Cargando…
Accuracy of gross intraoperative margin assessment for breast cancer: experience since the SSO-ASTRO margin consensus guidelines
Gross intraoperative assessment can be used to ensure negative margins at the time of surgery. Previous studies of this technique were conducted before the introduction of consensus guidelines defining a “positive” margin. We performed a retrospective study examining the accuracy of this technique s...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Nature Publishing Group UK
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7567822/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33060797 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-74373-6 |
_version_ | 1783596403564478464 |
---|---|
author | Nunez, Alberto Jones, Veronica Schulz-Costello, Katherine Schmolze, Daniel |
author_facet | Nunez, Alberto Jones, Veronica Schulz-Costello, Katherine Schmolze, Daniel |
author_sort | Nunez, Alberto |
collection | PubMed |
description | Gross intraoperative assessment can be used to ensure negative margins at the time of surgery. Previous studies of this technique were conducted before the introduction of consensus guidelines defining a “positive” margin. We performed a retrospective study examining the accuracy of this technique since these guidelines were published. We identified all specimens that were grossly examined at the time of breast conserving surgery from January 2014 to July 2020. Gross and final microscopic diagnoses were compared and the performance of intraoperative examination was assessed in terms of false positive and false negative rates. Logistic regression models were used to examine the effect of clinicopathologic covariates on discordance. 327 cases were reviewed. Gross exam prompted re-excision in 166 cases (61%). The rate of false negative discordance was 8.6%. In multivariate analysis, multifocality on final pathology was associated with discordance. We consider the false negative rate acceptable for routine clinical use; however, there is an ongoing need for more accurate methods for the intraoperative assessment of margins. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7567822 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | Nature Publishing Group UK |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-75678222020-10-19 Accuracy of gross intraoperative margin assessment for breast cancer: experience since the SSO-ASTRO margin consensus guidelines Nunez, Alberto Jones, Veronica Schulz-Costello, Katherine Schmolze, Daniel Sci Rep Article Gross intraoperative assessment can be used to ensure negative margins at the time of surgery. Previous studies of this technique were conducted before the introduction of consensus guidelines defining a “positive” margin. We performed a retrospective study examining the accuracy of this technique since these guidelines were published. We identified all specimens that were grossly examined at the time of breast conserving surgery from January 2014 to July 2020. Gross and final microscopic diagnoses were compared and the performance of intraoperative examination was assessed in terms of false positive and false negative rates. Logistic regression models were used to examine the effect of clinicopathologic covariates on discordance. 327 cases were reviewed. Gross exam prompted re-excision in 166 cases (61%). The rate of false negative discordance was 8.6%. In multivariate analysis, multifocality on final pathology was associated with discordance. We consider the false negative rate acceptable for routine clinical use; however, there is an ongoing need for more accurate methods for the intraoperative assessment of margins. Nature Publishing Group UK 2020-10-15 /pmc/articles/PMC7567822/ /pubmed/33060797 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-74373-6 Text en © The Author(s) 2020 Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. |
spellingShingle | Article Nunez, Alberto Jones, Veronica Schulz-Costello, Katherine Schmolze, Daniel Accuracy of gross intraoperative margin assessment for breast cancer: experience since the SSO-ASTRO margin consensus guidelines |
title | Accuracy of gross intraoperative margin assessment for breast cancer: experience since the SSO-ASTRO margin consensus guidelines |
title_full | Accuracy of gross intraoperative margin assessment for breast cancer: experience since the SSO-ASTRO margin consensus guidelines |
title_fullStr | Accuracy of gross intraoperative margin assessment for breast cancer: experience since the SSO-ASTRO margin consensus guidelines |
title_full_unstemmed | Accuracy of gross intraoperative margin assessment for breast cancer: experience since the SSO-ASTRO margin consensus guidelines |
title_short | Accuracy of gross intraoperative margin assessment for breast cancer: experience since the SSO-ASTRO margin consensus guidelines |
title_sort | accuracy of gross intraoperative margin assessment for breast cancer: experience since the sso-astro margin consensus guidelines |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7567822/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33060797 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-74373-6 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT nunezalberto accuracyofgrossintraoperativemarginassessmentforbreastcancerexperiencesincethessoastromarginconsensusguidelines AT jonesveronica accuracyofgrossintraoperativemarginassessmentforbreastcancerexperiencesincethessoastromarginconsensusguidelines AT schulzcostellokatherine accuracyofgrossintraoperativemarginassessmentforbreastcancerexperiencesincethessoastromarginconsensusguidelines AT schmolzedaniel accuracyofgrossintraoperativemarginassessmentforbreastcancerexperiencesincethessoastromarginconsensusguidelines |