RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Breast cancer-related lymphedema (BCRL) poses a significant risk following sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) and axillary lymph node dissection (ALND), particularly affecting ethnic minorities, with a twofold increased risk. Axillary reverse mapping (ARM), a novel technique, shows potential in reducing BCRL rates, yet its utility in ethnic minorities lacks sufficient exploration. Therefore, our study aims to investigate the utility and outcomes of ARM on BCRL in an ethnic diverse group. METHODS: A retrospective chart review of ARM patients from January 2019 to July 2022 was conducted, monitoring patients over 24 months at 3-month intervals using SOZO® scores, with comparisons with preoperative baselines. RESULTS: Of the 212 patients, 83% belonged to ethnic minorities. SLNB was performed in 83%, ALND in 17%, and 62.3% underwent radiation therapy. Positive lymph nodes were found in 31.6%, with 22.2% exhibiting blue nodes and 25.9% exhibiting blue lymphatics. Of identified blue nodes, 70.2% were excised, including 51.5% crossover nodes. Lymphedema occurred in 3 patients, resulting in a BCRL rate of 1.4%. Compared with an historical BCRL incidence of 40.4% following ALND in ethnic minorities, our study reported a significantly lower rate of 8% (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The ARM procedure can significantly lower BCRL in ethnic minority groups. The combination of ARM and bioimpedance spectroscopy led to a remarkably low BCRL rate of 1.4%. Notably, none of the patients in our study developed an axillary recurrence at 24-month follow-up. Nevertheless, future studies with larger sample sizes are warranted to better understand the utility of the ARM technique in this population.
RESUMO
Background: Positive margins on lumpectomy specimens are associated with a twofold increased risk of local breast tumor recurrence. Prior literature has demonstrated various techniques and modalities for assessing margin status to reduce re-excision rates. However, there is paucity of literature analyzing which margin contributes to the highest re-excision rates. Therefore, the primary aim of the study was to investigate whether the nipple-ward margins resulted in a higher rate of re-excision in our patient population. Methods: â¯A retrospective chart review was performed on patients who had re-excision surgery. Nipple-ward margin was identified by correlating radiological and pathological reports. A cut-off of more than 25% was used to demonstrate correlation between nipple-ward margin and re-excision rate. Results: A total of 98 patients' data were analyzed, with 41 (41.8%), 14 (14.3%), 5 (5.1%), and 38 (38.8%) diagnosed with DCIS, IDC, ILC, and mixed pathology on their margins, respectively. Overall, 48% (n=47) of the positive margins were nipple-ward, with 44.7% (n=21) reporting DCIS. Upon stratification, 45 (45.9%) cases were single-margin positive, with 26 (57.8%) being nipple-ward. Furthermore, the remaining 53 (54.1%) patients had multiple positive margins, with 21 (39.6.7%) nipple-ward cases. Conclusion: Positive nipple-ward margins significantly contribute to a higher re-excision rate p < 0.001; 48% of re-excision surgeries had positive nipple-ward margins, and 57.8% of positive single-margin cases were nipple-ward. Taking an additional shave during initial lumpectomy decreases re-excision rates. However, planning a lumpectomy procedure with a more elliptical rather than a spherical resection with additional cavity shave (ie, larger volume) in the nipple-ward direction and minimizing the remaining cavity shaves so the total volume resected remains unchanged. Nevertheless, future studies with larger sample sizes are required to bolster our findings.