Response to: “Intact Excision of Breast Lesions Using BLES™: Is There a Clinical Indication Yet?”

  • Pat WhitworthEmail author
Breast Oncology

To the Editors:

In response to our article1, in her editorial2 Yao states that a second procedure was needed to achieve clear margins in 27% of patients: “Of 124 cancer patients, 55% had clear margins after undergoing a biopsy with the BLES device, 27% underwent another procedure with the BLES device to establish negative margins”. She repeats this error when summarizing the results in cancer patients: “In the current study, 55% of cancerous lesions (DCIS and invasive carcinoma) had complete excision, with one procedure using the BLES device, and 45% of patients had to undergo another procedure, either with the BLES device or surgical excision”.

In our article, we clearly state that patients having excision of small cancers had one procedure: “Patients with DCIS or invasive cancers (recent diagnostic biopsy with core or Intact device) had an MI excision procedure that included a second Intact capture to provide a shaved margin. All such patients were registered”. Therefore, the...



  1. 1.
    Whitworth P, Schonholz S, Phillips R, et al. Minimally invasive intact excision of high-risk breast lesions and small breast cancers: the Intact Percutaneous Excision (IPEX) Registry. Ann Surg Oncol. 2019;26(4):954–60.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Yao K. Intact excision of breast lesions using BLES™: Is there a clinical indication yet? Ann Surg Oncol. 2019;26(4):933–5.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Society of Surgical Oncology 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Nashville Breast CenterNashvilleUSA

Personalised recommendations