Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Radiological Underestimation of Tumor Size as a Relevant Risk Factor for Positive Margin Rate in Breast-Conserving Therapy of Pure Ductal Carcinoma In Situ (DCIS).
Schultek, Gesche; Gerber, Bernd; Reimer, Toralf; Stubert, Johannes; Hartmann, Steffi; Martin, Annett; Stachs, Angrit.
Afiliação
  • Schultek G; Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Rostock, 18059 Rostock, Germany.
  • Gerber B; Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Rostock, 18059 Rostock, Germany.
  • Reimer T; Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Rostock, 18059 Rostock, Germany.
  • Stubert J; Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Rostock, 18059 Rostock, Germany.
  • Hartmann S; Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Rostock, 18059 Rostock, Germany.
  • Martin A; Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Rostock, 18059 Rostock, Germany.
  • Stachs A; Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Rostock, 18059 Rostock, Germany.
Cancers (Basel) ; 14(10)2022 May 11.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35625972
Background: Radiological underestimation of the actual tumor size is a relevant problem in reaching negative margins in ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) associated with microcalcifications in breast-conserving therapy (BCT). The aim of this study is to evaluate whether the radiological underestimation of tumor size has an influence on the histopathological margin status. Methods: Patients who underwent BCT with preoperatively diagnosed pure DCIS were included (pooled analysis of two trials). Multiple factors were analysed regarding radiological underestimation ≥10 mm. Radiological underestimation was defined as mammographic minus histological tumor size in mm. Results: Positive margins occurred in 75 of 189 patients. Radiological underestimation ≥10 mm was an independent influencing factor (OR 5.80; 95%CI 2.55−13.17; p < 0.001). A radiological underestimation was seen in 70 patients. The following parameters were statistically significant associated with underestimation: pleomorphic microcalcifications (OR 3.77; 95%CI 1.27−11.18), clustered distribution patterns (OR 4.26; 95%CI 2.25−8.07), and mammographic tumor sizes ≤20 mm (OR 7.47; 95%CI 3.49−15.99). Only a mammographic tumor size ≤20 mm was an independent risk factor (OR 6.49; 95%CI 2.30−18.26; p < 0.001). Grading, estrogen receptor status, and comedo necrosis did not influence the size estimation. Conclusion: Radiological underestimation is an independent risk factor for positive margins in BCT of DCIS associated with microcalcifications predominantly occurring in mammographic small tumors.
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Tipo de estudo: Etiology_studies / Risk_factors_studies Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2022 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Tipo de estudo: Etiology_studies / Risk_factors_studies Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2022 Tipo de documento: Article