[Ultrasound-guided surgery for breast cancer]. / Echogeleid opereren bij mammacarcinoom.

Recent literature shows that perioperative ultrasound guidance of surgery for palpable and nonpalpable breast carcinoma results in improved surgical effectiveness. Ultrasound-guided surgery can easily lead to significant improvement of the number of radical resections and can decrease the need for additional surgery or extra radiotherapy. Ultrasound-guided surgery also contributes to a reduction in the amount of excessive breast tissue removal, which means the final cosmetic result is better. Ultrasound-guided surgery is cost-effective and easy to learn. Implementation of ultrasound-guided surgery has increased in recent years, albeit slowly. Surgeons as well as radiologists should become more aware of the improvement of primary and secondary outcome measures that can be achieved with ultrasound-guided surgery of breast cancer. In addition to radicality, the quantity of excised tissue - tumour tissue and healthy tissue - can be used as a quality indicator, given the impact on cosmetic outcome and quality of life for patients with breast cancer.

Intraoperative ultrasound guidance in breast-conserving surgery shows superiority in oncological outcome, long-term cosmetic and patient-reported outcomes: Final outcomes of a randomized controlled trial (COBALT).

BACKGROUND: The multicenter randomized controlled COBALT trial demonstrated that ultrasound-guided breast-conserving surgery (USS) results in a significant reduction of margin involvement (3.1% vs. 13%) and excision volumes compared to palpation-guided surgery (PGS). The aim of the present study was to determine long term oncological and patient-reported outcomes including quality of life (QoL), together with their progress over time. METHODS: 134 patients with T1-T2 breast cancer were randomized to USS (N = 65) or PGS (N = 69). Cosmetic outcomes were assessed with the Breast Cancer Conservative Treatment cosmetic results (BCCT.core) software, panel-evaluation and patient self-evaluation on a 4-point Likert-scale. QoL was measured using the EORTC QLQ-C30/-BR23 questionnaire. RESULTS: No locoregional recurrences were reported after mean follow-up of 41 months. Seven patients (5%) developed distant metastatic disease (USS 6.3%, PGS 4.4%, p = 0.466), of whom six died of disease (95.5% overall survival). USS achieved better cosmetic outcomes compared to PGS, with poor outcomes of 11% and 21% respectively, a result mainly attributable to mastectomies due to involved margins following PGS. There was no difference after 1 and 3 years in cosmetic outcome. Dissatisfied patients included those with larger excision volumes, additional local therapies and worse QoL. Patients with poor/fair cosmetic outcomes scored significantly lower on aspects of QoL, including breast-symptoms, body image and sexual enjoyment. CONCLUSION: By significantly reducing positive margin status and lowering resection volumes, USS improves the rate of good cosmetic outcomes and increases patient-satisfaction. Considering the large impact of cosmetic outcome on QoL, USS has great potential to improve QoL following breast-conserving therapy.

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast-conserving surgery - Consequences on margin status and excision volumes: A nationwide pathology study.

BACKGROUND: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) is increasingly used in patients with operable disease due to the potential of converting patients requiring mastectomy to breast conserving surgery (BCS) or lowering resection volumes to improve cosmetic outcome. This nationwide retrospective study aims to determine margin status and specimen volume in patients with invasive breast cancer who underwent BCS after NACT. METHODS: All patients who underwent BCS in 2012-2013 for invasive breast cancer were selected from a nationwide network and registry of histology and cytopathology in the Netherlands (PALGA). RESULTS: Of the 9901 patients, 626 (6.3%) received NACT. After primary surgery 949 (10.2%) patients had tumour-involved margins compared to 152 (24.3%) after NACT. Close margins (≤1 mm) were seen in another 111 (17.7%) patients after NACT. The adjusted odds ratio for involved margins after NACT was 2.94, meaning a three times higher risk of involved margins compared with primary surgery. In patients with lobular carcinoma (54.9%) and no response to NACT (42.1%) higher tumour-involved margins were seen. High resection volumes >60 cc were observed in 224 (36%) patients after NACT of which 37 (16.5%) had tumour involved margins and 32 (14.3%) close margins ≤1 mm. CONCLUSION: The primary goal of the surgeon performing BCS after NACT, to reach tumour-free margins, is not accomplished in one out of four patients. Patients especially at risk are patients with ILC and no pathological tumour response. Excessive resection volumes after NACT do not guarantee tumour-free margins. Further research is necessary to analyze whether we are counterproductive when NACT is given in order to lower resection volumes.

A nationwide pathology study on surgical margins and excision volumes after breast-conserving surgery: There is still much to be gained.

AIM OF THE STUDY: The current study aims to assess margin status in relation to amount of healthy breast tissue resected in breast-conserving surgery (BCS) on a nationwide scale. METHODS: Using PALGA (a nationwide network and registry of histology and cytopathology in the Netherlands), all patients who underwent BCS for primary invasive carcinoma in 2012-13 were selected (10,058 excerpts). 9276 pathology excerpts were analyzed for a range of criteria including oncological margin status and distance to closest margin, specimen weight/volume, greatest tumor diameter, and with or without localization method. Calculated resection ratios (CRR) were assessed to determine excess healthy breast tissue resection. RESULTS: Margins for invasive carcinoma and in situ carcinoma combined were tumor-involved in 498 (5.4%) and focally involved in 1021 cases (11.0%) of cases. Unsatisfactory resections including (focally) involved margins and margins ≤ 1 mm were reported in 33.8% of patients. The median lumpectomy volume was 46 cc (range 1-807 cc; SD 49.18) and median CRR 2.32 (range 0.10-104.17; SD 3.23), indicating the excision of 2.3 the optimal resection volume. CONCLUSION: The unacceptable rate of tumor-involved margins as well as margins ≤ 1 mm in one third of all patients is also achieved at the expense of healthy breast tissue resection, which may carry the drawback of high rates of cosmetic failure. These data clearly suggest the need for improvement in current breast conserving surgical procedures to decrease tumor-involved margin rates while reducing the amount of healthy breast tissue resected.

Ultrasound-guided surgery for palpable breast cancer is cost-saving: results of a cost-benefit analysis.

Ultrasound-guided surgery (USS) has recently been proven to result in a significant reduction of tumour-involved surgical margins, for patients with palpable invasive breast cancer. The objective of this economic evaluation alongside a randomised trial was to evaluate the costs and benefits of USS compared to palpation-guided surgery (PGS). The hospital perspective was used. On the cost side of the analysis, resource use related to baseline treatment was taken into account and on the benefit side, resource use related to additional treatments was included. On the cost side, the difference in costs per patient was €193 (95% CI €153-€233) with higher costs in the USS group. On the benefit side, the difference in costs per patient was -€349 (95% CI -€591 to -€103) with higher costs in the PGS group. This resulted in a cost decrease of -€154 (95% CI -€388 to €81) in the USS group compared to the PGS group. Intra-operative use of a US system during BCS reduces the rate of tumour-involved margins and thereby the costs of additional treatments.