Ultrasound-Guided Versus Wire-Guided Breast-Conserving Surgery for Non-palpable Breast Lesions: A Retrospective Review
Résumé fourni par la source
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.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- Ultrasound-Guided Versus Wire-Guided Breast-Conserving Surgery for Non-palpable Breast Lesions: A Retrospective Review
- Date Crossref
- 28/10/2024
- Éditeur
- Springer Science and Business Media LLC
- Type
- journal-article
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude et ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Institutions déclarées
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.