The Impact of L-Dex(®) Measurements in Assessing Breast Cancer-Related Lymphedema as Part of Routine Clinical Practice.

PURPOSE: With improved survivorship, the prevalence of breast cancer-related lymphedema (BCRL) continues to increase, leading to impairment of a patients' quality of life. While traditional diagnostic methods are limited by an inability to detect BCRL until clinically apparent, bioimpedance spectroscopy (BIS) has been shown to detect subclinical BCRL. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the role of BIS in the early detection of BCRL, as well as assessment of response to BCRL treatment. METHODS: A retrospective review of 1,133 patients treated between November 2008 and July 2013 at two surgical practices was performed. Eligible patients (n = 326) underwent preoperative and postoperative L-Dex measurements. Patients were identified as having subclinical lymphedema if they were asymptomatic and the L-Dex score increased >10 U above baseline and were monitored following treatment. Patients were stratified by lymph node dissection technique [sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) vs. axillary lymph node dissection (ALND)] and receipt of BCRL treatment. RESULTS: The average age of the cohort was 56.2 years old, and mean follow-up was 21.7 months. Of the 326 patients, 210 underwent SLNB and 116 underwent ALND. BCRL was identified by L-Dex in 40 patients (12.3%). The cumulative incidence rate of subclinical lymphedema was 4.3% for SLNB (n = 9) and 26.7% for ALND (n = 31). Of those diagnosed with BCRL, 50% resolved following treatment, 27.5% underwent treatment without resolution, and 22.5% had resolution without treatment. The prevalence of persistent, clinical BCRL was 0.5% for SLNB and 8.6% for ALND. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates both the feasibility and clinical utility of implementing L-Dex measurements in routine breast cancer care. L-Dex identified patients with possible subclinical BCRL and allowed for assessment of response to therapy.

A Prospective, Single Arm, Multi-site, Clinical Evaluation of a Nonradioactive Surgical Guidance Technology for the Location of Nonpalpable Breast Lesions during Excision.

OBJECTIVES: This study was a multicenter evaluation of the SAVI SCOUT(®) breast localization and surgical guidance system using micro-impulse radar technology for the removal of nonpalpable breast lesions. The study was designed to validate the results of a recent 50-patient pilot study in a larger multi-institution trial. The primary endpoints were the rates of successful reflector placement, localization, and removal. METHODS: This multicenter, prospective trial enrolled patients scheduled to have excisional biopsy or breast-conserving surgery of a nonpalpable breast lesion. From March to November 2015, 154 patients were consented and evaluated by 20 radiologists and 16 surgeons at 11 participating centers. Patients had SCOUT(®) reflectors placed up to 7 days before surgery, and placement was confirmed by mammography or ultrasonography. Implanted reflectors were detected by the SCOUT(®) handpiece and console. Presence of the reflector in the excised surgical specimen was confirmed radiographically, and specimens were sent for routine pathology. RESULTS: SCOUT(®) reflectors were successfully placed in 153 of 154 patients. In one case, the reflector was placed at a distance from the target that required a wire to be placed. All 154 lesions and reflectors were successfully removed during surgery. For 101 patients with a preoperative diagnosis of cancer, 86 (85.1 %) had clear margins, and 17 (16.8 %) patients required margin reexcision. CONCLUSIONS: SCOUT(®) provides a reliable and effective alternative method for the localization and surgical excision of nonpalpable breast lesions using no wires or radioactive materials, with excellent patient, radiologist, and surgeon acceptance.

The impact of use of an intraoperative margin assessment device on re-excision rates.

Historically there has been a high rate of surgical interventions to obtain clear margins for breast cancer patients undergoing breast conserving local therapy. An intraoperative margin assessment tool (MarginProbe) has been approved for use in the US since 2013. This study is the first compilation of data from routine use of the device, to assess the impact of device utilization on re-excision rates. We present a retrospective, observational, review from groups of consecutive patients, before and after the implementation of intraoperative use of the device during lumpectomy procedures. Lesions were localized by standard methods. The intraoperative margin assessment device was used on all circumferential margins of the main specimen, but not on any additional shavings. A positive reading by the device led to an additional shaving of the corresponding cavity location. Specimens were also, when feasible, imaged intra-operatively by X-ray, and additional shavings were taken if needed based on clinical assessment. For each surgeon, historical re-excision rates were established based on a consecutive set of patients from a time period proximal to initiation of use of the device. From March 2013 to April 2014 the device was routinely used by 4 surgeons in 3 centers. In total, 165 cases lumpectomy cases were performed. Positive margins resulted in additional re-excision procedures in 9.7% (16/165) of the cases. The corresponding historical set from 2012 and 2013 consisted of 186 Lumpectomy cases, in which additional re-excision procedures were performed in 25.8% (48/186) of the cases. The reduction in the rate of re-excision procedures was significant 62% (P < 0.0001). Use of an intraoperative margin assessment device contributes to achieving clear margins and reducing re-excision procedures. As in some cases positive margins were found on shavings, future studies of interest may include an analysis of the effect of using the device on the shavings intra-operatively.

Validating the performance of the mammary sentinel lymph node team.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The mammary sentinel lymph node (SLN) procedure has the potential to improve the accuracy and lower the morbidity of axillary staging in breast cancer patients, but results are closely linked to experience and can vary widely between institutions. Standardized performance measures need to be established in order to optimize the transition to SLN biopsy only. METHODS: Performance data were prospectively collected for the first 156 mammary SLN procedures performed by three surgeons in our institution. RESULTS: Seventy-five cases were required to achieve an SLN visualization rate of > 80% on preoperative lymphoscintigraphy. The SLN visualization rate was 90% for the last 52 cases. Two surgeons required 25 cases before consistently achieving a > or = 90% SLN identification rate in the operating room and one required 15 cases. The metastasis detection rate increased from 22% for the first 52 cases to 31% for the last 52 cases. The false negative rate for the procedure was 5%. CONCLUSIONS: The following performance criteria and benchmarks are suggested for validating the performance of the SLN team: (1) SLN visualization rate on preoperative lymphoscintigraphy > or = 80%, (2) SLN identification rate in the operating room > or = 90%, (3) False negative rate for the procedure 5%. Thirty procedures per surgeon were sufficient to achieve these benchmarks in our group.