Skip to main content

Does Localization Technique Matter for Non-palpable Breast Cancers?

Publication ,  Journal Article
Chagpar, AB; Garcia-Cantu, C; Howard-McNatt, MM; Gass, JS; Levine, EA; Chiba, A; Lum, S; Martinez, R; Brown, E; Dupont, E; SHAVE2 authors
Published in: Am Surg
December 2022

BACKGROUND: There are several techniques for localization of non-palpable breast tumors, but comparisons of these techniques in terms of margin positivity and volume of tissue resected are lacking. METHODS: Between 2011-2013 and 2016-2018, 2 randomized controlled trials involving 10 centers across the United States accrued 631 patients with stage 0-3 breast cancer, all of whom underwent breast conserving surgery. Of these, 522 had residual non-palpable tumors for which localization was required. The localization technique was left to the discretion of the individual surgeon. We compared margin positivity and volume of tissue resected between various localization techniques. RESULTS: The majority of the patients (n = 465; 89.1%) had wire localization (WL), 50 (9.6%) had radioactive seed (RS) localization, and 7 (1.3%) had Savi Scout (SS) localization. On bivariate analysis, there was no difference in terms of margin positivity (37.8% vs. 28.0% vs. 28.6%, P = .339) nor re-excision rates (13.3% vs. 12.0% vs. 14.3%, P = .961) for the WL, RS, and SS groups, respectively. Further, the volume of tissue removed was not significantly different between the 3 groups (71.9 cm3 vs. 55.8 cm3 vs. 86.6 cm3 for the WL, RS, and SS groups, respectively, P = .340). On multivariate analysis, margin status was affected by tumor size (OR = 1.336; 95% CI: 1.148-1.554, P<.001) but not by type of localization (P = .670). CONCLUSIONS: While there are a number of methods for tumor localization, choice of technique does not seem to influence volume of tissue resected nor margin status.

Duke Scholars

Altmetric Attention Stats
Dimensions Citation Stats

Published In

Am Surg

DOI

EISSN

1555-9823

Publication Date

December 2022

Volume

88

Issue

12

Start / End Page

2871 / 2876

Location

United States

Related Subject Headings

  • Surgery
  • Retrospective Studies
  • Neoplasm, Residual
  • Mastectomy, Segmental
  • Margins of Excision
  • Humans
  • Female
  • Breast Neoplasms
  • 3202 Clinical sciences
  • 1103 Clinical Sciences
 

Citation

APA
Chicago
ICMJE
MLA
NLM
Chagpar, A. B., Garcia-Cantu, C., Howard-McNatt, M. M., Gass, J. S., Levine, E. A., Chiba, A., … SHAVE2 authors, . (2022). Does Localization Technique Matter for Non-palpable Breast Cancers? Am Surg, 88(12), 2871–2876. https://doi.org/10.1177/00031348211011135
Chagpar, Anees B., Carlos Garcia-Cantu, Marissa M. Howard-McNatt, Jennifer S. Gass, Edward A. Levine, Akiko Chiba, Sharon Lum, et al. “Does Localization Technique Matter for Non-palpable Breast Cancers?Am Surg 88, no. 12 (December 2022): 2871–76. https://doi.org/10.1177/00031348211011135.
Chagpar AB, Garcia-Cantu C, Howard-McNatt MM, Gass JS, Levine EA, Chiba A, et al. Does Localization Technique Matter for Non-palpable Breast Cancers? Am Surg. 2022 Dec;88(12):2871–6.
Chagpar, Anees B., et al. “Does Localization Technique Matter for Non-palpable Breast Cancers?Am Surg, vol. 88, no. 12, Dec. 2022, pp. 2871–76. Pubmed, doi:10.1177/00031348211011135.
Chagpar AB, Garcia-Cantu C, Howard-McNatt MM, Gass JS, Levine EA, Chiba A, Lum S, Martinez R, Brown E, Dupont E, SHAVE2 authors. Does Localization Technique Matter for Non-palpable Breast Cancers? Am Surg. 2022 Dec;88(12):2871–2876.

Published In

Am Surg

DOI

EISSN

1555-9823

Publication Date

December 2022

Volume

88

Issue

12

Start / End Page

2871 / 2876

Location

United States

Related Subject Headings

  • Surgery
  • Retrospective Studies
  • Neoplasm, Residual
  • Mastectomy, Segmental
  • Margins of Excision
  • Humans
  • Female
  • Breast Neoplasms
  • 3202 Clinical sciences
  • 1103 Clinical Sciences