scholarly journals Radioactive Seed Versus Wire-Guided Localization for Ductal Carcinoma in Situ of the Breast: Comparable Resection Margins

2020 ◽  
Vol 27 (13) ◽  
pp. 5296-5302
Author(s):  
Marie Colombe Agahozo ◽  
Sofie A.M. Berghuis ◽  
Esther van den Broek ◽  
Linetta B. Koppert ◽  
Inge-Marie Obdeijn ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Ductal Carcinoma In Situ ◽  
Carcinoma In Situ ◽  
Resection Margin ◽  
Ductal Carcinoma ◽  
Breast Conserving Surgery ◽  
Margin Status ◽  
National Cohort ◽  
Resection Margin Status ◽  
Radioactive Seed

Abstract Background There are currently two widely used methods for preoperative localization of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) of the breast: wire-guided localization (WGL) and radioactive seed localization (RSL). Several studies compared these localization techniques in small cohorts. Objective The aim of this study was to compare the surgical resection margin status between RSL and WGL in a large national cohort of patients with DCIS. Patients and Methods We included patients from the Dutch Pathology Registry who underwent breast-conserving surgery for DCIS by either RSL (n = 1851) or WGL (n = 2187) between 2009 and 2019. Several clinicopathological characteristics were compared between these two groups, including resection margin status and number of re-excisions. Results Patients undergoing RSL were younger (p = 0.014) and were more often diagnosed with a large DCIS (p = 0.013), high grade DCIS (p < 0.001) and comedonecrosis (p < 0.001) compared with patients undergoing WGL. There was no significant difference in resection margin status between both groups (p = 0.089) and the number of re-excisions (p = 0.429). However, in case of re-excision, patients in the RSL group were more often treated with breast-conserving surgery (p = 0.029). Conclusion In this large national cohort study of patients with DCIS, we demonstrated that there was no difference in resection margin status between both procedures, or in the number of re-excisions, but patients in the RSL group were more often treated with breast-conserving therapy in case of a re-excision.

Evaluating the relationship between ductal carcinoma in situ, calcifications, and margin status in patients undergoing breast conserving surgery

2019 ◽  
Vol 119 (6) ◽  
pp. 694-699 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elizabeth H. Bruenderman ◽  
Neal Bhutiani ◽  
Megan K. Mercer ◽  
Kelly M. McMasters ◽  
Mary Ann G. Sanders ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Ductal Carcinoma In Situ ◽  
Carcinoma In Situ ◽  
Ductal Carcinoma ◽  
Breast Conserving Surgery ◽  
Margin Status ◽  
The Relationship

scholarly journals Impact of consensus guidelines for breast‐conserving surgery in patients with ductal carcinoma in situ

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Abigail Tremelling ◽  
Rebecca L. Aft ◽  
Amy E. Cyr ◽  
William E. Gillanders ◽  
Katherine Glover‐Collins ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Ductal Carcinoma In Situ ◽  
Carcinoma In Situ ◽  
Ductal Carcinoma ◽  
Breast Conserving Surgery ◽  
Consensus Guidelines

scholarly journals Preoperative breast magnetic resonance imaging in patients with ductal carcinoma in situ: a systematic review for the European Commission Initiative on Breast Cancer (ECIBC)

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carlos Canelo-Aybar ◽  
Alvaro Taype-Rondan ◽  
Jessica Hanae Zafra-Tanaka ◽  
David Rigau ◽  
Axel Graewingholt ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Ductal Carcinoma In Situ ◽  
Surgical Outcomes ◽  
Carcinoma In Situ ◽  
Ductal Carcinoma ◽  
Breast Conserving Surgery ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Treatment Change ◽  
The Impact

Abstract Objective To evaluate the impact of preoperative MRI in the management of Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). Methods We searched the PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane Library databases to identify randomised clinical trials (RCTs) or cohort studies assessing the impact of preoperative breast MRI in surgical outcomes, treatment change or loco-regional recurrence. We provided pooled estimates for odds ratios (OR), relative risks (RR) and proportions and assessed the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach. Results We included 3 RCTs and 23 observational cohorts, corresponding to 20,415 patients. For initial breast-conserving surgery (BCS), the RCTs showed that MRI may result in little to no difference (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.00) (low certainty); observational studies showed that MRI may have no difference in the odds of re-operation after BCS (OR 0.96; 95% CI 0.36 to 2.61) (low certainty); and uncertain evidence from RCTs suggests little to no difference with respect to total mastectomy rate (RR 0.91; 95% CI 0.65 to 1.27) (very low certainty). We also found that MRI may change the initial treatment plans in 17% (95% CI 12 to 24%) of cases, but with little to no effect on locoregional recurrence (aHR = 1.18; 95% CI 0.79 to 1.76) (very low certainty). Conclusion We found evidence of low to very low certainty which may suggest there is no improvement of surgical outcomes with pre-operative MRI assessment of women with DCIS lesions. There is a need for large rigorously conducted RCTs to evaluate the role of preoperative MRI in this population. Key Points • Evidence of low to very low certainty may suggest there is no improvement in surgical outcomes with pre-operative MRI. • There is a need for large rigorously conducted RCTs evaluating the role of preoperative MRI to improve treatment planning for DCIS.

scholarly journals Patterns of invasive recurrence among patients originally treated for ductal carcinoma in situ by breast-conserving surgery versus mastectomy

2021 ◽  
Vol 186 (3) ◽  
pp. 617-624
Author(s):  
Kate R. Pawloski ◽  
Audree B. Tadros ◽  
Varadan Sevilimedu ◽  
Ashley Newman ◽  
Lori Gentile ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Ductal Carcinoma In Situ ◽  
Carcinoma In Situ ◽  
Ductal Carcinoma ◽  
Advanced Disease ◽  
Breast Conserving Surgery ◽  
Risk Profile ◽  
High Grade ◽  
Group A ◽  
First Recurrence

Abstract Purpose Local recurrence after treatment of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) with breast-conserving surgery (BCS) is more common than after mastectomy, but it is unclear if patterns of invasive recurrence vary by initial surgical therapy. Among patients with invasive recurrence after treatment for DCIS, we compared patterns of first recurrence between those originally treated with BCS vs. mastectomy. Methods From 2000 to 2016, women with an invasive recurrence occurring ≥ 6 months after initial treatment for DCIS were retrospectively identified. Clinicopathologic features and adjuvant treatment of the initial DCIS, as well as characteristics of first invasive recurrences, were compared between patients who had undergone BCS vs. mastectomy. Results 452 patients with an invasive recurrence after surgery for DCIS were identified: 367 patients (81%) had initially undergone BCS and 85 patients (19%) mastectomy. Patients originally treated with mastectomy were younger and were more likely to have had high grade, necrosis, and multifocal or multicentric DCIS (p < 0.001) compared with the BCS group. A higher proportion of invasive recurrences were local after BCS (93%; 343/367), whereas 88% (75/85) of recurrences after mastectomy were regional or distant (p < 0.001). The median time to first invasive recurrence was not different between surgical groups (BCS: 6.4 years vs. mastectomy: 5.5 years; p = 0.12). Conclusions Among women who experienced a first invasive recurrence after treatment for DCIS, those who had originally undergone mastectomy more commonly presented with advanced disease compared to those treated with BCS, likely related to the absence of the breast and the higher risk profile of their initial DCIS.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document