Patient and clinician satisfaction and clinical outcomes of Magseed compared with wire-guided localisation for impalpable breast lesions

Innovations in the localization techniques for non-palpable breast lesions: Make invisible visible

Non-palpable breast cancer lesions pose a challenge for surgeons to resect cancer lesions. Making 'invisible' lesions 'visible' is the main strategy. Currently, multiple preoperative localization techniques have been applied in clinical. Among them, wire-guided localization (WGL) is the most common procedure due to its convenience and low cost. However, its limitations including discomfort, wire migration and the coupling of localization and operation procedures cause troubles for surgeons and patients. The desire for localization methods improvement, accompanied by the advance of emerging science and technology, leads to the development of a series of locating approaches for breast non-palpable lesions, aiming to improve locating accuracy while reducing adverse events. These emerging methods have undergone improvements from steel wire to functional particles, from radioactivity to non-radioactive, which help doctors and patients choose a more appropriate scheme. This review outlines the principles, procedures, advantages and disadvantages of these locating methods, and highlights the latest progress and related clinical data on innovative locating approaches. Finally, we briefly discuss the current challenges and future opportunities for the clinical application of these localization approaches.

Impact of Magseed® localization on re-excision rates of non-palpable breast cancers in an Australian regional hospital

BACKGROUND

Impalpable breast cancers have traditionally been localized under hook-wire guidance. Magseed® is an innovative method of breast cancer localization that consists of a tiny paramagnetic seed designed to enable more precise tumour localization and greater scheduling flexibility by decoupling the timing of radiological insertion and surgery. The primary outcome of this study was to evaluate whether the implementation of the Magseed® localization technique in our healthcare facility led to a reduction in re-excision rates.

METHODS

A single institution retrospective evaluation was carried out for 96 women who underwent Magseed® localization (MSL) between 01 August 2020 and 30 April 2022. To allow direct comparison to the hospitals wire-guided localization (WGL) re-excision rates, data was collected from the Queensland Cancer Registry for patients who underwent WGL excision at our hospital between 01 January 2015 and 30 June 2020.

RESULTS

A total of 105 Magseeds® were inserted in 96 patients with 95% placed within 1 mm of the target lesion. All Magseeds® markers were successfully retrieved. Re-excision rates were 14% and of the re-excisions only 24% (n = 3) had residual tumour in the re-excision specimen. In the preceding 5 years when hook-wires were used as the localization technique, the re-excision rate was 38%.

CONCLUSION

Magseed® technology is a safe and effective pre-operative localization method that has the potential to reduce re-excision rates for non-palpable breast lesions.

Reliability of Magseed® marking before neoadjuvant systemic therapy with subsequent contrast-enhanced mammography in patients with non-palpable breast cancer lesions after treatment: the MAGMA study

PURPOSE

To assess the reliability of excising residual breast cancer lesions after neoadjuvant systemic therapy (NAST) using a previously localized paramagnetic seed (Magseed®) and the subsequent use of contrast-enhanced spectral mammography (CESM) to evaluate response.

METHODS

Observational, prospective, multicenter study including adult women (> 18 years) with invasive breast carcinoma undergoing NAST between January 2022 and February 2023 with non-palpable tumor lesions at surgery. Radiologists marked tumors with Magseed® during biopsy before NAST, and surgeons excised tumors guided by the Sentimag® magnetometer. CESMs were performed before and after NAST to evaluate tumor response (Response Evaluation Criteria for Solid Tumors [RECIST]). We considered intraoperative, surgical, and CESM-related variables and histological response.

RESULTS

We analyzed 109 patients (median [IQR] age of 55.0 [46.0, 65.0] years). Magseed® was retrieved from breast tumors in all surgeries (100%; 95% CI 95.47-100.0%) with no displacement and was identified by radiology in 106 patients (97.24%), a median (IQR) of 176.5 (150.0, 216.3) days after marking. Most surgeries (94.49%) were conservative; they lasted a median (IQR) of 22.5 (14.75, 40.0) min (95% CI 23.59-30.11 min). Most dissected tumor margins (93.57%) were negative, and few patients (5.51%) needed reintervention. Magseed® was identified using CESM in all patients (100%); RECIST responses correlated with histopathological evaluations of dissected tumors using the Miller-Payne response grade (p < 0.0001) and residual lesion diameter (p < 0.0001). Also 69 patients (63.3%) answered a patient's satisfaction survey and 98.8% of them felt very satisfied with the entire procedure.

CONCLUSION

Long-term marking of breast cancer lesions with Magseed® is a reliable and feasible method in patients undergoing NAST and may be used with subsequent CESM.

Ultrasound-Guided Versus Wire-Guided Breast-Conserving Surgery for Non-palpable Breast Lesions: A Retrospective Review

Background Breast-conserving surgery (BCS) is standard for early breast cancer, yet achieving clear surgical margins remains challenging. Ultrasound (US)-guided BCS has emerged as a potential alternative to wire-guided surgery, but its efficacy compared to traditional methods requires evaluation. Methods A retrospective review of patients undergoing BCS from April 2022 to April 2023 at the Portuguese Institute of Oncology of Porto (IPO-Porto) was conducted. Preoperative assessment by the surgeon determined the choice between ultrasound-guided and wire-guided surgery for non-palpable lesions. Results Out of 155 patients, 81 (52.3%) underwent US-guided BCS, while 74 (47.7%) underwent wire-guided BCS. Both groups had similar tumor characteristics and achieved rates of negative surgical margins (69 (92%) versus 53 (93%)). There was no significant difference in intraoperative re-excision rates between the two groups (24 (32%) versus 19 (33.3%); p=8.71). Additionally, the rate of repeat BCS/mastectomy after initial surgery was comparable (6 (8%) versus 4 (7%); p=1.000). Conclusions Ultrasound-guided BCS demonstrates comparable efficacy to wire-guided BCS for non-palpable breast lesions. Both techniques provide similar surgical outcomes, with the potential additional benefits of ultrasound-guided BCS for the patient and in the management of healthcare resources.

Surgical marker navigation system in breast conserving surgery and excision of non-palpable lesions: first Spanish single-center experience

BACKGROUND

Due to the establishment of screening mammography for breast cancer detection, the number of non-palpable lesions has increased. Thus, an optimal localization system is mandatory for the excision of non-palpable breast tumors.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the study is to report the feasibility Surgical Marker Navigation (SMN) system Sirius Pintuition® for the excision of non-palpable breast tumors and non-palpable axillary lymph nodes.

METHODS

A retrospective observational study of patients undergoing breast-conserving surgery and lymph node excision guided by SMN between December 2022 and May 2023 was performed.

RESULTS

A total of 84 patients underwent excision of non-palpable breast tumors (77; 91.7%) or non-palpable axillary lymph-nodes (7; 8.3%) using SMN. In total, 94 markers were placed, in 74 patients (88.1%) only one marker was placed, whereas in 10 patients (11.9%) two markers were placed to correctly localize the lesion in the operating room. Most markers were placed using ultrasonographic guidance (69; 82.1%). Seventy-seven patients underwent breast-conserving surgery (91.7%) and 7 (8.3%) lymph node excision. In 10 cases (11.9%), the marker was accidentally displaced during surgery due to the use of magnetized instruments, although the specimen could be removed. In sum, all the markers were removed from the patients, although the marker retrieval rate, as we defined it (percentage of patients in whom the initial excised specimen contained the marker divided by the total number of patients), was 88.1%.

CONCLUSION

The use of Sirius Pintuition® SMN for non-palpable breast tumors and non-palpable lymph nodes is feasible, with a retrieval rate of 88.1%.

Minimal Invasive Pre-Op CT-Guided Gold-Fiducials in Local Anesthesia for Easy Level Localization in Thoracic Spine Surgery

Background: The accurate identification of intraoperative levels is of paramount importance in spinal surgery, particularly in cases of obesity or anatomical anomalies affecting the thoracic spine. The aim of this work was to clarify whether the preoperative percutaneous placement of fiducial markers under local anesthesia only, with minimal discomfort to the patient, can be performed safely and efficiently. Methods: Patients treated at our institution between June 2019 and June 2020 for thoracic intraspinal lesions with preoperative percutaneous gold fiducial placement were analyzed. A total of 10 patients underwent CT-guided gold fiducial placement 2-48 h prior to surgery on an outpatient or inpatient basis. Patient characteristics, CT intervention time, and perioperative complications were recorded. Results: In all cases, the gold markers were placed under local anesthesia alone and were easily visualized intraoperatively with fluoroscopy. There was no preoperative dislocation or malposition. The procedure was performed without X-ray exposure to the neuroradiology interventionalist. The average CT intervention time from the planning scout to the final control time was 14.3 min. The percentage of anatomical norm variants in our observation group was high, as 2 of the 10 patients had lumbarization of the first sacral vertebra, resulting in a six-link lumbar spine. Conclusions: Preoperative CT-guided transcutaneous submuscular placement of gold markers under local anesthesia is a practical and safe method for rapid and accurate intraoperative level determination in thoracic spine surgery in a time-saving minimally invasive manner. The virtually painless procedure can be performed either preoperatively on an outpatient basis or as an inpatient procedure.

SCOUT® Localization Using MRI Guidance: Initial Experience

OBJECTIVE

The Food and Drug Administration approved the MRI-compatible wireless SCOUT localization system in April 2022. The purpose of this study was to evaluate feasibility of SCOUT localization under MRI guidance. We present our initial experience adopting MRI-guided SCOUT localization and compare it to MRI-guided wire localization.

METHODS

Electronic medical records and imaging were retrospectively reviewed for all patients who underwent MRI-guided SCOUT or wire localization at our institution between October 2022 and July 2023. Statistical analysis was performed using 2-sample proportion and Wilcoxon rank-sum tests.

RESULTS

There were 14 MRI-guided SCOUT and 23 MRI-guided wire localization cases during the study period. All SCOUTs were placed without complication and were considered to be in adequate proximity to the target. There was no significant difference in complication rate (P = .25) or days lapsed from MRI-detected abnormality to surgery (P = .82) between SCOUT and wire cases. SCOUT was placed at time of biopsy for 71% (10/14) of cases. 57% (8/14) of SCOUT cases were used for breast conservation surgery (BCS) compared to 100% (23/23) of wire cases (P <.01), with all 6 SCOUTs not used for BCS placed at time of biopsy.

CONCLUSION

MRI-guided SCOUT localization is feasible and offers an alternative to MRI-guided wire localization, with no SCOUT complications reported. SCOUT placement at time of biopsy obviates the need for an additional procedure, but predicting appropriateness is challenging, with 60% (6/10) of SCOUTs placed at time of MRI-guided biopsy not used for subsequent localization surgery.

The Effect of Wire Versus Magnetic Seed Localization on Lumpectomy Cavity Size

PURPOSE

Our purpose was to assess whether an association exists between surgical localization technique and lumpectomy cavity size on radiation therapy planning computed tomography (CT) scan.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

A single-institution retrospective review was conducted of women undergoing breast conserving surgery with wire or magnetic seed guided lumpectomy followed by adjuvant radiation therapy from 2018 to 2021. Patients of a surgeon only performing 1 localization technique or undergoing bracketed localization were excluded. The primary outcome was lumpectomy cavity size on simulation CT. Confounding due to imbalance in patient and tumor factors was addressed with overlap weights derived from a propensity score analysis and used in a weighted multivariable analysis. Secondary outcomes included positive margins, total pathologic volume, boost delivery, and boost modality.

RESULTS

Of 617 women who received lumpectomy during the study period, 387 were included in final analysis. Tumors of patients undergoing seed localization were more likely unifocal, assessable by ultrasound, and smaller. Seed use rates ranged from 27.7% to 70.7% per surgeon. There was no difference in positive margins (6.4 vs 5.4%, P = .79) or second surgeries (9.4 vs 8.1%, P = .79) between groups. Close margin rates were similar for ductal carcinoma in situ (P = .35) and invasive carcinoma (P = .97). In unadjusted bivariable analyses, wire localization was associated with larger total pathology volume (P = .004), but localization technique showed no association with CT cavity volume (P = .15). After adjusting for potentially confounding variables, multivariable analysis failed to show an association between localization technique and either CT cavity (P = .35) or total path volume (P = .08). There was no difference in indicated-boost delivery (P = .15) or electron boost (P = .14) by localization technique.

CONCLUSIONS

There was no significant difference in CT cavity size by localization technique, suggesting choice between surgical techniques does not impede radiation therapy boost delivery.

Radar localization of breast and axillary lesions with SCOUT: a prospective single institution pilot study

BACKGROUND

Wire-guided localization has been the mainstay of localization techniques for non-palpable breast and axillary lesions prior to excision. Evidence is still growing for relatively newer localization technologies. This study evaluated the efficacy of the wireless localization technology, SCOUT®, for both breast and axillary surgery.

METHODS

Data were extracted from a prospective database (2021-2023) of consecutive patients undergoing wide local excision, excisional biopsy, targeted axillary dissection, or axillary lymph node dissection with SCOUT at a high-volume tertiary centre. Rates of successful reflector placement, intraoperative lesion localization, and reflector retrieval were evaluated. A survey of surgeon-reported ease of lesion localization and reflector retrieval was also evaluated.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

ACTRN386751.

RESULTS

One-hundred-ninety-five reflectors were deployed in 172 patients. Median interval between deployment and surgery was 3 days (range 1-20) and mean distance from reflector to lesion was 3.2 mm (standard deviation, SD 3.1). Rate of successful localization and reflector retrieval was 100% for both breast and axillary procedures. Mean operating time was 65.8 min (SD 33). None of the reflectors migrated. No reflector deployment or localization-related complications occurred. Ninety-eight percent of surgeons were satisfied with ease of localization for the first half of cases.

CONCLUSION

SCOUT is an accurate and reliable method to localize and excise both breast and axillary lesions, and it may overcome some of the limitations of wire-guided localization.

Evolution of localization methods for non-palpable breast lesions: a literature review from a translational medicine perspective

Background and Objective

With an increasing number of non-palpable breast lesions detected due to improved screening, accurate localization of these lesions for surgery is crucial. This literature review explores the evolution of localization methods for non-palpable breast lesions, highlighting the translational journey from concept to clinical practice.

Methods

A comprehensive search of PubMed, Embase, and Scopus databases until September 2023 was conducted.

Key Content and Findings

Multiple methods have been developed throughout the past few decades. (I) Wire-guided localization (WGL) introduced in 1966, has become a reliable method for localization. Its simplicity and cost-effectiveness are its key advantages, but challenges include logistical constraints, patient discomfort, and potential wire migration. (II) Intraoperative ultrasound localization (IOUS) has shown promise in ensuring complete lesion removal with higher negative margin rates. However, its utility is limited to lesions visible on ultrasound (US) imaging. (III) Breast biopsy marker localization: the use of markers has improved the precision of localization without the need for wire. However, marker visibility remains a challenge despite improvements in their design. (IV) Radioactive techniques: radio-guided occult lesion localization (ROLL) and radioactive seed localization (RSL) offer flexibility in scheduling and improved patient comfort. However, they require close multidisciplinary collaboration and specific equipment due to radioactive concerns. (V) Other wireless non-radioactive techniques: wireless non-radioactive techniques have been developed in recent three decades to provide flexible and patient-friendly alternatives. It includes magnetic seed localization, radar techniques, and radiofrequency techniques. Their usage has been gaining popularity due to their safety profile and allowance of more flexible scheduling. However, their high cost and need for additional training remain a barrier to a wider adoption.

Conclusions

The evolution of breast lesion localization methods has progressed to more patient-friendly techniques, each with its unique advantages and limitations. Future research on patient-reported outcomes, cosmetic outcomes, breast biopsy markers and integration of augmented reality with breast lesion localization are needed.

Magnetic Seed vs Guidewire Breast Cancer Localization With Magnetic Lymph Node Detection: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

Guidewires have been the standard for breast lesion localization but pose operative and logistic challenges. Paramagnetic seeds have shown promising results, but to the authors' knowledge, no randomized comparison has been performed.

Objective

To determine whether the combination of a paramagnetic seed and superparamagnetic iron oxide (SPIO) is equivalent to guidewire and SPIO for breast cancer localization and sentinel lymph node detection (SLND).

Design, Setting, and Participants

This was a phase 3, pragmatic, equivalence, 2-arm, open-label, randomized clinical trial conducted at 3 university and/or community hospitals in Sweden from May 2018 to May 2022. Included in the study were patients with early breast cancer planned for breast conservation and SLND. Study data were analyzed July to November 2022.

Interventions

Participants were randomly assigned 1:1 to a paramagnetic seed or a guidewire. All patients underwent SLND with SPIO.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Re-excision rate and resection ratio (defined as actual resection volume / optimal resection volume).

Results

A total of 426 women (median [IQR] age, 65 [56-71] years; median [IQR] tumor size, 11 [8-15] mm) were included in the study. The re-excision rate was 2.90% (95% CI, 1.60%-4.80%), and the median (IQR) resection ratio was 1.96 (1.15-3.44). No differences were found between the guidewire and the seed in re-excisions (6 of 211 [2.84%] vs 6 of 209 [2.87%]; difference, -0.03%; 95% CI, -3.20% to 3.20%; P = .99) or resection ratio (median, 1.93; IQR, 1.18-3.43 vs median, 2.01; IQR, 1.11-3.47; P = .70). Overall SLN detection was 98.6% (95% CI, 97.1%-99.4%) with no differences between arms (203 of 207 [98.1%] vs 204 of 206 [99.0%]; difference, -0.9%; 95% CI, -3.6% to 1.8%; P = .72). More failed localizations occurred with the guidewire (21 of 208 [10.1%] vs 4 of 215 [1.9%]; difference, 8.2%; 95% CI, 3.3%-13.2%; P < .001). Median (IQR) time to specimen excision was shorter for the seed (15 [10-22] minutes vs 18 [12-30] minutes; P = .01), as was the total operative time (69 [56-86] minutes vs 75.5 [59-101] minutes; P = .03). The experience of surgeons, radiologists, and surgical coordinators was better with the seed.

Conclusions and Relevance

The combination of SPIO and a paramagnetic seed performed comparably with SPIO and guidewire for breast cancer conserving surgery and resulted in more successful localizations, shorter operative times, and better experience.

Trial Registration

ISRCTN.org Identifier: ISRCTN11914537.

Breast-Conserving Surgery Guided with Magnetic Seeds vs. Wires: A Single-Institution Experience

PURPOSE

The aim of this study is to describe our initial experience using magnetic seeds (Magseed®) to guide breast-conserving surgery in non-palpable breast lesions and compare the use of magnetic seed with wires to guide breast-conserving surgery in terms of clinical and pathological characteristics.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective study including all breast-conserving surgeries for non-palpable breast lesions under 16 mm from June 2018 to May 2021. We compared breast-conserving surgeries guided with magnetic seeds (Magseed®) to those guided with wires, analyzing tumor and patient characteristics, surgical time, and pathological results of the surgical specimens.

RESULTS

Data from 225 cases were collected, including 149 cases guided by magnetic seeds and 76 cases guided by wires. The breast lesion was localized in every case. Both cohorts were similar regarding clinical and pathological characteristics. We found significant statistical differences (p < 0.02) in terms of the median volume (cm3) of the excised specimen, which was lower (29.3%) in the magnetic seed group compared with the wire group (32.5 [20.5-60.0]/46.0 [20.3-118.7]). We did not find significant differences regarding surgical time (min) or the affected or close margins.

CONCLUSION

In our experience, the use of magnetic seed (Magseed®) is a feasible option to guide breast-conserving surgery of non-palpable lesions and enabled us to resect less breast tissue.

Magnetic Localization of Breast Lesions: A Large-Scale European Evaluation in a National Cancer Institute

INTRODUCTION

For decades the standard for preoperative breast lesions' localization has been wire localization. In recent years the options for nonwired localization have significantly expanded and include radioactive seeds, radar reflectors, radiofrequency identification tags and magnetic seeds. The aim of our study is to evaluate on a large scale the performance of preoperative magnetic seed localization of nonpalpable breast lesions.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We prospectively collected data on all patients undergoing image-guided magnetic seed localization from September 2019 to December 2022. We analyzed imaging findings, histological results, and type of surgery. The primary outcome was the successful localization rate. Secondary outcomes were the successful placement rate, the ease of percutaneous positioning, the procedural complications, and the reintervention rate.

RESULTS

A total of 1123 magnetic seeds were placed in 1084 patients by 4 radiologists under ultrasound (1053) or stereotactic (70) guidance. All seeds were detectable transcutaneously in all breasts sizes and at all depths by 7 surgeons with a success rate of 100%. A total of 97.5% seeds were correctly placed into the target lesions (only 2.5% were dislocated). All radiologists have shown good compliance during the procedure, and there were no complications or safety issues. The reoperation rate was 5.1%.

CONCLUSIONS

Image-guided localization with magnetic seeds is an easy, safe, reliable, and effective method for localizing nonpalpable breast lesions. Both radiologists and surgeons agreed that the technology was intuitive to use and that it can be widely applied in preoperative localization in breast units.

Locoregional Therapy: From Mastectomy to Reconstruction, Targeted Surgery, and Ultra-Hypofractionated Radiotherapy

Background

The past 3 decades have seen an unprecedented shift toward treatment de-escalation in surgical therapy of breast cancer.

Summary

Radical mastectomy has been replaced by breast-conserving and oncoplastic approaches in most patients, and full axillary lymph node dissection by less radical staging procedures, such as sentinel lymph node biopsy and targeted axillary dissection. Further, attempts have been made to spare healthy tissue while increasing the probability of removing the tumor with clear margins, thus improving cosmetic results and minimizing the risk of local recurrence. In this context, modern probe-guided localization techniques have been introduced to guide surgical excision. This progress was accompanied by the development of targeted systemic therapies. At the same time, radiotherapy for breast cancer has undergone significant changes. The use of hypofractionation has decreased the typical length of a treatment course from 5-6 weeks to 1-3 weeks. Partial breast irradiation is now a valid option for de-escalation in patients with low-risk features. Axillary radiotherapy achieves similar recurrence rates and decreases the risk of lymphedema in patients with limited sentinel node involvement.

Key Messages

Taken together, these advances are important steps toward individualization of locoregional management strategies. This highlights the importance of interdisciplinary approaches for de-escalation of locoregional therapies.

Surgeon and Radiologist Evaluation of Electromagnetic Chip Localization for Benign and Malignant Breast Lesions

BACKGROUND

SmartClipTM is a food and drug administration-approved, electromagnetic chip (EMC) localization system that provides three-dimensional navigation for the excision of soft tissue lesions. The purpose of this study was to analyze the accuracy and feasibility of EMC radiologic and surgical localization for benign and malignant breast lesions.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

An institutional review board-approved, single institution, prospective study from October 2020 to September 2022 of 38 women undergoing breast conserving surgery with EMC localization of a single lesion > 5 mm on mammogram (MMG) or ultrasound (US) imaging. Surveys from performing breast radiologists and breast surgeons were collected after image-guided localization and surgical excision.

RESULTS

Seventy-six survey responses from nine radiologists and four surgeons were received. The deployment needle and EMC were highly visible in 86.8% and 76.3% of procedures, respectively. There was no difficulty in deployment for 92.1% of procedures. The EMC was in the correct location on postdeployment MMG in 97.4% of cases. Three instances of EMC migration occurred, one 1 cm from target lesion. The targeted mass and EMC were within the surgical specimen in 97.4% of cases. On specimen radiograph, 39.5% of the EMCs were 0-1 mm from the center of the target lesion, 18.4% were within 2-4 mm, and 23.7% were within 5-10 mm. Mean operating room time for all cases was 65 min. One case required US to localize the target due to console malfunction.

CONCLUSION

There was successful EMC deployment by radiologists with accurate visualization and successful surgical excision in most cases. The EnVisioTM SmartClipTM system is a reproducible and accurate localization method for benign and malignant breast lesions.

Comparison of Wire and Non-Wire Localisation Techniques in Breast Cancer Surgery: A Review of the Literature with Pooled Analysis

Background and Objectives: Wide local excision is a common procedure in the treatment of breast cancer. Wire-guided localisation (WGL) has been the gold standard for many years; however, several issues have been identified with this technique, and therefore, wire-free techniques have been developed. This scoping review synthesises the available literature comparing wire-guided localisation with the wire-free techniques used in breast-conserving cancer surgery. Materials and Methods: Multiple databases including Pubmed and MEDLINE were used to search articles between 1 January 2000 and 31 December 2022. Terms included "breast neoplasms", "margins of excision", and "reoperation". In total, 34/256 papers were selected for review. Comparisons were made between positive margins and re-excision rates of WGL with wire-free techniques including SAVI SCOUT, Magseed, ROLL, and RSL. Pooled p-values were calculated using chi-square testing to determine statistical significance. Results: Pooled analysis demonstrated statistically significant reductions in positive margins and re-excision rates when SAVI SCOUT, RSL, and ROLL were compared with WGL. When SAVI SCOUT was compared to WGL, there were fewer re-excisions {(8.6% vs. 18.8%; p = 0.0001) and positive margins (10.6% vs. 15.0%; p = 0.0105)}, respectively. This was also the case in the ROLL and RSL groups. When compared to WGL; lower re-excision rates and positive margins were noted {(12.6% vs. 20.8%; p = 0.0007), (17.0% vs. 22.9%; p = 0.0268)} for ROLL and for RSL, respectively {(6.8% vs. 14.9%),(12.36% vs. 21.4%) (p = 0.0001)}. Magseed localisation demonstrated lower rates of re-excision than WGL (13.44% vs. 15.42%; p = 0.0534), but the results were not statistically significant. Conclusions: SAVI SCOUT, Magseed, ROLL, and RSL techniques were reviewed. Pooled analysis indicates wire-free techniques, specifically SAVI SCOUT, ROLL, and RSL, provide statistically significant reductions in re-excision rates and positive margin rates compared to WGL. However, additional studies and systematic analysis are required to ascertain superiority between techniques.

Comparison of 3 Different Systems for Non-wire Localization of Lesions in Breast Cancer Surgery

PURPOSE

Localizing breast lesions by marking tumors and their detection using probes during surgery is a common part of clinical practice. Various nonwire localization systems were intended to be compared from different perspectives.

METHODS

Various measurement experiments were performed. Localization techniques, including radioactive seed (RSLS), magnetically guided (MGLS), or radar (SLS), were compared in signal propagation in water and tissue environments, signal interference by surgical instruments, and the practical experience of surgeons. Individual experiments were thoroughly prospectively planned.

RESULTS

The RSLS signal was detectable at the largest evaluated distance, ie, 60 mm. The SLS and MGLS signal detection was shorter, up to 25 mm to 45 mm and 30 mm, respectively. The signal intensity and the maximum detection distance in water differed slightly depending on the localization marker orientation to the probe, especially for SLS and MGLS. Signal propagation in the tissue was noted to a depth of 60 mm for RSLS, 50 mm for SLS, and 20 mm for MGLS. Except for the expected signal interferences by approaching surgical instruments from any direction for MGLS, the signal interruption for RSLS and SLS was observed only by inserting instruments directly between the localization marker and probe. Moreover, the SLS signal interference by instrument touch was noted. Based on surgeons' results, individual systems did not differ significantly for most measurement condition settings.

CONCLUSION

Apparent differences noted among localization systems can help experts choose an appropriate system for a specific situation or reveal small nuances that have not yet been observed in clinical practice.

Wire-Free, Nonradioactive Localization Techniques to Guide Surgical Excision of Nonpalpable Breast Tumours: A Health Technology Assessment

Background

The current standard treatment for nonpalpable breast tumours is surgical excision; however, it is nearly impossible to locate these small masses during surgery. Therefore, a marker must be implanted into the abnormal tissue under mammography or ultrasound guidance prior to surgery to guide the surgeon to the location of the tumour. Two techniques to localize nonpalpable breast tumours are currently used in Ontario: wire-guided localization and radioactive seed localization.However, these techniques have some limitations. New wire-free, nonradioactive technologies that address these limitations are now available. We conducted a health technology assessment of wire-free, nonradioactive localization techniques available in Canada that are used to localize nonpalpable breast tumours for surgical excision. This report includes an evaluation of the effectiveness, safety, and budget impact of publicly funding these techniques, as well as an evaluation of patient preferences and values.

Methods

We performed a systematic literature search of the clinical evidence. We assessed the risk of bias of each included study using the ROBINS-I tool and the quality of the body of evidence according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) Working Group criteria. We performed a systematic economic literature search, and we analyzed the budget impact of publicly funding wire-free, nonradioactive localization techniques to guide surgical excision of nonpalpable breast tumours in Ontario. We did not conduct a primary economic evaluation because of the limited data available to use as model inputs. To contextualize the potential value of wire-free, nonradioactive localization techniques, we spoke with people who had undergone a localization procedure for the surgical excision of a nonpalpable breast tumour.

Results

We included 16 studies in the clinical evidence review, of which 15 were comparative studies and one was a single-arm study. The results of our analysis of the comparative studies suggest that the re-excision rate for the wire-guided, nonradioactive devices included in this review is either lower or not different from the rate for conventional localization methods (GRADE: Moderate/Low). We found no difference in postoperative complications or operation time between the new and the conventional techniques (GRADE: Moderate). In a feasibility study of a newly developed magnetic seed device in Ontario, no patient required re-excision (GRADE: not assessed). Our economic evidence review identified two costing studies that found that wire-free, nonradioactive localization techniques were more expensive than wire-guided and radioactive seed localization. We were unable to identify any published cost-effectiveness evidence for wire-free, nonradioactive localization techniques. The annual budget impact of publicly funding wire-free, nonradioactive localization techniques in Ontario over the next 5 years ranges from an additional $0.51 million in year 1 to an additional $2.61 million in year 5, for a total 5-year budget impact of $7.73 million. The people we spoke with who had undergone a localization procedure reported valuing surgical interventions that are clinically effective, timely, and patient centred. They responded positively to the potential public funding of wire-free, nonradioactive localization techniques and felt that equitable access should be a requirement of implementation.

Conclusions

The wire-free, nonradioactive localization techniques included in this review are effective and safe methods for the localization of nonpalpable breast tumours and are reasonable alternatives to wire-guided and radioactive seed localization. We estimate that publicly funding wire-free, nonradioactive localization techniques in Ontario would result in an additional cost of $7.73 million over the next 5 years. Broad access to wire-free, nonradioactive localization techniques may have a positive impact on patients undergoing surgical excision for a nonpalpable breast tumour. People with lived experience of a localization procedure value surgical interventions that are clinically effective, timely, and patient centred. They also value equitable access to surgical care.

A series of the first 13 combined Magseed and Magtrace cases in a single centre in regional Victoria

BACKGROUND

The standard journey for a patient with impalpable breast cancer wishing to undergo breast-conserving surgery involves placement of a guidewire and lymphoscintigraphy pre-operatively. Access to these procedures is limited in the regional centres, this scheduling can require overnight stays away from home and can delay theatre which can increase patient distress. The Sentimag technology uses magnetism for localisation of preoperatively inserted Magseeds (for impalpable breast lesions) and Magtrace (for sentinel node biopsy), avoiding guidewire placement and nuclear medicine. This study evaluates the first 13 cases using this combined technique by a single specialist breast surgeon in a regional centre.

METHODS

Thirteen consecutive patients were enrolled with ethics approval. Magseeds were placed under ultrasound guidance preoperatively, and Magtrace was injected at the time of pre-operative consultation.

RESULTS

The median age of patients was 60 (range 27-78). The average distance from hospital was 81.63 km (2.8-238 km). The average operating time was 1h54m (range 1 h 17 m-2 h 39 m) and the mean total journey time was 8h54m (range 6-23 h). The earliest time-out was 8:40 am. Re-excision rate was 23% (n = 3), however, in each re-excision case the lesions were in the axilla, were small (<15 mm) and were in patients with dense breasts on mammography. There were no significant adverse outcomes.

CONCLUSION

In this preliminary study Sentimag localisation appears to be safe and reliable when used in combination. Re-excision rates were only slightly higher than reported in the literature and predicted to downtrend with ongoing learning curve.

Efficacy of ultrasound-guided cryoablation in treating low-risk breast cancer

OBJECTIVES

The primary objective of this study to determine whether infiltrating carcinoma is present in surgical specimens obtained after ultrasound-guided cryoablation from patients with HER2-negative luminal breast cancer without positive axillary lymph nodes at ultrasound. The secondary objective is to demonstrate that placing the presurgical seed-marker immediately before cryoablation does not interfere with the disappearance of tumor cells from freezing or in the surgeon's ability to locate the tumor.

METHODS

We treated 20 patients diagnosed with unifocal HR-positive HER2-negative infiltrating ductal carcinoma measuring <2cm by means of ultrasound-guided cryoablation (ICEfx Galil, Boston Scientific) using a triple-phase (freezing‒passive thawing‒freezing; 10min each phase) protocol. All patients later underwent tumorectomy according to the routine operating-room agenda.

RESULTS

No infiltrating carcinoma cells were detected in the post-cryoablation surgical specimen in 19 patients; a focus of infiltrating carcinoma cells measuring <1mm was detected in the remaining patient.

CONCLUSION

In the near future, if confirmed in larger studies with longer follow-up, cryoablation might constitute a safe and efficacious technique for the treatment of early, low-risk infiltrating ductal carcinoma. In our series, marking with ferromagnetic seeds did not interfere with the efficacy of the procedure or of the subsequent surgical intervention.

Localization Techniques for Non-Palpable Breast Lesions: Current Status, Knowledge Gaps, and Rationale for the MELODY Study (EUBREAST-4/iBRA-NET, NCT 05559411)

BACKGROUND

Surgical excision of a non-palpable breast lesion requires a localization step. Among available techniques, wire-guided localization (WGL) is most commonly used. Other techniques (radioactive, magnetic, radar or radiofrequency-based, and intraoperative ultrasound) have been developed in the last two decades with the aim of improving outcomes and logistics.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review on localization techniques for non-palpable breast cancer.

RESULTS

For most techniques, oncological outcomes such as lesion identification and clear margin rate seem either comparable with or better than for WGL, but evidence is limited to small cohort studies for some of the devices. Intraoperative ultrasound is associated with significantly higher negative margin rates in meta-analyses of randomized clinical trials (RCTs). Radioactive techniques were studied in several RCTs and are non-inferior to WGL. Smaller studies show higher patient preference towards wire-free localization, but little is known about surgeons' and radiologists' attitudes towards these techniques.

CONCLUSIONS

Large studies with an additional focus on patient, surgeon, and radiologist preference are necessary. This review aims to present the rationale for the MELODY (NCT05559411) study and to enable standardization of outcome measures for future studies.

Combined use of magnetic seed and tracer in breast conserving surgery with sentinel lymph node biopsy for non-palpable breast lesions: A pilot study describing pitfalls and solutions

BACKGROUNDS

Traditionally, breast conserving surgery for non-palpable breast cancer is guided by wire or radioactive seed and radioactive tracer for sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB). Alternatively, a stain-less magnetic seed and superparamagnetic iron oxide tracer (SPIO) can be combined as a radioactive-free technique. The aim of this study was to define the pitfalls we encountered during implementation of this combined technique and provide solutions resulting in an instruction manual for a radio-active free procedure.

METHODS

Between January and March 2021, seventeen consecutive patients with cN0 non-palpable breast cancer were included. The magnetic seed was placed to localize the lesion and SPIO was used to identify the sentinel lymph node (SLN). A lymphoscintigraphy with Technetium-99m nano colloid was performed concomitantly in all patients as a control procedure for SPIO. Surgical outcomes are reported, including problems with placing and retrieval of the seed and SPIO and corresponding solutions.

RESULTS

Surgical excision was successful with invasive tumor-free margins in all patients. SLN detection was successful in 82% patients when compared to Technetium-99m. The most challenging issue was an overlapping magnetic signal of the seed and SPIO. Solutions are provided in detail.

CONCLUSIONS

Combined use of magnetic seed and SPIO for wide local excision and SLNB patients with non-palpable breast lesions appeared challenging due to overlapping magnetic signals. After multiple adaptations, the protocol proved to be feasible with an added advantage of eliminating the use of radioisotopes. We described the pitfalls and solutions resulting in an instruction manual for a totally radioactive-free procedure.

Clinical utility of axillary nodal markers in breast cancer

BACKGROUND

De-escalation of axillary surgery for lymph node (LN) positive breast cancer is facilitated by marking involved nodes which, when removed with sentinel nodes constitute risk-adapted targeted axillary dissection (TAD). Whether after chemotherapy or for primary surgery, selected patients with biopsy-proven involvement of nodes may be eligible for axillary conservation. Likewise, impalpable recurrence or stage 4 patients with localised axillary disease may benefit. In these contexts, several devices are used to mark biopsied nodes to facilitate their accurate surgical removal. We report our experience using the paramagnetic MAGSEED (Endomag®, Cambridge, UK).

METHODS

Local approval (BR2021_149) was obtained to interrogate a prospective database of all axillary markers. The primary endpoint was successful removal of the marked LN.

RESULTS

Of 241 markers (in 221 patients) inserted between October 2018 and July 2022, all were retrieved. Of 74 patients who had Magseeds® inserted after completion of NACT (involved nodes initially marked using an UltraCor™Twirl™ marker), the Magseeds® were found outside the node in neighbouring axillary tissue in 18 (24.3%) patients. When Magseeds® were placed at commencement of NACT in 54 patients, in only 1 (1.8%) was the marker found outside the node - a statistically significantly lower rate (Chi² 10.7581 p = 0.001038). For 'primary TAD' patients and those localised for recurrent or stage IV disease, all 93 had the Magseed® found within the biopsied node.

CONCLUSION

This series supports our axillary nodal marking technique as safe and reliable. For TAD following NACT, placement at the start of treatment led to a significantly higher localisation rate.

Evolution and refinement of magnetically guided sentinel lymph node detection in breast cancer: meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Superparamagnetic iron oxide nanoparticles (SPIO) have been used as a tracer for sentinel lymph node (SLN) localization in breast cancer, demonstrating comparable performance to the combination of radioisotope (RI) and blue dye (BD).

METHODS

A systematic literature search and meta-analysis with subgroup and meta-regression analysis were undertaken to update the available evidence, assess technique evolution, and define knowledge gaps. Recommendations were made using the GRADE approach.

RESULTS

In 20 comparative studies, the detection rate was 97.5 per cent for SPIO and 96.5 per cent for RI ± BD (risk ratio 1.006, 95 per cent c.i. 0.992 to 1.019; P = 0.376, high-certainty evidence). Neoadjuvant therapy, injection site, injection volume or nodal metastasis burden did not affect the detection rate, but injection over 24 h before surgery increased the detection rate on meta-regression. Concordance was 99.0 per cent and reverse concordance 97.1 per cent (rate difference 0.003, 95 per cent c.i. -0.009 to 0.015; P = 0.656, high-certainty evidence). Use of SPIO led to retrieval of slightly more SLNs (pooled mean 1.96 versus 1.89) with a higher nodal detection rate (94.1 versus 83.5 per cent; RR 1.098, 1.058 to 1.140; P < 0.001; low-certainty evidence). In meta-regression, injection over 24 h before surgery increased the SPIO nodal yield over that of RI ± BD. The skin-staining rate was 30.8 per cent (very low-certainty evidence), and possibly prevented with use of smaller doses and peritumoral injection.

CONCLUSION

The performance of SPIO is comparable to that of RI ± BD. Preoperative injection increases the detection rate and nodal yield, without affecting concordance. Whether skin staining and MRI artefacts are reduced by lower dose and peritumoral injection needs to be investigated.

Clinical Outcomes Using Magnetic Seeds as a Non-wire, Non-radioactive Alternative for Localization of Non-palpable Breast Lesions

BACKGROUND

Nonpalpable breast lesions require precise preoperative localization to facilitate negative margins with breast-conserving therapy. The traditional use of wires has several challenges including patient discomfort, wire migration, and coordination of schedules between radiology and the operating room. Radioactive seed localization overcomes some of these challenges, but radiation safety requirements have limited adoption of this technology. The authors examined their institutional experience with Magseed as an alternative technology for localization and compared outcomes with those of wire and radioactive seed localization.

METHODS

An institutional review board (IRB)-approved retrospective study was performed to evaluate patients who underwent excisional biopsy or segmental mastectomy after wire-guided localization (WGL), radioactive seed localization (RSL), or Magseed localization (ML). The clinical and pathologic factors of the three groups were assessed with a negative margin rate as the primary outcome measure.

RESULTS

Of the 1835 patients in the study, 825 underwent WGL, 449 underwent RSL, and 561 underwent ML. For the patients with either multiple lesions or a large lesion that required bracketing, multiple localization devices were placed in 31% of the WGL patients, 28% of the RSL patients, and 23% of the ML patients (p = 0.006). Negative margins were achieved in 91% of the WGL patients, 89% of the RSL patients, and 89% of the ML patients (p = 0.4).

CONCLUSION

Localization of non-palpable breast lesions using Magseed is a safe and effective alternative to WGL and RSL that overcomes radiation safety limitations and increases radiology and surgery scheduling efficiency.

Comparison of Wireless Localization Alternatives with Wire Localization for Nonpalpable Breast Lesions

BACKGROUND

Radiofrequency identification tag localization (TL) and magnetic seed localization (MSL) are alternatives to wire localization (WL) for excision of nonpalpable breast lesions. We sought to compare localization methods with respect to operative time, specimen volume, and re-excision rate.

STUDY DESIGN

A retrospective cohort analysis was performed on TL, MSL, and WL lumpectomies and excisional biopsies at a single institution. Association between localization method and operative time, specimen volume, and re-excision rate was assessed by multiple logistic regression using odds ratios (ORs) and 95% CIs.

RESULTS

A total of 506 procedures were included: 147 TL (29.0%), 140 MSL (27.7%), and 219 WL (43.3%). On logistic regression analysis, MSL was associated with longer operative times than WL for excisional biopsies only (OR 4.24, 95% CI 1.92 to 9.34, p < 0.001). Mean excisional biopsy time was 39.1 minutes for MSL and 33.0 minutes for WL. Specimen volume did not vary significantly across surgery types between localization methods. In an analysis of all lumpectomies with an indication of carcinoma, marker choice was not associated with rate of re-excision (TL vs WL OR 0.64, 95% CI 0.26 to 1.60, p = 0.342; MSL vs WL OR 1.22, 95% CI 0.60 to 2.49, p = 0.587; TL vs MSL OR 0.65, 95% CI 0.26 to 1.64, p = 0.359).

CONCLUSION

TL, MSL, and WL are comparable in performance for excision of nonpalpable breast lesions. Although increased operative time associated with MSL vs WL excisional biopsies is statistically significant, clinical significance warrants additional study. With similar outcomes, physicians may choose the marker most appropriate for the patient and setting.

Optimal localization strategies for non-palpable breast cancers -A network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

PURPOSE

Mammographic screening programmes have increased detection rates of non-palpable breast cancers. In these cases, wire-guided localization (WGL) is the most common approach used to guide breast conserving surgery (BCS). Several RCTs have compared WGL to a range of novel localization techniques. We aimed to perform a network meta-analysis (NMA) of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing methods of non-palpable breast cancer localization.

METHODS

A NMA was performed according to PRISMA-NMA guidelines. Analysis was performed using R packages and Shiny.

RESULTS

24 RCTs assessing 9 tumour localization methods in 4236 breasts were included. Margin positivity and reoperation rates were 16.9% (714/4236) and 14.3% (409/2870) respectively. Cryo-assisted localization had the highest margin positivity (28.2%, 58/206) and reoperation (18.9%, 39/206) rates. Compared to WGL (n = 2045 from 24 RCTs) only ultrasound guided localization (USGL) (n = 316 from 3 RCTs) significantly lowered margin positivity (odds ratio (OR): 0.192, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.079-0.450) and reoperation rates (OR: 0.182, 95%CI: 0.069-0.434). Anchor-guided localization (n = 52, 1 RCT) significantly lowered margin positivity (OR: 0.229, 95%CI: 0.050-0.938) and magnetic-marker localization improved patient satisfaction (OR: 0.021, 95%CI: 0.001-0.548). There was no difference in operation duration, overall complications, haematoma, seroma, surgical site infection rates, or specimen size/vol/wt between methods.

CONCLUSION

USGL and AGL are non-inferior to WGL for the localization of non-palpable breast cancers. The reported data suggests that these techniques confer reduced margin positivity rates and requirement for re-operation. However, caution when interpreting results relating to RCTs with small sample sizes and further validation is required in larger prospective, randomized studies.

P.KharashgahM.HaniefM.MilicaA.KhanA.BellA.SmithB.SprosonC.HollywoodC.HodgkinsK. A.RutherfordC. L.ThekkinkattilD.ShanthakumarD.RahmanE.MullapudiN. AmulyaMoradA.QuinnE.MouraF.BromleyH.ChenJ.WalterL.PrestonM.NeyazN.JafferbhoyS.OsborneR.BorgE.LumleyE.WijesingheK.RossF. A.DaviesT.ToveyS.FatayerH.WhiteheadI. J.MondaniJ.JamesK.DarraghL.KiernanT.SridharanU.AshfordS.LawsS.RobsonN.MatiasM. R. A.WilsonR. L.AliS. H.SalmanM.BuhleigahM.RathinaezhilR.HignettS.SchrireT. D.LambertW.. Wire- and magnetic-seed-guided localization of impalpable breast lesions: iBRA-NET localisation study

BACKGROUND

Wire localization is historically the most common method for guiding excision of non-palpable breast lesions, but there are limitations to the technique. Newer technologies such as magnetic seeds may allow some of these challenges to be overcome. The aim was to compare safety and effectiveness of wire and magnetic seed localization techniques.

METHODS

Women undergoing standard wire or magnetic seed localization for non-palpable lesions between August 2018 and August 2020 were recruited prospectively to this IDEAL stage 2a/2b platform cohort study. The primary outcome was effectiveness defined as accurate localization and removal of the index lesion. Secondary endpoints included safety, specimen weight and reoperation rate for positive margins.

RESULTS

Data were accrued from 2300 patients in 35 units; 2116 having unifocal, unilateral breast lesion localization. Identification of the index lesion in magnetic-seed-guided (946 patients) and wire-guided excisions (1170 patients) was 99.8 versus 99.1 per cent (P = 0.048). There was no difference in overall complication rate. For a subset of patients having a single lumpectomy only for lesions less than 50 mm (1746 patients), there was no difference in median closest margin (2 mm versus 2 mm, P = 0.342), re-excision rate (12 versus 13 per cent, P = 0.574) and specimen weight in relation to lesion size (0.15 g/mm2versus 0.138 g/mm2, P = 0.453).

CONCLUSION

Magnetic seed localization demonstrated similar safety and effectiveness to those of wire localization. This study has established a robust platform for the comparative evaluation of new localization devices.

The Evolving Role of Radiofrequency Guided Localisation in Breast Surgery: A Systematic Review

Wire-guided localisation (WGL) has been the gold-standard for localising non-palpable breast lesions before excision. Due to its drawbacks, various wireless alternatives have been developed, including LOCalizer™, which is based on radio-frequency identification (RFID) technology. In this systematic review, we consulted EMBASE, Medline and PubMed databases using appropriate search terms regarding the use of RFID technology in the localisation of occult breast lesions. Retrospective and prospective studies were included if they quoted the number of patients, rate of successful placement, retrieval rate, margin positivity rate and the re-excision rate. In addition, studies comparing RFID to WGL were also included and analysed separately. Seven studies were included in this systematic review spanning 1151 patients and 1344 tags. The pooled deployment rate was 99.1% and retrieval rate was 100%. Re-excision rate was 13.9%. One complication was identified. Two studies compared RFID with WGL (128 vs. 282 patients respectively). For both techniques the re-excision rate was 15.6% (20/128 vs. 44/282 respectively, p value is 0.995). Based on our review, LOCalizer™ is safe and non-inferior to WGL in terms of successful localisation and re-excision rates. However, further research is required to assess the cost effectiveness of this approach and its impact on the aesthetic outcome compared with WGL and other wire free technologies to better inform decision making in service planning and provision.

Multicentre evaluation of magnetic technology for localisation of non-palpable breast lesions and targeted axillary nodes

BACKGROUND

Magseed technology is a recently introduced localisation technique for impalpable breast lesions with possible advantages over traditional techniques. These include improved theatre logistics, flexibility in incision placement and improved patient experience. This multicentre study evaluates the experience of introducing Magseed technology into routine surgical practice.

METHODS

A prospective multicentre study of Magseed localised procedures was performed. Insertion data were recorded by the radiologist including lesion characteristics and Magseed insertion accuracy. The surgical team recorded time from insertion to operation, operating time and surgical satisfaction. Pathology results were reviewed for specimen weight and margins.

RESULTS

Between February 2019 and June 2020, 100 patients were enrolled. Magseed localised procedures included 18 excisional biopsies, 23 wide local excisions (WLE), 50 WLE with axillary surgery and four cases of Magseed localised breast WLE with Magseed localised axillary surgery. There were three therapeutic mammoplasties and two cases of Magseed localised targeted axillary node dissection alone. A total of 90% of Magseeds were radiologically placed within 5 mm of the target lesion/node. Time between incision and specimen removal was 17 min (range 6-40 min). All breast and axillary Magseeds were successfully identified and retrieved during surgery. The target lesion was identified in the specimen in all cases. A total of 10% of cases required further surgery for pathologically positive margins. Overall, surgeons reported that Magseed localisation was "easy" or "very easy" in 77% of cases.

CONCLUSION

Magseed is a reliable, safe and accurate surgical technique that provides logistical advantages and flexibility of surgical approach. The method was well-accepted by all users.

Preoperative non-palpable breast lesion localization, innovative techniques and clinical outcomes in surgical practice: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Pre-operative localization of non-palpable breast lesions with non-wired non-ionizing (NWNI) techniques may improve clinical outcomes as reoperation rate, cosmetic outcome and contribute to organizational aspects improvement in breast-conserving surgery (BCS). However only limited literature is available and clinical studies involving these forefront devices are often small and non-randomized. Furthermore, there is a lack of consensus on free margins and cosmetic outcomes definitions. The objective of the present meta-analysis was to determine the crude clinical outcomes reported for the NWNI techniques on BCS. A literature search was performed of PubMed, Embase and Scopus databases up to February 2021 in order to select all prospective or retrospective clinical trials on pre-operative breast lesion localization done with NWNI devices. All studies were assessed following the PRISMA recommendations. Continuous outcomes were described in averages corrected for sample size, while binomial outcomes were described using the weighted average proportion. Twenty-seven studies with a total of 2103 procedures were identified. The technique is consolidated, showing for both reflectors' positioning and localization nearly the 100% rate of success. The re-excision and clear margins rates were 14% (95% CI, 11-17%) and 87% (80-92%), respectively. Overall, positive margins rates were 12% (8-17%). In studies that compared NWNI and wire localization techniques, positive margin rate is lower for the first techniques (12%, 6-22% vs 17%, 12-23%) and re-excision rate is slightly higher using the latter (13%, 9-19% vs 16%, 13-18%). Pre-operative NWNI techniques are effective in the localization of non-palpable breast lesions and are promising in obtaining clear (or negative) margins minimizing the need for re-excision and improving the cosmetic outcomes. Randomized trials are needed to confirm these findings.

Magnetically Guided Localization Using a Guiding-Marker System® and a Handheld Magnetic Probe for Nonpalpable Breast Lesions: A Multicenter Feasibility Study in Japan

Simple Summary

In this multicenter feasibility study, non-palpable breast lesions in 89 patients were localized using a handheld cordless magnetic probe (TAKUMI) and a magnetic marker (Guiding-Marker System^®). Additionally, a dye was injected subcutaneously under ultrasound guidance to indicate the extent of the tumor. Consequently, a magnetic marker was detected in all resected specimens, and the initial surgical margin was positive only in five (6.1%) of 82 patients. Thus, the magnetic guiding localization system with ultrasound guidance is useful for the detection and excision of non-palpable breast lesions.

Abstract

Accurate pre-operative localization of nonpalpable lesions plays a pivotal role in guiding breast-conserving surgery (BCS). In this multicenter feasibility study, nonpalpable breast lesions were localized using a handheld magnetic probe (TAKUMI) and a magnetic marker (Guiding-Marker System^®). The magnetic marker was preoperatively placed within the target lesion under ultrasound or stereo-guidance. Additionally, a dye was injected subcutaneously to indicate the extent of the tumor excision. Surgeons checked for the marker within the lesion using a magnetic probe. The magnetic probe could detect the guiding marker and accurately localize the target lesion intraoperatively. All patients with breast cancer underwent wide excision with a safety margin of ≥5 mm. The presence of the guiding-marker within the resected specimen was the primary outcome and the pathological margin status and re-excision rate were the secondary outcomes. Eighty-seven patients with nonpalpable lesions who underwent BCS, from January to March of 2019 and from January to July of 2020, were recruited. The magnetic marker was detected in all resected specimens. The surgical margin was positive only in 5/82 (6.1%) patients; these patients underwent re-excision. This feasibility study demonstrated that the magnetic guiding localization system is useful for the detection and excision of nonpalpable breast lesions.

Innovations for the future of breast surgery

BACKGROUND

Future innovations in science and technology with an impact on multimodal breast cancer management from a surgical perspective are discussed in this narrative review. The work was undertaken in response to the Commission on the Future of Surgery project initiated by the Royal College of Surgeons of England.

METHODS

Expert opinion was sought around themes of surgical de-escalation, reduction in treatment morbidities, and improving the accuracy of breast-conserving surgery in terms of margin status. There was emphasis on how the primacy of surgical excision in an era of oncoplastic and reconstructive surgery is increasingly being challenged, with more effective systemic therapies that target residual disease burden, and permit response-adapted approaches to both breast and axillary surgery.

RESULTS

Technologies for intraoperative margin assessment can potentially half re-excision rates after breast-conserving surgery, and sentinel lymph node biopsy will become a therapeutic procedure for many patients with node-positive disease treated either with surgery or chemotherapy as the primary modality. Genomic profiling of tumours can aid in the selection of patients for neoadjuvant and adjuvant therapies as well as prevention strategies. Molecular subtypes are predictive of response to induction therapies and reductive approaches to surgery in the breast or axilla.

CONCLUSION

Treatments are increasingly being tailored and based on improved understanding of tumour biology and relevant biomarkers to determine absolute benefit and permit delivery of cost-effective healthcare. Patient involvement is crucial for breast cancer studies to ensure relevance and outcome measures that are objective, meaningful, and patient-centred.

Reflector-Guided Localisation of Non-Palpable Breast Lesions: A Prospective Evaluation of the SAVI SCOUT® System

Simple Summary

Marking impalpable areas of breast cancer prior to surgery is an important part of the modern treatment of breast cancer. Traditionally, the target lesion would be marked by a wire just before surgery under image guidance and would help the surgeon locate the tumour during surgery. However, this method has some drawbacks, such as patient discomfort, the risk of migration and dislodgement, and the need to couple surgical and radiological schedules. Therefore, there has been a growing interest in this system, thus supporting its potential. In this study, we have evaluated one such system, SAVI SCOUT^®, in 63 consecutive patients. Our experience with this system supported its potential role in modern breast surgery.

Abstract

Wire-guided localisation (WGL) has been the mainstay for localising non-palpable breast lesions before excision. Due to its limitations, various wireless alternatives have been developed. In this prospective study, we evaluate the role of radiation-free wireless localisation using the SAVI SCOUT^® system at the London Breast Institute. A total of 72 reflectors were deployed in 67 consecutive patients undergoing breast conserving surgery for non-palpable breast lesions. The mean interval between deployment and surgery for the therapeutic cases was 18.8 days (range: 0–210). The median deployment duration was 5 min (range: 1–15 min). The mean distance from the lesion was 1.1 mm (median distance: 0; range: 0–20 mm). The rate of surgical localisation and retrieval of the reflector was 98.6% and 100%, respectively. The median operating time was 28 min (range: 15–55 min) for the therapeutic excision of malignancy and 17 min (range: 15–24) for diagnostic excision. The incidence of reflector migration was 0%. Radial margin positivity in malignant cases was 7%. The median weight for malignant lesions was 19.6 g (range: 3.5–70 g). Radiologists and surgeons rated the system higher than WGL (93.7% and 98.6%, respectively; 60/64 and 70/71). The patient mean satisfaction score was 9.7/10 (n = 47, median = 10; range: 7–10). One instance of signal failure was reported. In patients who had breast MRI after the deployment of the reflector, the MRI void signal was <5 mm (n = 6). There was no specific technique-related surgical complication. Our study demonstrates that wire-free localisation using SAVI SCOUT^® is an effective and time-efficient alternative to WGL with excellent physician and patient acceptance.

Symptomatic breast services in the post-COVID-19 era

The COVID-19 pandemic has necessitated unprecedented changes to the functioning of hospitals across the world. This article evaluates the acute impact of COVID-19 on the provision of symptomatic breast services in the UK and explores suggestions for more sustainable functioning of services in the post-COVID-19 era.