Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Efficacy of intraoperative entire-circumferential frozen section analysis of lumpectomy margins during breast-conserving surgery for breast cancer

  • Original Article
  • Published:
International Journal of Clinical Oncology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Intraoperative frozen section analysis of the surgical margins during breast-conserving surgery (BCS) for breast cancer can reliably achieve clear surgical margins and prevent re-operations. The aim of this study was to assess intraoperative entire-circumferential frozen section analysis (IEFSA) of the lumpectomy margins during BCS.

Methods

A total of 1029 patients who underwent BCS with IEFSA between June 2007 and July 2013 were available for assessment. The inner surfaces of the shaved lumpectomy margins were examined as frozen sections during BCS. The margins were defined as positive when the cancer cells were present within 5 mm from the edge of the outermost margins of the specimens.

Results

Out of 1029 patients, 312 patients (30.3 %) had positive margins after the initial lumpectomy and underwent additional resections during BCS. Fourteen patients (1.4 %) underwent mastectomy following the results of additional resections during the first surgery. Of 1015 patients who completed BCS, 60 patients (5.9 %) were found to have positive margins in the final pathology. One patient (0.1 %) underwent re-operation after BCS while the residual diseases of the other 59 patients were judged to be minimal. Of the 312 patients who were judged to have positive margins after the initial lumpectomy with IEFSA, 53 patients (16.9 %) were found to have negative margins in the final pathology. At a median follow-up time of 54.1 months, one patient (0.1 %) had a recurrence of breast cancer in the preserved breast.

Conclusion

IEFSA is useful for preventing the need for re-operation and local recurrence after BCS.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Referrence

  1. Fisher B, Anderson S, Bryant J et al (2002) Twenty-year follow-up of a randomized trial comparing total mastectomy, lumpectomy, and lumpectomy plus irradiation for the treatment of invasive breast cancer. N Engl J Med 347(16):1233–1241. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa022152

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Jacobson JA, Danforth DN, Cowan KH et al (1995) Ten-year results of a comparison of conservation with mastectomy in the treatment of stage I and II breast cancer. N Engl J Med 332(14):907–911. doi:10.1056/nejm199504063321402

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Veronesi U, Cascinelli N, Mariani L et al (2002) Twenty-year follow-up of a randomized study comparing breast-conserving surgery with radical mastectomy for early breast cancer. N Engl J Med 347(16):1227–1232. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa020989

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Gage I, Schnitt SJ, Nixon AJ et al (1996) Pathologic margin involvement and the risk of recurrence in patients treated with breast-conserving therapy. Cancer 78(9):1921–1928

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Leong C, Boyages J, Jayasinghe UW et al (2004) Effect of margins on ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence after breast conservation therapy for lymph node-negative breast carcinoma. Cancer 100(9):1823–1832. doi:10.1002/cncr.20153

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Schnitt SJ, Abner A, Gelman R et al (1994) The relationship between microscopic margins of resection and the risk of local recurrence in patients with breast cancer treated with breast-conserving surgery and radiation therapy. Cancer 74(6):1746–1751

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Smitt MC, Nowels KW, Zdeblick MJ et al (1995) The importance of the lumpectomy surgical margin status in long-term results of breast conservation. Cancer 76(2):259–267

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Weng EY, Juillard GJ, Parker RG et al (2000) Outcomes and factors impacting local recurrence of ductal carcinoma in situ. Cancer 88(7):1643–1649

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Aziz D, Rawlinson E, Narod SA et al (2006) The role of reexcision for positive margins in optimizing local disease control after breast-conserving surgery for cancer. Breast J 12(4):331–337. doi:10.1111/j.1075-122X.2006.00271.x

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Jacobson AF, Asad J, Boolbol SK et al (2008) Do additional shaved margins at the time of lumpectomy eliminate the need for re-excision? Am J Surg 196(4):556–558. doi:10.1016/j.amjsurg.2008.06.007

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Talsma AK, Reedijk AM, Damhuis RA et al (2011) Re-resection rates after breast-conserving surgery as a performance indicator: introduction of a case-mix model to allow comparison between Dutch hospitals. Eur J Surg Oncol 37(4):357–363. doi:10.1016/j.ejso.2011.01.008

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Cox CE, Ku NN, Reintgen DS et al (1991) Touch preparation cytology of breast lumpectomy margins with histologic correlation. Arch Surg 126(4):490–493

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. D’Halluin F, Tas P, Rouquette S et al (2009) Intra-operative touch preparation cytology following lumpectomy for breast cancer: a series of 400 procedures. Breast 18(4):248–253. doi:10.1016/j.breast.2009.05.002

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Moore MM, Whitney LA, Cerilli L et al (2001) Intraoperative ultrasound is associated with clear lumpectomy margins for palpable infiltrating ductal breast cancer. Ann Surg 233(6):761–768

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Rahusen FD, Bremers AJ, Fabry HF et al (2002) Ultrasound-guided lumpectomy of nonpalpable breast cancer versus wire-guided resection: a randomized clinical trial. Ann Surg Oncol 9(10):994–998

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Singletary SE (2002) Surgical margins in patients with early-stage breast cancer treated with breast conservation therapy. Am J Surg 184(5):383–393

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Valdes EK, Boolbol SK, Cohen JM et al (2007) Intra-operative touch preparation cytology; does it have a role in re-excision lumpectomy? Ann Surg Oncol 14(3):1045–1050. doi:10.1245/s10434-006-9263-x

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Cabioglu N, Hunt KK, Sahin AA et al (2007) Role for intraoperative margin assessment in patients undergoing breast-conserving surgery. Ann Surg Oncol 14(4):1458–1471. doi:10.1245/s10434-006-9236-0

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Camp ER, McAuliffe PF, Gilroy JS et al (2005) Minimizing local recurrence after breast conserving therapy using intraoperative shaved margins to determine pathologic tumor clearance. J Am Coll Surg 201(6):855–861. doi:10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2005.06.274

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Cao D, Lin C, Woo SH et al (2005) Separate cavity margin sampling at the time of initial breast lumpectomy significantly reduces the need for reexcisions. Am J Surg Pathol 29(12):1625–1632

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Chagpar A, Yen T, Sahin A et al (2003) Intraoperative margin assessment reduces reexcision rates in patients with ductal carcinoma in situ treated with breast-conserving surgery. Am J Surg 186(4):371–377

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Chen K, Zeng Y, Jia H et al (2012) Clinical outcomes of breast-conserving surgery in patients using a modified method for cavity margin assessment. Ann Surg Oncol 19(11):3386–3394. doi:10.1245/s10434-012-2331-5

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Jorns JM, Visscher D, Sabel M et al (2012) Intraoperative frozen section analysis of margins in breast conserving surgery significantly decreases reoperative rates: one-year experience at an ambulatory surgical center. Am J Clin Pathol 138(5):657–669. doi:10.1309/ajcp4iemxcj1gdts

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Olson TP, Harter J, Munoz A et al (2007) Frozen section analysis for intraoperative margin assessment during breast-conserving surgery results in low rates of re-excision and local recurrence. Ann Surg Oncol 14(10):2953–2960. doi:10.1245/s10434-007-9437-1

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Houssami N, Macaskill P, Marinovich ML et al (2014) The association of surgical margins and local recurrence in women with early-stage invasive breast cancer treated with breast-conserving therapy: a meta-analysis. Ann Surg Oncol 21(3):717–730. doi:10.1245/s10434-014-3480-5

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Moran MS, Schnitt SJ, Giuliano AE et al (2014) Society of Surgical Oncology-American Society for Radiation Oncology consensus guideline on margins for breast-conserving surgery with whole-breast irradiation in stages I and II invasive breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. doi:10.1200/JCO.2013.53.3935

    Google Scholar 

  27. Bellon JR, Come SE, Gelman RS et al (2005) Sequencing of chemotherapy and radiation therapy in early-stage breast cancer: updated results of a prospective randomized trial. J Clin Oncol 23(9):1934–1940. doi:10.1200/jco.2005.04.032

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Burke MF, Allison R, Tripcony L (1995) Conservative therapy of breast cancer in Queensland. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 31(2):295–303. doi:10.1016/0360-3016(94)e0210-b

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Demirci S, Broadwater G, Marks LB et al (2012) Breast conservation therapy: the influence of molecular subtype and margins. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 83(3):814–820. doi:10.1016/j.ijrobp.2011.09.001

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Ewertz M, Kempel MM, During M et al (2008) Breast conserving treatment in Denmark, 1989–1998. A nationwide population-based study of the Danish Breast Cancer Co-operative Group. Acta Oncol 47(4):682–690. doi:10.1080/02841860802032769

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Freedman G, Fowble B, Hanlon A et al (1999) Patients with early stage invasive cancer with close or positive margins treated with conservative surgery and radiation have an increased risk of breast recurrence that is delayed by adjuvant systemic therapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 44(5):1005–1015

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Goldstein NS, Kestin L, Vicini F (2003) Factors associated with ipsilateral breast failure and distant metastases in patients with invasive breast carcinoma treated with breast-conserving therapy. A clinicopathologic study of 607 neoplasms from 583 patients. Am J Clin Pathol 120(4):500–527. doi:10.1309/8941-vdaj-mky2-gclx

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Groot G, Rees H, Pahwa P et al (2011) Predicting local recurrence following breast-conserving therapy for early stage breast cancer: the significance of a narrow (</= 2 mm) surgical resection margin. J Surg Oncol 103(3):212–216. doi:10.1002/jso.21826

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Horiguchi J, Koibuchi Y, Takei H et al (2002) Breast-conserving surgery following radiation therapy of 50 Gy in stages I and II carcinoma of the breast: the experience at one institute in Japan. Oncol Rep 9(5):1053–1057

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Karasawa K, Mitsumori M, Yamauchi C et al (2005) Treatment outcome of breast-conserving therapy in patients with positive or close resection margins: japanese multi institute survey for radiation dose effect. Breast Cancer 12(2):91–98

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Karasawa K, Obara T, Shimizu T et al (2003) Outcome of breast-conserving therapy in the Tokyo Women’s Medical University Breast Cancer Society experience. Breast Cancer 10(4):341–348

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Kasumi F, Takahashi K, Nishimura S et al (2006) CIH-Tokyo experience with breast-conserving surgery without radiotherapy: 6.5 year follow-up results of 1462 patients. Breast J 12(5 Suppl 2):S181–S190. doi:10.1111/j.1075-122X.2006.00332.x

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Kokubo M, Mitsumori M, Ishikura S et al (2000) Results of breast-conserving therapy for early stage breast cancer: Kyoto University experiences. Am J Clin Oncol 23(5):499–505

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Kreike B, Hart AA, van de Velde T et al (2008) Continuing risk of ipsilateral breast relapse after breast-conserving therapy at long-term follow-up. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 71(4):1014–1021. doi:10.1016/j.ijrobp.2007.11.029

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Kunos C, Latson L, Overmoyer B et al (2006) Breast conservation surgery achieving > or = 2 mm tumor-free margins results in decreased local-regional recurrence rates. Breast J 12(1):28–36. doi:10.1111/j.1075-122X.2006.00181.x

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Liau SS, Cariati M, Noble D et al (2010) Audit of local recurrence following breast conservation surgery with 5-mm target margin and hypofractionated 40-Gray breast radiotherapy for invasive breast cancer. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 92(7):562–568. doi:10.1308/003588410x12699663903476

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Livi L, Meattini I, Franceschini D et al (2013) Radiotherapy boost dose-escalation for invasive breast cancer after breast-conserving surgery: 2093 patients treated with a prospective margin-directed policy. Radiother Oncol 108(2):273–278. doi:10.1016/j.radonc.2013.02.009

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Livi L, Paiar F, Saieva C et al (2007) Survival and breast relapse in 3834 patients with T1-T2 breast cancer after conserving surgery and adjuvant treatment. Radiother Oncol 82(3):287–293. doi:10.1016/j.radonc.2006.11.009

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Lupe K, Truong PT, Alexander C et al (2011) Subsets of women with close or positive margins after breast-conserving surgery with high local recurrence risk despite breast plus boost radiotherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 81(4):e561–e568. doi:10.1016/j.ijrobp.2011.02.021

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. McBain CA, Young EA, Swindell R et al (2003) Local recurrence of breast cancer following surgery and radiotherapy: incidence and outcome. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol) 15(1):25–31

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  46. Mirza NQ, Vlastos G, Meric F et al (2002) Predictors of locoregional recurrence among patients with early-stage breast cancer treated with breast-conserving therapy. Ann Surg Oncol 9(3):256–265

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Neuschatz AC, DiPetrillo T, Safaii H et al (2003) Long-term follow-up of a prospective policy of margin-directed radiation dose escalation in breast-conserving therapy. Cancer 97(1):30–39. doi:10.1002/cncr.10981

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Obedian E, Haffty BG (1999) Internal mammary nodal irradiation in conservatively-managed breast cancer patients: is there a benefit? Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 44(5):997–1003

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Park CC, Mitsumori M, Nixon A et al (2000) Outcome at 8 years after breast-conserving surgery and radiation therapy for invasive breast cancer: influence of margin status and systemic therapy on local recurrence. J Clin Oncol 18(8):1668–1675

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Perez CA (2003) Conservation therapy in T1-T2 breast cancer: past, current issues, and future challenges and opportunities. Cancer J 9(6):442–453

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Pierce LJ, Strawderman MH, Douglas KR et al (1997) Conservative surgery and radiotherapy for early-stage breast cancer using a lung density correction: the University of Michigan experience. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 39(4):921–928

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Santiago RJ, Wu L, Harris E et al (2004) Fifteen-year results of breast-conserving surgery and definitive irradiation for Stage I and II breast carcinoma: the University of Pennsylvania experience. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 58(1):233–240

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Smitt MC, Nowels K, Carlson RW et al (2003) Predictors of reexcision findings and recurrence after breast conservation. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 57(4):979–985

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Spivack B, Khanna MM, Tafra L et al (1994) Margin status and local recurrence after breast-conserving surgery. Arch Surg 129(9):952–956 discussion 956–957

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Touboul E, Buffat L, Belkacemi Y et al (1999) Local recurrences and distant metastases after breast-conserving surgery and radiation therapy for early breast cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 43(1):25–38

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Varghese P, Gattuso JM, Mostafa AI et al (2008) The role of radiotherapy in treating small early invasive breast cancer. Eur J Surg Oncol 34(4):369–376. doi:10.1016/j.ejso.2007.04.008

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Voogd AC, Nielsen M, Peterse JL et al (2001) Differences in risk factors for local and distant recurrence after breast-conserving therapy or mastectomy for stage I and II breast cancer: pooled results of two large European randomized trials. J Clin Oncol 19(6):1688–1697

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Whipp E, Beresford M, Sawyer E et al (2010) True local recurrence rate in the conserved breast after magnetic resonance imaging-targeted radiotherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 76(4):984–990. doi:10.1016/j.ijrobp.2009.03.026

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank the staff members of the Department of Clinical Pathology at our hospital for their technical support.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest with respect to this study.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Breast and Endocrine Surgery, Kumamoto City Hospital, 1-1-60 Kotoh, Higashi-ku, Kumamoto, 862-8605, Japan

    Tomofumi Osako, Reiki Nishimura, Yasuyuki Nishiyama, Yasuhiro Okumura, Rumiko Tashima, Masahiro Nakano & Mamiko Fujisue

  2. Department of Pathology, Kumamoto City Hospital, 1-1-60 Kotoh, Higashi-ku, Kumamoto, 862-8605, Japan

    Yasuo Toyozumi & Nobuyuki Arima

Authors
  1. Tomofumi Osako
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Reiki Nishimura
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Yasuyuki Nishiyama
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Yasuhiro Okumura
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Rumiko Tashima
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Masahiro Nakano
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Mamiko Fujisue
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Yasuo Toyozumi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Nobuyuki Arima
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tomofumi Osako.

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Osako, T., Nishimura, R., Nishiyama, Y. et al. Efficacy of intraoperative entire-circumferential frozen section analysis of lumpectomy margins during breast-conserving surgery for breast cancer. Int J Clin Oncol 20, 1093–1101 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10147-015-0827-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10147-015-0827-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation