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 3/2010

01-10-2010 | American Society of Breast Surgeons

Ten-Year Experience with Hematoma-Directed Ultrasound-Guided (HUG) Breast Lumpectomy

Authors: Candy Arentz, MD, Kate Baxter, MD, Cristiano Boneti, MD, Ronda Henry-Tillman, MD, Kent Westbrook, MD, Soheila Korourian, MD, V. Suzanne Klimberg, MD

Published in: Annals of Surgical Oncology | Special Issue 3/2010

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Pain, patient inconvenience, vasovagal symptoms, scheduling problems, wire malposition, and a positive margin rate of 40–75% are problems commonly associated with needle localized biopsy (NLBB). Despite these issues, NLBB is still the primary means of identifying nonpalpable lesions in the breast. We hypothesized that the hematoma-directed ultrasound-guided (HUG) procedure for intraoperative localization of nonpalpable lesions would allow for lumpectomy without the downfalls of needle localization and decrease the high positive-margin rate with NLBB.

Methods

This is a retrospective study from January 2000 to October 2009. Electronic chart review identified lumpectomy procedures performed in the clinic and operating room. These patients underwent preoperative core-biopsy diagnosis by ultrasound (US) or stereotactic means. When excision was necessary needle localization or HUG was planned. A multifrequency linear array transducer was used intraoperatively for the HUG procedures, and a block of tissue surrounding the hematoma was removed.

Results

Localization procedures were performed in 455 patients: 126 (28%) via needle localization and 329 (72%) via HUG. The previous core-biopsy site in 100% of patients was successfully excised using HUG: 152 of 329 (46%) were benign and 177 of 329 (54%) were malignant. Margins were positive in 42 of these 177 cases (24%). was successful in 100% of patients: 88 of 126 (70%) were benign and NLBB 38 of 126 (30%) were malignant; margins were positive in 18 of these 38 (47%). Margin positivity was significantly higher for NLBB than HUG (P = 0.045, Fisher exact).

Conclusions

This 10-year experience, representing the largest to date, suggests that HUG is more accurate in localizing nonpalpable lesions than NLBB. Compared with the additional painful procedure of NLBB, HUG is more time and cost-efficient. Preoperative needle core biopsy is not only the minimally invasive diagnostic procedure of choice, but also becomes the localization procedure when excisional biopsy is necessary.
Literature
1.
Potterton AJ, Peakman DJ, Young JR. Ultrasound demonstration of small breast cancers detected by mammographic screening. Clin Radiol. 1994;49(11):808–13.CrossRefPubMed
2.
Berg WA, Arnoldus CL, Teferra E, Bhargavan M. Biopsy of amorphous breast calcifications: pathologic outcome and yields at stereotactic biopsy. Radiology. 2001;221(2):495–503.CrossRefPubMed
3.
Simon JR, Kalbhen CL, Cooper RA, Flisak ME. Accuracy and complication rates of US-guided vacuum-assisted core breast biopsy: initial results. Radiology. 2000;215, 694–7.PubMed
4.
Smith LF, Henry-Tillman R, Rubio IT, Korourian S, Klimberg VS. Intraoperative localization after stereotactic breast biopsy without a needle. Am J Surg. 2001;182(6):584–9.CrossRefPubMed
5.
Parker SH, Klaus AJ, McWey PJ, et al. Sonographically guided directional vacuum-assisted breast biopsy using a handheld device. AM J Roentgenol. 2001;177:405–8.
6.
Perez-Fuentes JA, Longobardi IR, Acosta VF, Marin CE, Liberman L. Sonographically guided direction vacuum-assisted breast biopsy: preliminary experience in Venezuela. Am J Roentgenol. 2001;1459–63.
7.
Kass R, Kumar G, Klimberg VS, Kass L, Henry-Tillman R, Johnson A, Colvert M, Lans S, Harshfield D, Korourian S, Parrish R, Mancino A. Clip migration in stereotactic biopsy. Am J Surg. 2002;184(4):325–31.CrossRefPubMed
8.
Hasselgreen PO, Hummel RP, Georgian-Smith D, Fieler M. Breast biopsy with needle localization: accuracy of specimen X-ray and management of missed lesions. Surgery. 1993;114(4):836–40; discussion 840–2.
9.
Homer MJ, Smith TJ, Safaii H. Prebiopsy needle localization: methods, problems, and expected results. Radiol Clin North Am. 1992;30(1):139–53.PubMed
10.
Snider Jr HC, Morrison DG. Intraoperative ultrasound localization of nonpalpable breast lesions. Ann Surg Oncol. 1999;6(3):308–14.CrossRefPubMed
11.
Van Esser Sm, Hobbelink m, Van Der Ploeg IMC, Mali WPThM, Van Diest PJ, Borel Rinkes IHM, Van Hillegersberg R. Radio-guided occult lesion localization (ROLL) for non-palpable invasive breast cancer. J Surg Oncol. 2008;98:526–9.CrossRefPubMed
12.
Thompson M, Henry-Tillman R, Margulies A, Thosten J, Bryant-Smith G, Fincher R, Korourian, Klimberg VS. Hematoma-directed ultrasound-guided (HUG) breast lumpectomy. Ann Surg Oncol. 1006;14(1):148–56.CrossRefPubMed
13.
Inui H, Watatani M, Hashimoto Y, Hojo T, Hirai K, Yamato H, Fujishima M, Azumi T, Shiozaki H. Hematoma-directed and ultrasound-guided breast conserving surgery for non palpable breast cancer after Mammotome biopsy. Surg Today. 2008;38(3):279–82.CrossRefPubMed
14.
Rahman RL, Crawford S, Larkin A, Quinlan R. Superiority of sonographic hematoma guided resection of mammogram only visible breast cancer: wire localization should be an exception-not a rule. Ann Surg Oncol. 2007;14(8)2228–32.CrossRef
15.
Klimberg VS, Bland K, Westbrook K. Needle localization breast biopsy. In: Klimberg VS, editor. Atlas of breast surgical techniques. Philadelphia: Saunders Elsevier; 2010. p. 72–87.
16.
Klimberg VS, editor. Excisional breast biopsy of palpable or nonpalpable lesions. In: Atlas of breast surgical techniques. Philadelphia: Saunders Elsevier; 2010:60–71.
17.
18.
Parker SH, Lovin JD, Jobe WE, et al. Stereotactic breast biopsy with a biopsy gun. Radiology. 1990;179(3):741–7.
19.
Smitt MC, Horst K. Association of clinic and pathologic variables with lumpectomy surgical margin status after preoperative diagnosis or excisional biopsy of invasive breast cancer. Ann Surg Oncol. 2007;14(3):1040–4.CrossRefPubMed
20.
Riedle C, Pfarl G, Memarsadeghi M, Wagner T, Fitzal F, Rudas M, Helbich T. Lesion miss rates and false-negative rates for 1115 consecutive cases of stereotactically guided needle-localized open breast biopsy with long-term follow-up. Radiology. 2005;237,847–53.CrossRef
21.
Kaelin CM, Smith TJ, Homer MJ, et al. Safety, accuracy, and diagnostic yield of needle localization biopsy of the breast performed using local anesthesia. J Am Coll Surg. 1994;179:267–72.PubMed
22.
Chaveron C, Bachelle F, Fauquet I, Rocourt N, Faivre-Pierret M, Ceugnart L. Clip migration after stereotactic macrobiopsy and presurgical localization: technical considerations and tricks. J Radiol. 2009;90:31–6.CrossRefPubMed
23.
Hanley C, Kessaram R. Quality of diagnosis and surgical management of breast lesions in a community hospital: room for improvement? J Can Chir. 2006;49(3).
24.
Velanovich V, Lewis FR, Nathanson SD, Strand VF, Talpos GB, Bhandarkar S, Elkus R, Szymanski W, Ferrara JJ. Comparison of mammographically guided breast biopsy techniques. Ann Surg. 1999;229(5):625.CrossRefPubMed
25.
Jakub JW, Gray RJ, Degnim AC, Boughey JC, Gardner M, Cox CE. Current status of radioactive seed for localization of nonpalpable breast lesions. Am J Surg. 2009 Nov 30.
26.
Klimberg VS, editor. Axillary sentinel lymph node biopsy. Atlas of breast surgical techniques. Philadelphia: Saunders Elsevier; 2010:124–39.
27.
Hughes JH, Mason MC, Gray RJ, et al. A multi-site validation trial of radioactive seed localization as an alternative to wire localization. Breast J. 2008;14:153–7.CrossRefPubMed
28.
Gray RJ, Pockaj BA, Karstaedt PJ, et al. Radioactive seed localization of nonpalpable breast lesions is better than wire localization. Am J Surg. 2004;188:377–80.CrossRefPubMed
29.
Cox CE, Furman B, Stowell N, et al: Radioactive seed localization breast biopsy and lumpectomy: can specimen radiographs be eliminated? Ann Surg Oncol. 2003;10:1039–47.CrossRefPubMed
30.
Fine RE. Ultrasound-guided percutaneous excisional biopsy. In: Klimberg VS, editor. Atlas of breast surgical techniques. Philadelphia: Saunders Elsevier; 2010:18–31.
31.
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):618–22.CrossRefPubMed
32.
Fajardo LL, Bird RE, Herman Cr, DeAngelis GA. Placement of endovascular embolization microcoils to localize the site of breast lesions removed at stereotactic vacuum-assisted breast biopsy. Radiology. 1998;206(1):275–8.PubMed
33.
Kirstein LJ, Rafferty E, Specht MC, Moore RH, Taghian AG, Hughes KS, Gadd MA, Smith BL. Outcomes of multiple wire localization for larger breast cancers: when can mastectomy be avoided? J Am Coll Surg. 2008;207(3).
Metadata
Title
Ten-Year Experience with Hematoma-Directed Ultrasound-Guided (HUG) Breast Lumpectomy
Authors
Candy Arentz, MD
Kate Baxter, MD
Cristiano Boneti, MD
Ronda Henry-Tillman, MD
Kent Westbrook, MD
Soheila Korourian, MD
V. Suzanne Klimberg, MD
Publication date
01-10-2010
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
Annals of Surgical Oncology / Issue Special Issue 3/2010
Print ISSN: 1068-9265
Electronic ISSN: 1534-4681
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-010-1230-x

Other articles of this Special Issue 3/2010

Annals of Surgical Oncology 3/2010 Go to the issue

American Society of Breast Surgeons

Health-Related Quality of Life After Breast-Conserving Surgery and Intraoperative Radiotherapy for Breast Cancer Using Low-Kilovoltage X-rays

American Society of Breast Surgeons

Factors Associated with Variance in Compliance with a Sentinel Lymph Node Dissection Quality Measure in Early-Stage Breast Cancer

American Society of Breast Surgeons

Regional Management of Breast Cancer

American Society of Breast Surgeons

How I Do It: Oncoplastic Breast-Conservation Surgery

American Society of Breast Surgeons

Molecular Detection of Micrometastatic Breast Cancer in Histopathology—Negative Axillary Lymph Nodes Fails to Predict Breast Cancer Recurrence: A Final Analysis of a Prospective Multi-Institutional Cohort Study

American Society of Breast Surgeons

Single-Center Long-Term Follow-Up After Intraoperative Radiotherapy as a Boost During Breast-Conserving Surgery Using Low-Kilovoltage X-Rays