J, Jayasinghe UW, et al. Effect of margins on ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence after breast conservation therapy for lymph node-negative breast carcinoma. Cancer 2004; 100(9):1823–32PubMedCrossRef
45.
Aziz D, Rawlinson E, Narod SA, et al. The role of reexcision for positive margins in optimizing local disease control after breast-conserving surgery for cancer. Breast J 2006; 12(4):331–7PubMedCrossRef
46.
Swanson GP, Rynearson K, Symmonds R. Significance of margins of excision on breast cancer recurrence. Am J Clin Oncol 2002; 25(5):438–41PubMedCrossRef
47.
Cellini C, Huston TL, Martins D, et al. Multiple re-excisions versus mastectomy in patients with persistent residual disease following breast conservation surgery. Am J Surg 2005; 189(6):662–6PubMedCrossRef
48.
Mendez JE, Lamorte WW, de Las Morenas A, et al. Influence of breast cancer margin assessment method on the rates of positive margins and residual carcinoma. Am J Surg 2006; 192(4):538–40PubMedCrossRef
49.
Kaufman CS, Jacobson L, Bachman B, Kaufman L. Intraoperative ultrasound facilitates surgery for early breast cancer. Ann Surg Oncol 2002; 9(10):988–93PubMedCrossRef
50.
Rahusen FD, Bremers AJ, Fabry HF, et al. Ultrasound-guided lumpectomy of nonpalpable breast cancer versus wire-guided resection: a randomized clinical trial. Ann Surg Oncol 2002; 9(10):994–8PubMed
51.
Gittleman MA. Single-step ultrasound localization of breast lesions and lumpectomy procedure. Am J Surg 2003; 186(4):386–90PubMedCrossRef
52.
Inoue T, Tamaki Y, Sato Y, et al. Three-dimensional ultrasound imaging of breast cancer by a real-time intraoperative navigation system. Breast Cancer 2005; 12(2):122–9PubMedCrossRef
53.
Rifkin MD, Schwartz GF, Pasto ME, et al. Ultrasound for guidance of breast mass removal. J Ultrasound Med 1988; 7(5):261–3PubMed
54.
Paramo JC, Landeros M, McPhee MD, Mesko TW. Intraoperative Ultrasound-Guided Excision of Nonpalpable Breast Lesions. Breast J 1999; 5(6):389–94PubMedCrossRef
55.
Holland R, Connolly JL, Gelman R, et al. The presence of an extensive intraductal component following a limited excision correlates with prominent residual disease in the remainder of the breast. J Clin Oncol 1990; 8(1):113–8PubMed
56.
Huston TL, Pigalarga R, Osborne MP, 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 2006; 192(4):509–12PubMedCrossRef
57.
Van Goethem M, Tjalma W, Schelfout K, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging in breast cancer. Eur J Surg Oncol 2006; 32(9):901–10PubMedCrossRef
58.
Cassano E, Rizzo S, Bozzini A, et al. Contrast enhanced ultrasound of breast cancer. Cancer Imaging 2006; 6:4–6PubMedCrossRef
Metadata
Title
Intra-operative Sonography: A Valuable Aid During Breast-Conserving Surgery for Occult Breast Cancer
Authors
Anton Haid, MD
Michael Knauer, MD
Stephanie Dunzinger, MD
Zerina Jasarevic, MD
Roswitha Köberle-Wührer, MD
Antonius Schuster, MD
Michael Toeppker, MD
Bernhard Haid, MD
Etienne Wenzl, MD, FRCS
Felix Offner, MD
Publication date
01-11-2007
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
Annals of Surgical Oncology / Issue 11/2007
Print ISSN: 1068-9265
Electronic ISSN: 1534-4681
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-007-9490-9

Other articles of this Issue 11/2007

Annals of Surgical Oncology 11/2007 Go to the issue

Editorials

Lumpectomy or Mastectomy: Is Quality of Life the Tie-Breaker?

Breast Oncology

Preoperative Identification of the Sentinel Lymph Node in Breast Cancer

Gastrointestinal Oncology

Utility of a Prognostic Nomogram Designed for Gastric Cancer in Predicting Outcome of Patients with R0 Resected Duodenal Adenocarcinoma

Editorials

Cytoreductive Surgery and Perioperative Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy for Colorectal Carcinomatosis: If at First You Don't Succeed...

Editorials

Can a Small Nodal Metastasis Reliably Alter Intraoperative Risk/Benefit Decision Making in Breast Cancer Surgery?

Gynecologic Oncology

Para-Aortic Involvement and Interest of Para-Aortic Lymphadenectomy after Chemoradiation Therapy in Patients with Stage IB2 and II Cervical Carcinoma Radiologically Confined to the Pelvic Cavity