Annals of Surgical Oncology

, Volume 21, Issue 7, pp 2203–2208 | Cite as

Supine Breast MRI and 3D Optical Scanning: A Novel Approach to Improve Tumor Localization for Breast Conserving Surgery

  • Matthew J. Pallone
  • Steven P. Poplack
  • Hima Bindu R. Avutu
  • Keith D. Paulsen
  • Richard J. BarthJr.
Breast Oncology

Abstract

Background

Wire localization for excision of nonpalpable breast cancer is an inefficient and inexact technique.

Methods

A total of 18 women with palpable invasive breast cancers underwent preoperative prone and supine magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Intraoperatively, the edges of the tumor were palpated and marked on the skin surface. The breast was optically scanned, and the supine MRI was adjusted to match the actual breast position at the time of surgery. Image-defined tumor edges were marked on the surface of the breast. The main outcome measure was the distance between the image-defined and palpation-defined edges of the tumor.

Results

No significant difference was found between the mean maximal tumor diameter as measured by histopathology (29.6 ± 14.3 mm), supine MRI (25.3 ± 9.7 mm), prone MRI (27.6 ± 13 mm), or palpation (30.5 ± 9.3 mm). The distance from the tumor to the chest wall was markedly different in prone versus supine MRI (56.4 ± 38 vs 19.5 ± 20 mm, p = .002). The average distance between the palpated and supine MRI image-defined tumor edge locations was 7.2 mm (range, 0–19 mm). Accuracy improved over time; the average difference in edge locations in the last 7 patients was 4.0 mm. All 4 image-defined edge locations in the last 5 patients were ≤1 cm away from the palpated locations.

Conclusions

We have developed a method of breast tumor localization using preoperative supine MRI and intraoperative optical scanning that defines tumor size and position as accurately as palpation.

References

  1. 1.
    Veronesi U, Boyle P, Goldhirsch A, Viale G. Breast cancer. Lancet. 2005;365:1727–41.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Kaufman CS, Delbecq R, Jacobson L. Excising the reexcision: stereotactic core-needle biopsy decreases need for reexcision of breast cancer. World J Surg. 1998;22:1023–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Cangiarella J, Gross J, Symmans WF, Waisman J, Petersen B, D’Angelo D, et al. The incidence of positive margins with breast conserving therapy following mammotome biopsy for microcalcification. J Surg Oncol. 2000;74:263–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Harlow SP, Krag DN, Ames SE, Weaver DL. Intraoperative ultrasound localization to guide surgical excision of nonpalpable breast carcinoma. J Am Coll Surg. 1999;189:241–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Rahusen F, Bremers A, Fabry H, van Amerongen AH, Boom RP, Meijer S. Ultrasound-guided lumpectomy of nonpalpable breast cancer versus wire-guided resection: a randomized clinical trial. Ann Surg Oncol. 2002;9:994–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kaufman CS, Jacobson L, Bachman B, Kaufman L. Intraoperative ultrasound facilitates surgery for early breast cancer. Ann Surg Oncol. 2002;9:988–93.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Layeequr R, Crawford S, Larkin A, Quinlan R. Superiority of sonographic hematoma guided resection of mammogram only visible breast cancer: wire localization should be an exception—not the rule. Ann Surg Oncol. 2007;14:2228–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Berg WA, Gutierrez L, NessAiver MS, Carter WB, Bhargavan M, Lewis RS, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of mammography, clinical examination, US, and MR imaging in preoperative assessment of breast cancer. Radiology. 2004;233:830–49.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kristoffersen Wiberg M, Aspelin P, Sylvan M, Bone B. Comparison of lesion size estimated by dynamic MR imaging, mammography and histopathology in breast neoplasms. Eur Radiol. 2003;13:1207–12.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Boetes C, Mus R, Holland R, Barentsz JO, Strijk SP, Wobbes T, et al. Breast tumors: comparative accuracy of MR imaging relative to mammography and US for demonstrating extent. Radiology. 1995;197:743–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Davis P, Staiger M, Harris K, Ganott MA, Klementaviciene J, McCarty KS Jr, et al. Breast cancer measurements with MRI, ultrasonography and mammography. Breast Cancer Res. 1996;37:1–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Bedrosian I, Mick R, Orel SG, Schnall M, Reynolds C, Spitz FR, et al. Changes in the surgical management of patients with breast carcinoma based on preoperative magnetic resonance imaging. Cancer. 2003;98:468–73.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Houssami N, Ciatto S, Macaskill P, Lord SJ, Warren RM, Dixon JM, et al. Accuracy and surgical impact of magnetic resonance imaging in breast cancer staging: Systematic review and meta-analysis in detection of multifocal and multicentric cancer. J ClinOncol. 2008;26:3248–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Schell AM, Rosenkranz K, Lewis PJ. Role of breast MRI in the preoperative evaluation of patients with newly diagnosed breast cancer. Am J Roentgenol. 2009;192:1438–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Turnbull L, Brown S, Harvey I, Olivier C, Drew P, Napp V, et al. Comparative effectiveness of MRI in breast cancer (COMICE) trial: a randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2010;375:563–71.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Sakakibara M, Nagashima T, Sangai T, Nakamura R, Fujimoto H, Arai M, et al. Breast-conserving surgery using projection and reproduction techniques of surgical-position breast MRI in patients with ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. J Am Coll Surg. 2008;207:62–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Germano I. Advanced techniques in image-guided brain and spine surgery. New York: Thieme; 2002.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Herline AJ, Herring JL, Stefansic JD, Chapman WC, Galloway RL Jr, Dawant BM. Surface registration for use in interactive, image-guided liver surgery. Comput Aided Surg. 2000;5:11–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Hill DLG and Batchelor P. Registration methodology: concepts and algorithms. In: Hajnal JV, Hawkes DJ, and Hill DLG, eds. Medical image registration. 1st ed. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press; 2001:48.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Sorkine O. Least-squares rigid motion using SVD. Technical notes. 2009.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    McAuliffe MJ, Lalonde FM, McGarry D, Gandler W, Csaky K, Trus BL. Medical image processing, analysis and visualization in clinical research. In: Computer-based medical systems. 14th IEEE symposium (Bethesda, MD). 2001:381–6.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Society of Surgical Oncology 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Matthew J. Pallone
    • 1
  • Steven P. Poplack
    • 2
  • Hima Bindu R. Avutu
    • 2
  • Keith D. Paulsen
    • 1
  • Richard J. BarthJr.
    • 3
  1. 1.Thayer School of EngineeringDartmouth CollegeHanoverUSA
  2. 2.Department of RadiologyDartmouth-Hitchcock Medical CenterLebanonUSA
  3. 3.Department of SurgeryDartmouth-Hitchcock Medical CenterLebanonUSA

Personalised recommendations