Comparison of ultrasound visibility and retrieval success of two ultrasound-visible clips in targeted axillary dissection after neoadjuvant chemotherapy.
{"title":"Comparison of ultrasound visibility and retrieval success of two ultrasound-visible clips in targeted axillary dissection after neoadjuvant chemotherapy.","authors":"Naomi Sakamoto, Hiroki Matsui, Eisuke Fukuma","doi":"10.1007/s12282-026-01895-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Targeted axillary dissection (TAD) is a less invasive alternative to axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) for patients with clinically node-positive breast cancer who convert to node-negative status after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC). However, the effect of preoperative ultrasound visibility of different clip types on TAD outcomes remains unclear.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a single-center retrospective cohort study of patients with biopsy-proven axillary node-positive breast cancer who underwent NAC followed by TAD between August 2017 and December 2024. Two ultrasound-visible clips, the UltraCor™ Twirl™ (Twirl) and HydroMARK™, were evaluated. Outcomes included ultrasound visibility, clipped node retrieval success, localization techniques, and false-negative rate (FNR).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Twenty-nine patients were included (Twirl, n = 15; HydroMARK, n = 14). Ultrasound visibility was higher with Twirl than with HydroMARK (86.7% versus 64.3%; p = 0.330). All Twirl cases underwent combined wire and dye-guided localization, whereas HydroMARK cases used multiple localization techniques. Retrieval success reached 100% with Twirl and 78.6% with HydroMARK (p = 0.199). When clips were visible on ultrasound, retrieval rates were high for both clips at 100% for Twirl and 88.9% for HydroMARK (p = 0.850). When clips were not clearly visible, Twirl maintained 100% retrieval compared with 60.0% for HydroMARK (p = 0.895). Among patients who underwent scheduled ALND, the FNR of TAD was 0% (0/6).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Preoperative ultrasound visibility of the clip was associated with successful clip-based TAD. Twirl showed more consistent ultrasound visibility and retrieval success than HydroMARK, which suggests that Twirl may be a more reliable clip for routine clinical practice.</p>","PeriodicalId":520574,"journal":{"name":"Breast cancer (Tokyo, Japan)","volume":" ","pages":"1173-1182"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2026-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Breast cancer (Tokyo, Japan)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s12282-026-01895-8","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/7/26 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Targeted axillary dissection (TAD) is a less invasive alternative to axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) for patients with clinically node-positive breast cancer who convert to node-negative status after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC). However, the effect of preoperative ultrasound visibility of different clip types on TAD outcomes remains unclear.
Methods: We conducted a single-center retrospective cohort study of patients with biopsy-proven axillary node-positive breast cancer who underwent NAC followed by TAD between August 2017 and December 2024. Two ultrasound-visible clips, the UltraCor™ Twirl™ (Twirl) and HydroMARK™, were evaluated. Outcomes included ultrasound visibility, clipped node retrieval success, localization techniques, and false-negative rate (FNR).
Results: Twenty-nine patients were included (Twirl, n = 15; HydroMARK, n = 14). Ultrasound visibility was higher with Twirl than with HydroMARK (86.7% versus 64.3%; p = 0.330). All Twirl cases underwent combined wire and dye-guided localization, whereas HydroMARK cases used multiple localization techniques. Retrieval success reached 100% with Twirl and 78.6% with HydroMARK (p = 0.199). When clips were visible on ultrasound, retrieval rates were high for both clips at 100% for Twirl and 88.9% for HydroMARK (p = 0.850). When clips were not clearly visible, Twirl maintained 100% retrieval compared with 60.0% for HydroMARK (p = 0.895). Among patients who underwent scheduled ALND, the FNR of TAD was 0% (0/6).
Conclusions: Preoperative ultrasound visibility of the clip was associated with successful clip-based TAD. Twirl showed more consistent ultrasound visibility and retrieval success than HydroMARK, which suggests that Twirl may be a more reliable clip for routine clinical practice.