Presurgical computed tomography-guided localization of lung ground glass nodules: comparing hook-wire and indocyanine green.

BACKGROUND: Presurgical computed tomography (CT)-guided localization is frequently employed to reduce the thoracotomy conversion rate, while increasing the rate of successful sublobar resection of ground glass nodules (GGNs) via video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS). In this study, we compared the clinical efficacies of presurgical CT-guided hook-wire and indocyanine green (IG)-based localization of GGNs. METHODS: Between January 2018 and December 2021, we recruited 86 patients who underwent CT-guided hook-wire or IG-based GGN localization before VATS resection in our hospital, and compared the clinical efficiency and safety of both techniques. RESULTS: A total of 38 patients with 39 GGNs were included in the hook-wire group, whereas 48 patients with 50 GGNs were included in the IG group. There were no significant disparities in the baseline data between the two groups of patients. According to our investigation, the technical success rates of CT-based hook-wire- and IG-based localization procedures were 97.4% and 100%, respectively (P = 1.000). Moreover, the significantly longer localization duration (15.3 ± 6.3 min vs. 11.2 ± 5.3 min, P = 0.002) and higher visual analog scale (4.5 ± 0.6 vs. 3.0 ± 0.5, P = 0.001) were observed in the hook-wire patients, than in the IG patients. Occurrence of pneumothorax was significantly higher in hook-wire patients (27.3% vs. 6.3%, P = 0.048). Lung hemorrhage seemed higher in hook-wire patients (28.9% vs. 12.5%, P = 0.057) but did not reach statistical significance. Lastly, the technical success rates of VATS sublobar resection were 97.4% and 100% in hook-wire and IG patients, respectively (P = 1.000). CONCLUSIONS: Both hook-wire- and IG-based localization methods can effectively identified GGNs before VATS resection. Furthermore, IG-based localization resulted in fewer complications, lower pain scores, and a shorter duration of localization.

The Challenging Image-Guided Preoperative Breast Localization: A Modality-Based Approach.

Breast conservation surgery (BCS) is the standard of care for treating patients with early-stage breast cancer and those with locally advanced breast cancer who achieve an excellent response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy. The radiologist is responsible for accurately localizing nonpalpable lesions to facilitate successful BCS. In this article, we present a practical modality-based guide on approaching challenging pre-operative localizations and incorporate examples of challenging localizations performed under sonographic, mammographic, and MRI guidance, as well as under multiple modalities. Aspects of preprocedure planning, modality selection, patient communication, and procedural and positional techniques are highlighted. Clip and device migration is also considered. Further, an overview is provided of the most widely used wire and nonwire localization devices in the United States. Accurate pre-operative localization of breast lesions is essential to achieve successful surgical outcomes. Certain modality-based techniques can be adopted to successfully complete challenging cases.

Adequacy of invasive and in situ breast carcinoma margins in radioactive seed and wire-guided localization lumpectomies.

Image-guided preoperative localizations help surgeons to completely resect nonpalpable breast cancers. The objective of this study is to compare the adequacy of specimen margins for both invasive breast cancer (IBC) and ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) after radioactive seed localization (RSL) vs wire-guided localization (WGL). We retrospectively reviewed 600 cases at a single Canadian academic center from January 2014 to September 2017, comparing surgical margins, re-excisions and reoperations, localization accuracy and major complications (migration, accidental deployment, vasovagal reaction), as well as operative duration between RSL and WGL cases. IBC margins were positive in 7% of RSL and 6% of WGL cases (P = .57). Tumor size (P = .039) and association with DCIS (P = .036) predicted positive margins in invasive carcinoma. DCIS margins were positive in 6% and 8%, and close (≤2 mm) in 37% and 36% of cases (P = .45) for RSL and RSL cases respectively. The presence of extensive intraductal component predicted positive DCIS margins (P < .0001). There was no significant difference between intraoperative re-excisions (P = .54), localization accuracy (P = .34), and operation duration (P = .81). Reoperation for lumpectomies and mastectomies was marginally higher for WGL than RSL (P = .049). There were 11 (4%) WGL and no RSL complications (P = .03). Overall, positive margins for IBC, close or positive margins for DCIS, intraoperative re-excision, localization accuracy, and operation duration were similar between RSL and WGL. The reoperation rate was higher in WGL than RSL, which may reflect practice changes over time. RSL was safer than WGL with lower complication rates.

A novel way of hook wire placement for surgical resection of suspicious breast lesions using the stereotactic vacuum assisted breast biopsy table.

Preoperative hook localization is a necessary procedure for targeting impalpable breast lesions. The aim of the current study is to introduce an alternative technique of wire placement by using the stereotactic biopsy device instead of the conventionally used mammography device. Fifty-one patients with impalpable mammographic lesions, graded BIRADS 4 or 5, were prospectively enrolled. Mean duration was 7 ± 1.5 minutes. Lesion-to-wire distance was <1 cm in 96% (51/53). Hook wire placement using the stereotactic biopsy device is considered as a safe, accurate, fast, and well-tolerable for the patient procedure.

Sentinel lymph node BIOPSY after neoadjuvant therapy in breast cancer patients with lymph node involvement at diagnosis. Could wire localization of clipped node improve our results?

INTRODUCTION: Sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) after neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) in node-positive (N+) breast cancer patients at diagnosis remains a controversial issue, with no consensus on implementation or safety. OBJECTIVES: We sought to assess the accuracy of SLNB after NAT in biopsy-proven N+ cases at diagnosis and the efficacy and accuracy of wire localization of the clipped node to improve results. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A cross-sectional diagnostic technique validation study in N+ patients following NAT was performed. The biopsy-proven affected lymph node was clipped at diagnosis. SLNB and axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) were performed in cases of clinical-radiological lymph node response after NAT. For the purposes of our study we added wire localization of the clipped node. RESULTS: 103 patients were included (mean age, 54.4 years [± 12.7]). Wire marking was performed in 28 cases. The overall identification rate (IR) of SLN was 81.6%. The median number of nodes removed was 2 (range 2). The overall false negative rate (FNR) was 6.1%. Sensitivity and overall accuracy were 93.9% and 95.2%, respectively (area under curve 0.97). In the double-marked (clip and wire) group the FNR decreased to 0% and accuracy was 100%. Axillary pathologic complete response was observed in 24.3% of cases. CONCLUSIONS: SLNB is useful in node-positive patients at diagnosis who respond to NAT. Combining this with preoperative wire localization of the biopsied lymph node reduces the FNR without increasing the number of complications.

Comparison of wire localization, radioactive seed, and Savi scout® radar for management of surgical breast disease.

BACKGROUND: Radioactive seed localization (RSL) and the Savi scout® radar (SSR) are newer alternatives to wire-guided localization (WL) for nonpalpable breast lesions. OBJECTIVE: To compare three types of localization devices used in breast conserving surgery. METHODS: A total of 293 patients had a partial mastectomy (n = 194) or breast biopsy (n = 99) with preoperative image-guided localization of a single nonpalpable lesion between July 2017 to July 2018. Lesions were localized by WL, RSL, or SSR. Although all operations performed were outpatient, due to workflow differences at our institution, operations performed in the hospital operating rooms were defined as "hospital setting." Operations performed at an outpatient surgery facility without the capacity to admit patients were defined as "ambulatory." Delay in operating room start times and total perioperative times in both the hospital and ambulatory setting, localization time, explant of localization device, positive margins, volume of tissue excised, and 30-day complications were evaluated. RESULTS: A total of 126 patients (43%) had WL; 59 patients (20%) had RSL; and 108 patients (37%) had SSR localization. SSR localization took longer to perform with an average time of 19 minutes, compared with 15 minutes for WL and 14 minutes for RSL (P = .020). In 93.52% of cases, the first specimen contained both the clip and localization device, which was similar among groups (P = .073). There was no difference in retained biopsy clip among the groups (average 3.4%, P = .173). For operations performed in the hospital, the time from patient arrival to the preoperative area and incision was significantly longer in the WL group with a median of 233 minutes (range 56-486), 130 minutes (range 64-294) in RSL, and 108 minutes (range 59-240) for SSR (P < .001). There was no difference in operative time among the groups with a median of 51 minutes (range 17-122) (P = .108). There was, however, significantly longer perioperative time of 469 minutes (range 210-926) in the WL group compared with 399 minutes (range 240-871) for RSL and 381 minutes (range 232-711) for SSR (P ≤ .001). For the ambulatory setting, although there was no difference in operating time among the groups (median 50 minutes, range 18-127, P = .715), only the RSL showed a decreased perioperative time compared to WL (WL 356 vs RSL 275, P < .001; SSR 279, p = NS). A total of 131 patients (44.7%) had same day localizations. Among operations with delayed start times, there was a longer average delay of 85 minutes (range 1-304) for WL group compared with 69 minutes (range 13-219) in RSL and 53 minutes (range 0-228) in SSR (P < .001). There was no difference among the three groups in positive margin rate, volume of tissue excised, and 30-day complications. CONCLUSION: Nonwire localization devices are associated with reduced overall perioperative time compared to wire localization, with few complications.

Intraoperative Ultrasound Guidance With an Ultrasound-Visible Clip: A Practical and Cost-effective Option for Breast Cancer Localization.

OBJECTIVES: In partial mastectomy (PM) or lumpectomy, ultrasound (US) localization avoids discomfort and additional procedures associated with wire localization. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the association between ultrasound-visible clip (UVC) use at the time of biopsy and US use during resection, hypothesizing that UVCs facilitate US localization and reduce costs compared with traditional radiopaque clips or no clip placement. METHODS: The study population consisted of adult female patients with breast cancer undergoing PM or lumpectomy at our institution between 2014 and 2016. The core biopsy clip type and localization method during PM were characterized as wire localization versus US localization, and associations were estimated with multivariable regression models. For the cost evaluation, breast biopsy data were obtained from the Department of Radiology. RESULTS: Among 674 patients, 490 had data on localization and the clip type. Ultrasound-visible clip placement at biopsy increased US use during resection by 13% (95% confidence interval, 6%-21%). There was no difference in the total specimen weight with US versus wire localization. The cost savings for using UVCs for the 2209 patients who underwent breast biopsy from 2014 to 2016 was $36,000. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that US localization for PM is feasible at a single institution and cost-effective when facilitated by UVCs. Placement of a UVC at the time of biopsy is recommended, as it is cost-effective and avoids the discomfort and inconvenience of wire localization.

A Single-Institute Experience With Radioactive Seed Localization of Breast Lesions-A Retrospective Study.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the benefits associated with radioactive seed localization (RSL) in comparison to conventional wire localization (WL) for nonpalpable breast lesions. METHODS: Radioactive seed localization was initiated at our institution in July 2013. Retrospective review of all WL performed between June 2012 and July 2013 (2013) and all RSL performed during June 2015 and July 2016 (2016). Patients who received neoadjuvant therapy or did not undergo their planned surgeries and WL performed in 2016 were excluded. The following data were collected: final pathology, resection margins for malignant lesions, time to surgery, seed migration, and number of localized lumpectomies performed by each surgeon. RESULTS: A total of 292 WL procedures (288 women) in 2013 and 194 RSL procedures (186 women) in 2016 were eligible for the study. All WLs were inserted the day of surgery. Mean time from RSL insertion to surgery was 4.0 ± 2.8 days (range: 1-17 days). There was no difference in specimen size for malignant lesions (6.8 ± 2.8 cm for WL and 6.9 ± 2.9 cm for RSL; P = .5). Specimen radiographs were obtained in 233 (80%) of 292 WL compared to 194 (100%) of 194 RSL (P < .001). For malignant lesions, positive margins were present in 34 (17.2%) of 198 with WL compared to 15 (10.3%) of 146 with RSL (P < .001). Close margins (≤1 mm) were present in 31 (15.6%) of 198 with WL compared to 1 (0.6%) of 146 with RSL (P < .001). The seed fell out of the specimen during surgery in 6 (3.1%) of 194. No seed loss was recorded. The surgeons (n = 4) who transitioned to RSL increased the number of surgeries per month from a mean of 4.4 ± 2.6 in 2013 to 6.9 ± 3.5 in 2016, equivalent to a 41% increase (P = .003). CONCLUSIONS: The use of RSL, as compared to conventional WL, resulted in a reduction in the number of pathologically involved surgical margins and was associated with an increased number of surgeries. Furthermore, RSL can be performed up to 14 days prior to surgery, which may improve scheduling flexibility in the radiology department.

Indocyanine green fluorescence-guided lumpectomy of nonpalpable breast cancer versus wire-guided excision: A randomized clinical trial.

The use of wire localization (WL) for excisions of nonpalpable breast cancer (NBC) has several disadvantages. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the use of indocyanine green-guided nonpalpable breast cancer lesion localization (INBCL) and to compare it with WL. A total of 62 patients with a preoperative histological diagnosis of NBC lesions that could be visualized with ultrasound and mammography were randomized to INBCL or WL. Patients with preoperatively diagnosed primary ductal carcinoma in situ and multifocal disease were excluded from the study. Significance was considered at P < 0.05. Of all 62 excision, 32 (51.6%) were guided by INBCL and 30 (48.4%) by WL. Both techniques resulted in 100% retrieval of the lesions. The rate of clear margins was significantly higher in the INBCL group (87.5%; 28/32) compared to the WL (63.3%, 19/30) (P = 0.026), reducing the requirement of re-excision. When results of the excised tissue are taken into account, the mean volume of the INBCL specimen was 56 cm3 less than that of the WL group, although this was not significantly different (P = 0.058). INBCL for NBCs was more accurate than WL, because it optimized the surgeon's ability to obtain clear margins. A smaller volume of the tissue may be excised by using INBCL technique. Therefore INBCL is an attractive alternative to WL.

Comparison of the value of superficial mark guided localization and hook-wire guided localization techniques for non-palpable breast microcalcifications: A retrospective clinical research.

AIM: The present study compares the effect and accuracy of the superficial mark guided localization (SGL) and hook-wire guided localization (WGL) techniques for non-palpable breast microcalcifications. METHODS: This retrospective study was conducted to compare SGL and WGL techniques. These techniques were performed on 51 patients with non-palpable breast microcalcifications from January 2015 to May 2016. RESULTS: Among these 51 patients, 25 (49.01%) patients were subjected to WGL and 26 patients (50.99%) were subjected to SGL. The SGL technique had a higher rate of malignant cancer detection (WGL = 12.0% and SGL = 23.0%). Furthermore, no significant differences were found with regard to average age, the rate of a second excision and the diameter of the excised tissue. Moreover, no complications were observed in the SGL group, while four (16.0%) patients in the WGL group experienced problems. CONCLUSION: The SGL technique is as accurate as the WGL technique. Furthermore, the procedure has advantages of being less expensive and causing less complications.

Generalized linear model (GLM) analysis: Multivariables of microcalcification specimens obtained via X-ray guided by stereotactic wire localization biopsy.

OBJECTIVE: To retrospectively explore correlation of the resected specimen volume of breast microcalcification lesions and endogenous and exogenous factors of stereotactic needle localization biopsy (SNLB). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Totally 214 patients underwent SNLB for non-palpable breast lesion with microcalcification lesions. Of 211 patients, 198 patients underwent single needle localization and 13 patients underwent multi-needle localization (26 lesions). Lesion sizes, distribution characteristics, lesion localization accuracy and resected specimen volumes were recorded and analyzed using a generalized linear model (GLM). RESULTS: The average lesion diameter is 2.63±1.73 cm. The localization accuracy of 187 lesions were moderate, 26 were too deep and 11 were too superficial. The mean resected specimen volume (V) was 17.51±5.14 cm3. One-way ANOVA analysis showed that 3 factors, including lesion sizes, distribution characteristics and the localization accuracy were associated with resected specimen volume (F = 67.56-112.78, P < 0.001). GLM revealed that lesion sizes, single clustered distribution and accurate localization were significant factors for resected specimen volume (F = -4.82-11.36, P < 0.05). The ratio (%) of the resected specimen volume to the involved breast volume (V0) was defined as the degree of breast defect. The mean breast defect of 125 benign patients (V/V0) was 27.5% ranging from 10.1% to 42.3%. CONCLUSION: Average lesion diameter and localization accuracy are highly significant variables for the resected specimen volume. Localization accuracy as a subjective controllable variable is one of the important factors that determine the volume of lesion resection. Single clustered distribution was more susceptible localization accuracy than other characteristic distributions. Improving localization accuracy can reduce resected specimen volume, which can reduce breast defect to a certain extent.

Bracketed radioactive seed localization vs bracketed wire-localization in breast surgery.

Multiple localizers placed in a bracketed fashion facilitates excision of radiographically extensive breast lesions. In this study, bracketed radioactive seed localization (bRSL) was compared to bracketed wire localization (bWL). We hypothesized that bRSL would achieve adequate margins and decrease re-operation rates with similar or less specimen volumes (SV) than bWL. Retrospective review identified patients who underwent bracketed breast procedures at an academic medical center. Data collected included patient demographics, tumor features, treatment variables, and surgical outcomes. Wilcoxon rank-sum test and chi-square test were used to compare continuous and categorical data, respectively. A multivariable logistic regression model was used to evaluate the association between re-excision and localization technique after adjusting for clinically relevant variables. Patients who underwent bWL were 3.9 times more likely to undergo re-excision compared to patients in bRSL group (OR=3.9, 95% CI: 2.0-7.4). Initial and total SV did not significantly differ between the two groups (P=.4). Patients were significantly more likely to undergo a mastectomy in the bWL group than in the bRSL group (24% vs 7%; P<.01). For patients undergoing excision of radiologically extensive breast lesions, bRSL serves as an alternative to bWL. In this retrospective study, bRSL was associated with a decreased re-excision rate with similar SV and a lower rate of mastectomy when compared to bWL.

MRI-guided breast interventions.

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-guided interventions, including biopsies and wire localizations, are fundamental to any breast imaging practice due to the high sensitivity but limited specificity of breast MRI. The basic steps of MRI-guided biopsies are similar regardless of the vendor or platform, and technical considerations include approach planning, patient preparation and positioning, lesion targeting, and directional sampling using a vacuum-assisted biopsy technique. Unique challenges related to MRI-guided biopsies include vanishing lesions due to contrast washout, obscuration of the biopsy site due to susceptibility artifacts, and limited access to posteromedial lesions. A careful approach to planning, patient positioning, and lesion targeting will maximize the chances for a successful biopsy. Due to overlapping imaging features between benign and malignant lesions, radiologic-pathologic concordance is difficult and essential for further patient management. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 5 Technical Efficacy: Stage 3 J. MAGN. RESON. IMAGING 2017;46:631-645.

Physician preference and patient satisfaction with radioactive seed versus wire localization.

BACKGROUND: Nonpalpable breast lesions require localization before excision. This is most commonly performed with a wire (WL) or a radioactive seed (SL), which is placed into the breast under radiographic guidance. Although there are advantages of each modality, there are no guidelines to address which patients should undergo WL versus SL. We investigated factors influencing the selection of SL versus WL at our institution and assessed patient satisfaction with each procedure. METHODS: Patients undergoing preoperative localization of nonpalpable breast lesions from May 2014 through August 2015 were included. Physicians were surveyed on surgical scheduling to evaluate factors influencing the decision to perform SL or WL. Patient satisfaction was evaluated with a survey at the first postoperative visit. Retrospective chart review was performed. RESULTS: 341 patients were included: 104 (30%) patients underwent SL and 237 (70%) underwent WL. There was no difference in patient age, benign versus malignant disease, or need for concomitant axillary surgery comparing the SL versus WL groups. Physician survey indicated that 18% of patients were candidates for WL only. Of the patients who were eligible for both, 88 (41%) ultimately underwent SL and 126 (59%) had WL. The most commonly cited reason for selection of one localization method or the other was physician preference, followed by patient preference or avoiding additional visit. There was no significant difference in self-reported preoperative anxiety level, convenience of the localization procedure, pain of the localization procedure, operative experience, postoperative pain level or medication requirement, or overall patient satisfaction comparing patients who underwent SL and WL. CONCLUSIONS: SL and WL offer patients similar comfort and satisfaction. Factors influencing selection of one modality over the other include both logistic and clinical considerations.

Translating the 2-dimensional mammogram into a 3-dimensional breast: Identifying factors that influence the movement of pre-operatively placed wire.

BACKGROUND: Pre-operative measurements from the skin to a wire-localized breast lesion can differ from operating room measurements. This study was designed to measure the discrepancies and study factors that may contribute to wire movement. METHODS: Prospective data were collected on patients who underwent wire localization lumpectomy. Clip and hook location, breast size, density, and direction of wire placement were the main focus of the analysis. RESULTS: Wire movement was more likely with longer distance from skin to hook or clip, larger breast size (especially if "fatty"), longer time between wire placement and surgery start time, and medial wire placement in larger breast. Age, body mass index, presence of mass, malignant diagnosis, tumor grade, and clip distance to the chest wall were not associated with wire movement. A longer distance from skin to hook correlated with larger specimen volume. CONCLUSIONS: Translation of the lesion location from a 2-dimensional mammogram into 3-dimensional breasts is sometimes discrepant because of movement of the localizing wire. Breast size, distance of skin to clip or hook, and wire exit site in larger breasts have a significant impact on wire movement. This information may guide the surgeon's skin incision and extent of excision.

MRI guided needle localization in a patient with recurrence pleomorphic sarcoma and post-operative scarring.

MRI-guided wire localization is commonly used for surgical localization of breast lesions. Here we introduce an alternative use of this technique to help with surgical resection of a recurrent pleomorphic sarcoma embedded in extensive post-treatment scar tissue. We describe a case of recurrent pleomorphic soft tissue sarcoma in the thigh after treatment with neoadjuvant therapy, surgery, and radiation. Due to the distortion of the normal tissue architecture and formation of extensive scar tissue from prior treatment, wire localization under MRI was successfully used to assist the surgeon in identifying the recurrent tumor for removal.

Comparative Evaluation of Iodine-125 Radioactive Seed Localization and Wire Localization for Resection of Breast Lesions.

PURPOSE: Radioactive seed localization (RSL) uses a titanium seed labeled with iodine-125 energy for surgery of nonpalpable breast lesions. RSL facilitates radiology-surgery scheduling and allows for improved oncoplasty compared with wire localization (WL). The purpose of this work was to compare the 2 techniques. METHODS: We performed a retrospective study of all breast lesions operated with RSL between February 2013 and March 2015 at our university institution, and compared with an equivalent number of surgeries performed with a single WL. Imaging and pathology reports were reviewed for information on guidance mode, accuracy of targeting, nature of excised lesion, size and volume of surgical specimen, status of margins, and reinterventions. RESULTS: A total of 254 lesions (247 women) were excised with RSL and compared with 257 lesions (244 women) whose surgery was guided by WL. Both groups were comparable in lesion pathology, guidance mode for RSL or WL positioning, and accuracy of targeting (98% correct). Mean delay between biopsy and surgery was 84 days for RSL versus 103 after WL (P = .04). No differences were noted after RSL or WL for surgical specimen mean weight, largest diameter, and volume excised. For malignancies, the rate of positive margins was comparable (2.8%-3%), with 5 of 10 women in the RSL group who underwent a second surgery displaying residual malignancy compared with 3 of 9 women in the WL group. CONCLUSIONS: RSL is safe and accurate, and has comparable surgical endpoints to WL. Because RSL offers flexible scheduling and facilitated oncoplasty, RSL may replace WL for resection of nonpalpable single breast lesions.

Comparison of intra-operative specimen mammography to standard specimen mammography for excision of non-palpable breast lesions: a randomized trial.

Standard specimen mammography (SSM) is performed in the radiology department after wire-localized excision of non-palpable breast lesions to confirm the presence of the target and evaluate margins. Alternatively, intra-operative specimen mammography (ISM) allows surgeons to view images in the operating room (OR). We conducted a randomized study comparing ISM and SSM. Women undergoing wire-localized excision for breast malignancy or imaging abnormality were randomized to SSM or ISM. For SSM, the specimen was transported to the radiology department for imaging and interpretation. For ISM, the specimen was imaged in the OR for interpretation by the surgeon and sent for SSM. Interpretation time was from specimen leaving OR until radiologist interpretation for SSM and from placement in ISM device until surgeon interpretation for ISM. Procedure and interpretation times were compared. Concordance between ISM and SSM for target and margins was evaluated. 72 patients were randomized, 36 ISM and 36 SSM. Median procedure times were similar, 48.5 (17-138) min for ISM, and 54 (17-40) min for SSM (p = 0.72), likely since specimens in both groups traveled to radiology for SSM. Median interpretation time was significantly shorter with ISM, 1 (0.5-2.0) and 9 (4-16) min for ISM and SSM, respectively (p < 0.0001). Among specimens with ISM and SSM, concordance was 100 % (35/35) for target and 93 % (14/15) for margins. In this randomized trial, use of ISM compared with SSM significantly reduced interpretation times, while accurately identifying the target. This could result in decreased operative costs from shorter OR times with use of ISM.

Imaging Factors That Influence Surgical Margins After Preoperative 125I Radioactive Seed Localization of Breast Lesions: Comparison With Wire Localization.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to compare the potential influence of imaging variables on surgical margins after preoperative radioactive seed localization (RSL) and wire localization (WL) techniques. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 565 women with 660 breast lesions underwent RSL or WL between May 16, 2012, and May 30, 2013. Patient age, lesion type (mass, calcifications, mass with associated calcifications, other), lesion size, number of seeds or wires used, surgical margin status (close positive or negative margins), and reexcision and mastectomy rates were recorded. RESULTS: Of 660 lesions, 127 (19%) underwent RSL and 533 (81%) underwent WL preoperatively. Mean lesion size was 1.8 cm in the RSL group and 1.8 cm in the WL group (p = 0.35). No difference in lesion type was identified in the RSL and WL groups (p = 0.63). RSL with a single seed was used in 105 of 127 (83%) RSLs compared with WL with a single wire in 349 of 533 (65%) WLs (p = 0.0003). The number of cases with a close positive margin was similar for RSLs (26/127, 20%) and WLs (104/533, 20%) (p = 0.81). There was no difference between the RSL group and the WL group in close positive margin status (20% each, p = 0.81), reexcision rates (20% vs 16%, respectively; p = 0.36), or mastectomy rates (6% each, p = 0.96). Lesions containing calcifications were more likely to require more than one wire (odds ratio [OR], 4.44; 95% CI, 2.8-7.0) or more than one seed (OR, 7.03; 95% CI, 1.6-30.0) when compared with masses alone (p < 0.0001). Increasing lesion size and the presence of calcifications were significant predictors of positive margins, whereas the use of more than one wire or seed was not (OR, 0.9; 95% CI, 0.5-1.5) (p = 0.75). CONCLUSION: Close positive margin, reexcision, and mastectomy rates remained similar in the WL group and RSL group. The presence of calcifications and increasing lesion size increased the odds of a close positive margin in both the WL and RSL groups, whereas the use of one versus more than one seed or wire did not.

A Randomized Prospective Comparison of Patient-Assessed Satisfaction and Clinical Outcomes with Radioactive Seed Localization versus Wire Localization.

Radioactive seed localization (RSL) has emerged as an alternative to wire localization (WL) in patients with nonpalpable breast cancer. Few studies have prospectively evaluated patient satisfaction and outcomes with RSL. We report the results of a randomized trial comparing RSL to WL in our community hospital. We prospectively enrolled 135 patients with nonpalpable breast cancer between 2011 and 2014. Patients were randomized to RSL or WL. Patients rated the pain and the convenience of the localization on a 5-point Likert scale. Characteristics and outcomes were compared between groups. Of 135 patients enrolled, 10 were excluded (benign pathology, palpable cancer, mastectomy, and previous ipsilateral cancer) resulting in 125 patients. Seventy patients (56%) were randomized to RSL and 55 (44%) to WL. Fewer patients in the RSL group reported moderate to severe pain during the localization procedure compared to the WL group (12% versus 26%, respectively, p = 0.058). The overall convenience of the procedure was rated as very good to excellent in 85% of RSL patients compared to 44% of WL patients (p < 0.0001). There was no difference between the volume of the main specimen (p = 0.67), volume of the first surgery (p = 0.67), or rate of positive margins (p = 0.53) between groups. RSL resulted in less severe pain and higher convenience compared to WL, with comparable excision volume and positive margin rates. High patient satisfaction with RSL provides another incentive for surgeons to strongly consider RSL as an alternative to WL.