| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
Article |
From the Department of Surgery (CC, STH) and the Department of Public Health (PC), Weill Medical College of Cornell University, and the Weill Cornell Breast Center (DM, JC, SK, ELaV, EC, RS), New York, New York.
ABSTRACT
Background: Successful breast conservation surgery (BCS) requires complete tumor excision. Margin status of the initial specimen determines the need for additional surgery. We explored factors associated with residual cancer (RC) upon follow-up surgery in patients with close, positive, or undetermined margins following BCS.
Methods: A retrospective analysis of 276 patients with initial close, positive, or undetermined margins who underwent re-excision (RE) or mastectomy was conducted. All initial excisions were intended as definitive procedures. Chi-square analysis was used to identify factors that may predict RC.
Results: Of 276 patients, 87 had close, 168 had positive, and 21 had undetermined margins on initial excision. Of this group, 63% (175/276) had RC upon RE or mastectomy. Of positive-margin patients, 68% had RC, compared with 53% of close-margin and 67% of undetermined-margin patients (P = .006). Tumors
2 cm were more often associated with RC than smaller tumors (70.8% vs. 56.5%; P = .07). This association was strongest in positive-margin patients (P = .04). High tumor grade was associated with RC in all groups. RC linearly increased with the number of involved margins (P = .02). Specimen inking with multiple colors was associated with decreased risk of RC (P = .004).
Conclusions: Over half of patients with involved or undetermined margins had RC upon RE or mastectomy. Positive and undetermined margins were more often associated with RC than close margins. Larger tumor size was associated with RC in patients with positive. Increasing tumor grade suggests a greater chance of detecting RC in all groups. Multiple involved margins led to a greater risk of RC.
Key Words: Breast neoplasm Positive margins Re-excision Residual cancer
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
J. F. Waljee, E. S. Hu, L. A. Newman, and A. K. Alderman Predictors of Re-excision among Women Undergoing Breast-Conserving Surgery for Cancer Ann. Surg. Oncol., May 1, 2008; 15(5): 1297 - 1303. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
D. E. Schiller, L. W. Le, B. C. J. Cho, B. J. Youngson, and D. R. McCready Factors Associated with Negative Margins of Lumpectomy Specimen: Potential Use in Selecting Patients for Intraoperative Radiotherapy Ann. Surg. Oncol., March 1, 2008; 15(3): 833 - 842. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
S. Loibl, G. von Minckwitz, G. Raab, J.-U. Blohmer, S. D. Costa, B. Gerber, H. Eidtmann, S. Petrich, J. Hilfrich, C. Jackisch, et al. Surgical Procedures After Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy in Operable Breast Cancer: Results of the GEPARDUO Trial Ann. Surg. Oncol., November 1, 2006; 13(11): 1434 - 1442. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M. F. Dillon, A. D. K. Hill, C. M. Quinn, E. W. McDermott, and N. O'Higgins A Pathologic Assessment of Adequate Margin Status in Breast-Conserving Therapy Ann. Surg. Oncol., March 1, 2006; 13(3): 333 - 339. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
D. R. McCready Keeping Abreast of Marginal Controversies Ann. Surg. Oncol., October 1, 2004; 11(10): 885 - 887. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |