Journal Basic Info
- Impact Factor: 1.995**
- H-Index: 8
- ISSN: 2474-1647
- DOI: 10.25107/2474-1647
Major Scope
- Urology
- Neurological Surgery
- Orthopaedic Surgery
- Endocrine Surgery
- Gastroenterological Surgery
- Colon and Rectal Surgery
- Robotic Surgery
- Minimally Invasive Surgery
Abstract
Citation: Clin Surg. 2021;6(1):3235.Research Article | Open Access
Macroscopic Intraoperative Margin Assessment and Risk Factors of Margin Involvement in Breast Cancer Conserving Surgery
Andrea Goikoetxea Urdiain1*, Pedro Armendáriz Rubio1, Natalia Moras Pérez1, Arkaitz Galbete Jiménez2, Yerani Ruiz de Azúa Ciria3 and Cristina Artieda Soto1
1Department of General Surgery, Complejo Hospitalario de Navarra, Spain
2Department of Statistics, Complejo Hospitalario de Navarra, Spain
3Department of Pathology, Complejo Hospitalario de Navarra, Spain
*Correspondance to: Andrea Goikoetxea Urdiain
PDF Full Text DOI: 10.25107/2474-1647.3235
Abstract
Background: Surgical margin status after Breast-Conserving Surgery (BCS) is an important prognostic factor in breast cancer treatment. Objective: To assess whether the protocol applied for intraoperative evaluation of the surgical specimen could affect the rate of margin involvement and to analyze other risk factors influencing margin status. Methods: We identified patients treated with BCS between 2004 and 2015 at a breast cancer referral center. Invasive lesions underwent an intraoperative macroscopic pathologic evaluation, using “ink on tumor” as margin definition. Multivariate logistic regression methods identified the risk factors for surgical margin involvement. Results: Of 1,054 patients receiving BCS, intraoperative margin assessment was performed in 78.3%. Failure to accomplish an intraoperative evaluation of margins was strongly associated with the rate of positive margins: 27.5% compared to 6.1% in the group whose margins were assessed. The overall definitive rate of inadequate margins was 10.7%. The multivariate study identified the following variables as independent predictors of margin involvement: Absence of intraoperative pathologic assessment of the margin, younger age, personal history of benign breast pathology, lack of preoperative diagnosis, intraductal histology and tumor size. Conclusion: These clinicopathologic factors should be considered when planning BCS. Our systematic approach is an important strategy to reduce surgical reoperations.
Keywords
Intraoperative macroscopic margin assessment; Margin involvement risk factors; Breast-conserving surgery; Breast cancer
Cite the article
Urdiain AG, Rubio PA, Pérez NM, Jiménez AG, de Azúa Ciria YR, Soto CA. Macroscopic Intraoperative Margin Assessment and Risk Factors of Margin Involvement in Breast Cancer Conserving Surgery. Clin Surg. 2021; 6: 3235..