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

ACC 2024 Congress

Catch up on all the top stories and latest evidence in cardiology research with our ACC 2024 Congress hub page.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Annals of Surgical Oncology
Published in: Annals of Surgical Oncology 1/2018

01-01-2018 | Breast Oncology

Radioactive Seed Localization Versus Wire Localization for Nonpalpable Breast Lesions: A Two-Year Initial Experience at a Large Community Hospital

Authors: Lacey Stelle, MD, Taylor Schoenheit, MD, Allison Brubaker, MD, Xiwei Tang, PhD, Peiyong Qu, PhD, Kimberly Cradock, MD, Anna Higham, MD

Published in: Annals of Surgical Oncology | Issue 1/2018

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Radioactive seed localization (RSL) is a safe and effective alternative to wire localization (WL) for nonpalpable breast lesions. While several large academic institutions currently utilize RSL, few community hospitals have adopted this technique.

Objective

The aim of this study was to examine the experience of RSL versus WL at a large community hospital.

Methods

A retrospective chart review of patients who underwent RSL or WL for breast-conserving surgery from 1 November 2013 to 31 November 2015.

Results

The total number of lesions examined was 382. RSL was utilized in 205 (54%) lesions, with 187 undergoing single RSL, while WL was used in 155 (40%) lesions, with 109 undergoing single WL; both techniques were used in 22 (6%) lesions. Pathology was benign in 142 (48%) lesions, with 93 RSLs and 49 WLs. For malignant lesions, mean specimen size was 36.3 g for single RSL and 35.9 g for single WL (p = 0.904). Re-excision for margin clearance was required for 16 (17%) malignant lesions in the RSL group and 10 (17%) in the WL group (p = 0.954). For malignant lesions, mean operating room time was 86 min for single RSL versus 70 min for single WL (p = 0.014).

Conclusions

The use of RSL is a viable option in the community setting, with several benefits over WL. While operative times were slightly longer with RSL, there was no difference in specimen size or re-excision rate for malignant lesions.
Literature
1.
Haakinson DJ, Stucky CC, Dueck AC, Gray RJ, Wasif N, Apsey HA, Pockaj B. A significant number of women present with palpable breast cancer even with a normal Mammogram within 1 Year. Am J Surg. 2010;200(6):712–7;discussion 717-8.
2.
Acosta JA, Greenlee JA, Gubler KD, Goepfert CJ, Ragland JJ. Surgical margins after needle-localization breast biopsy. Am J Surg. 1995;170(6):643–6.CrossRefPubMed
3.
Frank HA, Hall FM, Steer ML. Preoperative localization of nonpalpable breast lesions demonstrated by mammography. N Engl J Med. 1976;295(5):259–260.CrossRefPubMed
4.
Chan BK, Wiseberg-Firtell JA, Jois RH, Jensen K, Audisio RA. Localization techniques for guided surgical excision of non-palpable breast lesions. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015;(12):CD009206.
5.
Gray RJ, Salud C, Nguyen K, et al. Randomized prospective evaluation of a novel technique for biopsy or lumpectomy of nonpalpable breast lesions: radioactive seed versus wire localization. Ann Surg Oncol. 2001;8(9):711–5.CrossRefPubMed
6.
Dauway EL, Saunders R, Friedland J et al. Innovative diagnostics for breast cancer: new frontiers for the new millennium using radioactive seed localization. Surg Forum. 1999;50:348–9.
7.
Lovrics PJ, Goldsmith CH, Hodgson N, et al. A multicentered, randomized, controlled trial comparing radioguided seed localization to standard wire localization for nonpalpable, invasive and in situ breast carcinomas. Ann Surg Oncol. 2011;18(12):3407–14.CrossRefPubMed
8.
Murphy JO, Moo T-A, King TA, et al. Radioactive seed localization compared to wire localization in breast-conserving surgery: initial 6-month experience. Ann Surg Oncol. 2013;20(13):4121–27.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
9.
McGhan LJ, McKeever SC, Pockaj BA, et al. Radioactive seed localization for nonpalpable beast lesions: review of 1,000 consecutive procedures at a single institution. Ann Surg Oncol. 2011;18(11):3096–101.CrossRefPubMed
10.
Sung JS, King V, Thornton CM, et al. Safety and efficacy of radioactive seed localization with I-125 prior to lumpectomy and/or excisional biopsy. Eur J Radiol. 2013;82(9):1453–57.CrossRefPubMed
11.
Ahmed M. Radioactive seed localization for non-palpable breast cancer. Br J Surg. 2013;100(9):1253.CrossRefPubMed
12.
Jakub J, Gray R. Starting a radioactive seed localization program. Ann Surg Oncol. 2015;22(10):3197–202.CrossRefPubMed
13.
Chiu JC, Ajmal S, Zhu X, Griffith E, Encarnacion T, Barr L. Radioactive seed localization of nonpalpable breast lesions in an academic comprehensive cancer program community hospital setting. Am Surg. 2014;80(7):675–9.PubMed
14.
Diego EJ, Soran A, McGuire KP, et al. Localizing high-risk lesions for excisional breast biopsy: a comparison between radioactive seed localization and wire localization. Ann Surg Oncol. 2014;21(10):3268–72.CrossRefPubMed
15.
van der Noordaa MEM, Pengel KE, Groen E, et al. The use of radioactive Iodine-125 seed localization in patients with non-palpable breast cancer: a comparison with the radioguided occult lesion localization with 99m Technetium. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2015;41(4):553–8.CrossRefPubMed
16.
Sharek D, Zuley ML, Zhang JY, Soran A, Ahrendt GM, Ganott MA. Radioactive seed localization versus wire localization for lumpectomies: a comparison of outcomes. Am J Roentgenol. 2015;204(4):872–7.CrossRef
17.
Bloomquist EV, Ajkay N, Patil S, Collett AE, Frazier TG, Barrio AV. A randomized prospective comparison of patient-assessed satisfaction and clinical outcomes with radioactive seed localization versus wire localization. Breast J. 2016;22(2):151–7.CrossRefPubMed
18.
Pouw B, de Wit-van der Veen LJ, Stokkel MP, Loo CE, Vrancken Peeters MJ, Valdés Olmos RA. Heading toward radioactive seed localization in non-palpable breast cancer surgery? A meta-analysis. J Surg Oncol. 2015;111(2):185–91.
19.
Janssen NNY, Nijkamp J, Alderliesten T, et al. Radioactive seed localization in breast cancer treatment. Br J Surg. 2016;103(1):70–80.CrossRefPubMed
20.
Papa MZ, Klein E, Davidson B, et al. The effect of anesthesia type on needle localization breast biopsy: another point of view. Am J Surg. 1996;171(2):242–43.CrossRefPubMed
21.
Gajdos C, Tartter PI, Bleiweiss IJ, et al. Mammographic appearance of nonpalpable breast cancer reflects pathologic characteristics. Ann Surg. 2002;235(2):246–51.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
22.
Lovrics PJ, Cornacchi SD, Vora R, Goldsmith CH, Kahnamoui K. Systematic review of radioguided surgery for non-palpable breast cancer. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2011;37(5):388–97.CrossRefPubMed
23.
Chagpar AB, Killelea BK, Tsangaris TN, et al. A randomized, controlled trial of cavity shave margins in breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2015;373(6):503–10.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
Metadata
Title
Radioactive Seed Localization Versus Wire Localization for Nonpalpable Breast Lesions: A Two-Year Initial Experience at a Large Community Hospital
Authors
Lacey Stelle, MD
Taylor Schoenheit, MD
Allison Brubaker, MD
Xiwei Tang, PhD
Peiyong Qu, PhD
Kimberly Cradock, MD
Anna Higham, MD
Publication date
01-01-2018
Publisher
Springer International Publishing
Published in
Annals of Surgical Oncology / Issue 1/2018
Print ISSN: 1068-9265
Electronic ISSN: 1534-4681
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-017-6102-1

Other articles of this Issue 1/2018

Annals of Surgical Oncology 1/2018 Go to the issue

Pancreatic Tumors

Impact of Sarcopenic Obesity on Failure to Rescue from Major Complications Following Pancreaticoduodenectomy for Cancer: Results from a Multicenter Study

Gastrointestinal Oncology

Reduced Port Laparoscopic Distal Gastrectomy with D2 Lymphadenectomy

Health Services Research and Global Oncology

The Eighth Edition of TNM: Implications for the Surgical Oncologist

Urologic Oncology

Prognostic and Predictive Value of O6-methylguanine Methyltransferase for Chemotherapy in Patients with Muscle-Invasive Bladder Cancer

Melanomas

Prediction of Non-sentinel Node Status in Patients with Melanoma and Positive Sentinel Node Biopsy: An Italian Melanoma Intergroup (IMI) Study

Gastrointestinal Oncology

Impact of Proximal Vascular Ligation on Survival of Patients with Colon Cancer