Real-time electromagnetic navigation for breast-conserving surgery using NaviKnife technology: A matched case-control study.
breast cancer surgery
breast-conserving therapy
image-guided surgery
surgical oncology
Journal
The breast journal
ISSN: 1524-4741
Titre abrégé: Breast J
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 9505539
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
03 2020
03 2020
Historique:
received:
15
02
2019
revised:
20
05
2019
accepted:
23
05
2019
pubmed:
19
9
2019
medline:
22
6
2021
entrez:
19
9
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Breast-conserving surgery (BCS) is a mainstay in breast cancer treatment. For nonpalpable breast cancers, current strategies have limited accuracy, contributing to high positive margin rates. We developed NaviKnife, a surgical navigation system based on real-time electromagnetic (EM) tracking. The goal of this study was to confirm the feasibility of intraoperative EM navigation in patients with nonpalpable breast cancer and to assess the potential value of surgical navigation. We recruited 40 patients with ultrasound visible, single, nonpalpable lesions, undergoing BCS. Feasibility was assessed by equipment functionality and sterility, acceptable duration of the operation, and surgeon feedback. Secondary outcomes included specimen volume, positive margin rate, and reoperation outcomes. Study patients were compared to a control group by a matched case-control analysis. There was no equipment failure or breach of sterility. The median operative time was 66 (44-119) minutes with NaviKnife vs 65 (34-158) minutes for the control (P = .64). NaviKnife contouring time was 3.2 (1.6-9) minutes. Surgeons rated navigation as easy to setup, easy to use, and useful in guiding nonpalpable tumor excision. The mean specimen volume was 95.4 ± 73.5 cm
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
399-405Subventions
Organisme : CHIR Collaborative Health Research Project
ID : 381245
Pays : International
Informations de copyright
© 2019 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
Références
Torre LA, Bray F, Siegel RL, Ferlay J, Lortet-Tieulent J, Jemal A. Global cancer statistics, 2012. CA Cancer J Clin. 2015;65(2):87-108.
Black DM, Hunt KK, Mittendorf EA. Long term outcomes reporting the safety of breast conserving therapy compared to mastectomy: 20-year results of EORTC 10801. Gland Surg. 2013;2(3):120-123.
Chen K, Li S, Li Q, et al. Breast-conserving surgery rates in breast cancer patients with different molecular subtypes: an observational study based on surveillance, epidemiology, and end results (SEER) database. Medicine. 2016;95(8):e2593.
Hennigs A, Fuchs V, Sinn H-P, et al. Do patients after reexcision due to involved or close margins have the same risk of local recurrence as those after one-step breast-conserving surgery? Ann surg oncol. 2016;23(6):1831-1837.
Dua SM, Gray RJ, Keshtgar M. Strategies for localisation of impalpable breast lesions. Breast. 2011;20(3):246-253.
Ananthakrishnan P, Balci FL, Crowe JP. Optimizing surgical margins in breast conservation. Int J Surg Oncol. 2012;2012:585670.
Langhans L, Tvedskov TF, Klausen TL, et al. Radioactive seed localization or wire-guided localization of nonpalpable invasive and in situ breast cancer. Ann Surg. 2017;266(1):29-35.
Harvey JR, Lim Y, Murphy J, et al. Safety and feasibility of breast lesion localization using magnetic seeds (Magseed): a multi-centre, open-label cohort study. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2018;169(3):531-536.
Colakovic N, Zdravkovic D, Skuric Z, Mrda D, Gacic J, Ivanovic N. Intraoperative ultrasound in breast cancer surgery-from localization of non-palpable tumors to objectively measurable excision. World J Surg Onc. 2018;16(1):184.
Wilke LG, Czechura T, Wang C, et al. Repeat surgery after breast conservation for the treatment of stage 0 to II breast carcinoma: a report from the National Cancer Data Base, 2004-2010. JAMA Surg. 2014;149(12):1296-1305.
Lovrics PJ, Goldsmith CH, Hodgson N, et al. A multicentered, randomized, controlled trial comparing radioguided seed localization to standard wire localization for nonpalpable, invasive and in situ breast carcinomas. Ann Surg Oncol. 2011;18(12):3407-3414.
Houssami N, Macaskill P, Marinovich ML, et al. Meta-analysis of the impact of surgical margins on local recurrence in women with early-stage invasive breast cancer treated with breast-conserving therapy. Eur J Cancer. 2010;46(18):3219-3232.
Hargreaves AC, Mohamed M, Audisio RA. Intra-operative guidance: methods for achieving negative margins in breast conserving surgery. J Surg Oncol. 2014;110(1):21-25.
Ungi T, Gauvin G, Lasso A, et al. Navigated breast tumor excision using electromagnetically tracked ultrasound and surgical instruments. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng. 2016;63(3):600-606.
Moran MS, Schnitt SJ, Giuliano AE, et al. Society of surgical oncology-american society for radiation oncology consensus guideline on margins for breast-conserving surgery with whole-breast irradiation in stages I and II invasive breast cancer. Ann Surg Oncol. 2014;21(3):704-716.
Morrow M, Van Zee KJ, Solin LJ, et al. Society of surgical oncology-american society for radiation oncology-american society of clinical oncology consensus guideline on margins for breast-conserving surgery with whole-breast irradiation in ductal carcinoma in situ. Ann Surg Oncol. 2016;23(12):3801-3810.
Ungi T, Lasso A, Fichtinger G. Open-source platforms for navigated image-guided interventions. Med Image Anal. 2016;33:181-186.
Rahusen FD, Bremers A, Fabry H, Taets van Amerongen A, Boom R, Meijer S. Ultrasound-guided lumpectomy of nonpalpable breast cancer versus wire guided resection: a randomized clinical trial. Ann Surg Oncol. 2002;9(10):994-998.
Krekel N, Zonderhuis BM, Stockmann H, et al. A comparison of three methods for nonpalpable breast cancer excision. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2011;37(2):109-115.
Grunert P, Darabi K, Espinosa J, Filippi R. Computer-aided navigation in neurosurgery. Neurosurg Rev. 2003;26(2):73-99.
Qureshi S, Lu Y, McAnany S, Baird E. Three-dimensional intraoperative imaging modalities in orthopaedic surgery: a narrative review. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2014;22(12):800-809.
Jung W, Kang E, Kim SM, et al. Factors associated with re-excision after breast-conserving surgery for early-stage breast cancer. J breast cancer. 2012;15(4):412.
Bathla L, Harris A, Davey M, Sharma P, Silva E. High resolution intra-operative two-dimensional specimen mammography and its impact on second operation for re-excision of positive margins at final pathology after breast conservation surgery. Am J Surg. 2011;202(4):387-394.
Marudanayagam R, Singhal R, Tanchel B, O'Connor B, Balasubramanian B, Paterson I. Effect of cavity shaving on reoperation rate following breast-conserving surgery. Breast J. 2008;14(6):570-573.
Gray K, Ayabe R, Shover A, et al. Can selective image-guided intraoperative margin resection improve re-excision rates after lumpectomy in ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast? Am Surg. 2018;84(10):1580-1583.
Wang LC, Sullivan M, Du H, Feldman MI, Mendelson EB. US appearance of ductal carcinoma in situ. Radiographics. 2013;33(1):213-228.
Klein RL, Mook JA, Euhus DM, et al. Evaluation of a hydrogel based breast biopsy marker (HydroMARK®) as an alternative to wire and radioactive seed localization for non-palpable breast lesions. J Surg Oncol. 2012;105(6):591-594.
Harish V, Baksh A, Ungi T, et al. Measurement of electromagnetic tracking error in a navigated breast surgery setup. In Medical Imaging 2016: Image-Guided Procedures, Robotic Interventions, and modeling. SPIE. 2016;9786:97862K.