seed localization
Recently Published Documents


TOTAL DOCUMENTS

165
(FIVE YEARS 33)

H-INDEX

25
(FIVE YEARS 2)

2021 ◽  
Vol 28 (10) ◽  
pp. 5648-5656 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeffery M. Chakedis ◽  
Annie Tang ◽  
Gillian E. Kuehner ◽  
Brooke Vuong ◽  
Liisa L. Lyon ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Intraoperative ultrasound (IUS) localization for breast cancer is a noninvasive localization technique. In 2015, an IUS program for breast-conserving surgery (BCS) was initiated in a large, integrated health care system. This study evaluated the clinical results of IUS implementation. Methods The study identified breast cancer patients with BCS from 1 January to 31 October 2015 and from 1 January to 31 October 2019. Clinicopathologic characteristics were collected, and localization types were categorized. Clinical outcomes were analyzed, including localization use, surgeon adoption of IUS, day-of-surgery intervals, and re-excision rates. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed to evaluate predictors of re-excision. Results The number of BCS procedures increased 23%, from 1815 procedures in 2015 to 2226 procedures in 2019. The IUS rate increased from 4% of lumpectomies (n = 79) in 2015 to 28% of lumpectomies (n = 632) in 2019 (p < 0.001). Surgeons using IUS increased from 6% (5 of 88 surgeons) in 2015 to 70% (42 of 60 surgeons) in 2019. In 2019, 76% of IUS surgeons performed at least 25% of lumpectomies with IUS. The mean time from admission to incision was shorter with IUS or seed localization than with wire localization (202 min with IUS, 201 with seed localization, 262 with wire localization in 2019; p < 0.001). The IUS re-excision rates were lower than for other localization techniques (13.6%, vs 19.6% for seed localization and 24.7% for wire localization in 2019; p = 0.006), and IUS predicted lower re-excision rates in a multivariable model (odds ratio [OR], 0.59). Conclusions In a high-volume integrated health system, IUS was adopted for BCS by a majority of surgeons. The use of IUS decreased the time from admission to incision compared with wire localization, and decreased re-excision rates compared with other localization techniques.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Meena Powell ◽  
Tim Gate ◽  
Onneile Kalake ◽  
Carmen Ranjith ◽  
Mandana O. Pennick

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 99
Author(s):  
Gianluca Franceschini ◽  
Elena Jane Mason ◽  
Cristina Grippo ◽  
Sabatino D’Archi ◽  
Anna D’Angelo ◽  
...  

Breast conserving surgery has become the standard of care and is more commonly performed than mastectomy for early stage breast cancer, with recent studies showing equivalent survival and lower morbidity. Accurate preoperative lesion localization is mandatory to obtain adequate oncological and cosmetic results. Image guidance assures the precision requested for this purpose. This review provides a summary of all techniques currently available, ranging from the classic wire positioning to the newer magnetic seed localization. We describe the procedures and equipment necessary for each method, outlining the advantages and disadvantages, with a focus on the cost-effective preoperative skin tattoo technique performed at our centre. Breast surgeons and radiologists have to consider ongoing technological developments in order to assess the best localization method for each individual patient and clinical setting.


Author(s):  
Michael D. Bortz ◽  
Amna Khokar ◽  
David J. Winchester ◽  
Tricia A. Moo-Young ◽  
David B. Ecanow ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol 69 ◽  
pp. 311-317
Author(s):  
Yvonne E. van Riet ◽  
Robert-Jan Schipper ◽  
Franca van Merrienboer ◽  
Ricardo G. Orsini ◽  
Johanne G. Bloemen ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Wyanne Law ◽  
Nicole Look Hong ◽  
Ananth Ravi ◽  
Lisa Day ◽  
Yasmin Somani ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document