Budget Impact Analysis of Preoperative Radioactive Seed Localization

Radioactive seed localization is a safe and effective tool for breast cancer surgery: an evaluation of over 25,000 cases

Radioactive seed localization (RSL) provides a precise and efficient method for removing non-palpable breast lesions. It has proven to be a valuable addition to breast surgery, improving perioperative logistics and patient satisfaction. This retrospective review examines the lessons learned from a high-volume cancer center's RSL program after 10 years of practice and over 25 000 cases. We provide an updated model for assessing the patient's radiation dose from RSL seed implantation and demonstrate the safety of RSL to staff members. Additionally, we emphasize the importance of various aspects of presurgical evaluation, surgical techniques, post-surgical management, and regulatory compliance for a successful RSL program. Notably, the program has reduced radiation exposure for patients and medical staff.

The Impact of an Electromagnetic Seed Localization Device Versus Wire Localization on Breast-Conserving Surgery: A Matched-Pair Analysis

BACKGROUND

For breast-conserving surgery (BCS), several alternatives to wire localization (WL) have been developed. The newest, electromagnetic seed localization (ESL), provides three-dimensional navigation using the electrosurgical tool. This study assessed operative times, specimen volumes, margin positivity, and re-excision rates for ESL and WL.

METHODS

Patients who had ESL-guided breast-conserving surgery between August 2020 and August 2021 were reviewed and matched one-to-one with patients who had WL based on surgeon, procedure type, and pathology. Variables were compared between ESL and WL using Wilcoxon rank-sum and Fisher's exact tests.

RESULTS

The study matched 97 patients who underwent excisional biopsy (n = 20) or partial mastectomy with (n = 53) or without (n = 24) sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) using ESL. The median operative time for ESL versus WL for lumpectomy was 66 versus 69 min with SLNB (p = 0.76) and 40 versus 34.5 min without SLNB (p = 0.17). The median specimen volume was 36 cm3 using ESL versus 55 cm3 using WL (p = 0.001). For the patients with measurable tumor volume, excess tissue was greater using WL versus ESL (median, 73.2 vs. 52.5 cm3; p = 0.017). The margins were positive for 10 (10 %) of the 97 ESL patients and 18 (19 %) of the 97 WL patients (p = 0.17). In the ESL group, 6 (6 %) of the 97 patients had a subsequent re-excision compared with 13 (13 %) of the 97 WL patients (p = 0.15).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite similar operative times, ESL is superior to WL, as evidenced by decreased specimen volume and excess tissue excised. Although the difference was not statistically significant, ESL resulted in fewer positive margins and re-excisions than WL. Further studies are needed to confirm that ESL is the most advantageous of the two methods.

Fluoroscopic Intraoperative Breast Neoplasm and Node Detection

BACKGROUND

Preoperative localization is necessary for nonpalpable breast lesions. A novel procedure, fluoroscopic intraoperative neoplasm and node detection (FIND), obviates the preoperative painful and potentially expensive localization by using intraoperative visualization of the standard clip placed during diagnostic biopsy. We hypothesized FIND would improve negative margin rates.

STUDY DESIGN

This is an IRB-approved retrospective study (September 2016 to March 2021). Electronic chart review identified breast and axillary node procedures using wire localization (WL) or FIND. Primary outcome was margin status. Secondary outcomes included re-excision rate, specimen weight, surgery time, and axillary node localization rate.

RESULTS

We identified 459 patients, of whom 116 (25.3%) underwent FIND and 343 (74.7%) WL. Of these, 68.1% of FIND and 72.0% of WL procedures were for malignant lesions. Final margin positivity was 5.1% (4 of 79) for FIND and 16.6% (41 of 247) for WL (p = 0.008). This difference lost statistical significance on multivariable logistic regression (p = 0.652). Re-excision rates were 7.6% and 14.6% for FIND and WL (p = 0.125), with an equivalent mean specimen weight (p = 0.502), and mean surgery time of 177.5 ± 81.7 and 157.1 ± 66.8 minutes, respectively (mean ± SD; p = 0.022). FIND identified all (29 of 29) targeted axillary nodes, and WL identified only 80.1% (21 of 26) (p = 0.019).

CONCLUSIONS

FIND has lower positive margin rates and a trend towards lower re-excision rates compared with WL, proving its value in localizing nonpalpable breast lesions. It also offers accurate localization of axillary nodes, valuable in the era of targeted axillary dissection. It is a method of visual localization, using a skill and equipment surgeons already have, and saves patients and medical systems an additional schedule-disruptive, painful procedure, especially valuable when using novel localization devices is cost-prohibitive.

Transitioning From the Traditional Wire Localization to the Wireless Technology for Surgical Guidance at Lumpectomies: Part A. Radioseed Localization

Iodine-125 (I-125) labelled radioactive seeds were the first published wireless pre-operative image-guided breast localization technique. Radioseeds offer benefit to radiologists as a relatively intuitive procedure with precise mammographic or sonographic-guided localization and improved patient experience. Localization and surgical dates can be uncoupled, which facilitates efficient scheduling for radiologists and surgeons. Surgeons can better tailor their surgery with intra-operative localization using a special probe to detect the emitted gamma energy. Due to radioactivity, implementation of a radioseed program requires compliance with the National Regulatory Commission and therefore multidisciplinary involvement. Seeds have a high placement success rate, and comparable surgical success and re-excision rate to wires.

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.

Adequacy of invasive and in situ breast carcinoma margins in radioactive seed and wire-guided localization lumpectomies

Image-guided preoperative localizations help surgeons to completely resect nonpalpable breast cancers. The objective of this study is to compare the adequacy of specimen margins for both invasive breast cancer (IBC) and ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) after radioactive seed localization (RSL) vs wire-guided localization (WGL). We retrospectively reviewed 600 cases at a single Canadian academic center from January 2014 to September 2017, comparing surgical margins, re-excisions and reoperations, localization accuracy and major complications (migration, accidental deployment, vasovagal reaction), as well as operative duration between RSL and WGL cases. IBC margins were positive in 7% of RSL and 6% of WGL cases (P = .57). Tumor size (P = .039) and association with DCIS (P = .036) predicted positive margins in invasive carcinoma. DCIS margins were positive in 6% and 8%, and close (≤2 mm) in 37% and 36% of cases (P = .45) for RSL and RSL cases respectively. The presence of extensive intraductal component predicted positive DCIS margins (P < .0001). There was no significant difference between intraoperative re-excisions (P = .54), localization accuracy (P = .34), and operation duration (P = .81). Reoperation for lumpectomies and mastectomies was marginally higher for WGL than RSL (P = .049). There were 11 (4%) WGL and no RSL complications (P = .03). Overall, positive margins for IBC, close or positive margins for DCIS, intraoperative re-excision, localization accuracy, and operation duration were similar between RSL and WGL. The reoperation rate was higher in WGL than RSL, which may reflect practice changes over time. RSL was safer than WGL with lower complication rates.