1
|
Dodelzon K, Grimm L, Coffey K, Reig B, Mullen L, Dashevsky BZ, Bhole S, Parikh JR. Tips and Tricks for Image-Guided Breast Biopsies: Technical Factors for Success. JOURNAL OF BREAST IMAGING 2024; 6:658-667. [PMID: 39313444 PMCID: PMC11875097 DOI: 10.1093/jbi/wbae055] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/14/2024] [Indexed: 09/25/2024]
Abstract
Image-guided biopsy is an integral step in the diagnosis and management of suspicious image-detected breast or axillary lesions, allowing for accurate diagnosis and, if indicated, treatment planning. Tissue sampling can be performed under guidance of a full spectrum of breast imaging modalities, including stereotactic, tomosynthesis, sonographic, and MRI, each with its own set of advantages and limitations. Procedural planning, which includes consideration of technical, patient, and lesion factors, is vital for diagnostic accuracy and limitation of complications. The purpose of this paper is to review and provide guidance for breast imaging radiologists in selecting the best procedural approach for the individual patient to ensure accurate diagnosis and optimal patient outcomes. Common patient and lesion factors that may affect successful sampling and contribute to postbiopsy complications are reviewed and include obesity, limited patient mobility, patient motion, patients prone to vasovagal reactions, history of anticoagulation, and lesion location, such as proximity to vital structures or breast implant.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Katerina Dodelzon
- Weill Cornell Medicine at NewYork-Presbyterian, Department of Radiology, New York, New York, USA
| | - Lars Grimm
- Duke University Medical Center, Department of Radiology, Durham, North Carolina, USA
| | - Kristen Coffey
- Weill Cornell Medicine at NewYork-Presbyterian, Department of Radiology, New York, New York, USA
| | - Beatriu Reig
- New York University Grossman School of Medicine, Department of Radiology New York, NY, USA
| | - Lisa Mullen
- Johns Hopkins Medicine, Department of Radiology, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Brittany Z Dashevsky
- Stanford University School of Medicine, Department of Radiology, Stanford, CA, USA
| | - Sonya Bhole
- Northwestern University, Feinberg School of Medicine, Department of Radiology Chicago IL, USA
| | - Jay R. Parikh
- The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Department of Radiology Houston, TX USA
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Switalla KM, Boughey JC, Dimitroff K, Yau C, Ladores V, Yu H, Tchou J, Golshan M, Ahrendt G, Postlewait LM, Piltin M, Reyna CR, Matsen CB, Tuttle TM, Wallace AM, Arciero CA, Lee MC, Tseng J, Son J, Rao R, Sauder C, Naik A, Howard-McNatt M, Lancaster R, Norwood P, Esserman LJ, Mukhtar RA. Clipping the Positive Lymph Node in Patients with Clinically Node Positive Breast Cancer Treated with Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy: Impact on Axillary Surgery in the ISPY-2 Clinical Trial. Ann Surg Oncol 2024; 31:7249-7259. [PMID: 38995451 PMCID: PMC11452431 DOI: 10.1245/s10434-024-15792-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/11/2024] [Accepted: 06/24/2024] [Indexed: 07/13/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND For patients with clinically node-positive (cN+) breast cancer undergoing neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC), retrieving previously clipped, biopsy-proven positive lymph nodes during sentinel lymph node biopsy [i.e., targeted axillary dissection (TAD)] may reduce false negative rates. However, the overall utilization and impact of clipping positive nodes remains uncertain. PATIENTS AND METHODS We retrospectively analyzed cN+ ISPY-2 patients (2011-2022) undergoing axillary surgery after NAC. We evaluated trends in node clipping and associations with type of axillary surgery [sentinel lymph node (SLN) only, SLN and axillary lymph node dissection (ALND), or ALND only] and event-free survival (EFS) in patients that were cN+ on a NAC trial. RESULTS Among 801 cN+ patients, 161 (20.1%) had pre-NAC clip placement in the positive node. The proportion of patients that were cN+ undergoing clip placement increased from 2.4 to 36.2% between 2011 and 2021. Multivariable logistic regression showed nodal clipping was independently associated with higher odds of SLN-only surgery [odds ratio (OR) 4.3, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.8-6.8, p < 0.001]. This was also true among patients with residual pathologically node-positive (pN+) disease. Completion ALND rate did not differ based on clip retrieval success. No significant differences in EFS were observed in those with or without clip placement, both with or without successful clip retrieval [hazard ratio (HR) 0.85, 95% CI 0.4-1.7, p = 0.7; HR 1.8, 95% CI 0.5-6.0, p = 0.3, respectively]. CONCLUSION Clip placement in the positive lymph node before NAC is increasingly common. The significant association between clip placement and omission of axillary dissection, even among patients with pN+ disease, suggests a paradigm shift toward TAD as a definitive surgical management strategy in patients with pN+ disease after NAC.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kayla M Switalla
- University of Minnesota Medical School, Minneapolis, MN, USA
- Department of Surgery, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA
| | | | | | - Christina Yau
- Quantum Leap Healthcare Collaborative, San Francisco, CA, USA
| | - Velle Ladores
- Department of Surgery, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA
| | - Hongmei Yu
- Quantum Leap Healthcare Collaborative, San Francisco, CA, USA
| | - Julia Tchou
- Department of Surgery, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - Mehra Golshan
- Department of Surgery, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA
| | | | | | - Mara Piltin
- Department of Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA
| | - Chantal R Reyna
- Department of Surgery, Loyola University Medical Center, Chicago, IL, USA
| | - Cindy B Matsen
- Department of Surgery, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA
| | - Todd M Tuttle
- Department of Surgery, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA
| | - Anne M Wallace
- Department of Surgery, University of California San Diego, San Diego, CA, USA
| | | | | | | | - Jennifer Son
- Department of Surgery, MedStar Georgetown University, Washington, DC, USA
| | - Roshni Rao
- Department of Surgery, Columbia University Medical Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Candice Sauder
- Department of Surgery, UC Davis Health Comprehensive Cancer Center, Sacramento, CA, USA
| | - Arpana Naik
- Department of Surgery, Oregon Health and Science University, Portland, OR, USA
| | | | - Rachael Lancaster
- Division of Surgical Oncology, The University of Alabama at Birmingham Medical Center, Birmingham, AL, USA
| | - Peter Norwood
- Quantum Leap Healthcare Collaborative, San Francisco, CA, USA
| | - Laura J Esserman
- Department of Surgery, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA
| | - Rita A Mukhtar
- Department of Surgery, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA.
- UCSF Breast Care Center, San Francisco, CA, USA.
| |
Collapse
|