术中与术前超声引导线定位不可触及乳腺病变的结果

IF 0.4 Q4 ONCOLOGY

Breast Cancer Management Pub Date : 2021-05-10 DOI:10.2217/BMT-2020-0013

P. Wignarajah, V. Papalouka, P. Forouhi

{"title":"术中与术前超声引导线定位不可触及乳腺病变的结果","authors":"P. Wignarajah, V. Papalouka, P. Forouhi","doi":"10.2217/BMT-2020-0013","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Nonpalpable breast lesions require localization, the gold standard for which is preoperative ultrasound-guided wire localization (PUGWL). Our unit also employs intraoperative ultrasound-guided wire localization (IUGWL). Here we evaluate PUGWL and IUGWL outcomes between 2014 and 2018. Primary outcomes were reoperation rates, complication rates and average specimen weights. Trainee feedback and cost analysis assessed IUGWL viability. Methods: Prospectively recorded data were collected. 511 patients were included (241 PUGWL and 270 IUGWL). Results: Reoperation rates: PUGWL 17.7% versus IUGWL 13.9% (p = 0.28) . Complication rates: PUGWL 5.8% versus IUGWL 6.6% (p = 0.72) . Average specimen weight: PUGWL 34.2 g versus IUGWL 24.3 g (p < 0.0001) . Trainees needed 15 supervised cases to be IUGWL competent. Performing IUGWL saves £289 per localization. Conclusion: IUGWL outcomes are comparable to those of PUGWL. IUGWL is cost-effective, patient-friendly and easy to learn and replicate. IUGWL merits wider dissemination and further planned research.","PeriodicalId":43086,"journal":{"name":"Breast Cancer Management","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2021-05-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Outcomes of intraoperative versus preoperative ultrasound-guided wire localization of nonpalpable breast lesions\",\"authors\":\"P. Wignarajah, V. Papalouka, P. Forouhi\",\"doi\":\"10.2217/BMT-2020-0013\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background: Nonpalpable breast lesions require localization, the gold standard for which is preoperative ultrasound-guided wire localization (PUGWL). Our unit also employs intraoperative ultrasound-guided wire localization (IUGWL). Here we evaluate PUGWL and IUGWL outcomes between 2014 and 2018. Primary outcomes were reoperation rates, complication rates and average specimen weights. Trainee feedback and cost analysis assessed IUGWL viability. Methods: Prospectively recorded data were collected. 511 patients were included (241 PUGWL and 270 IUGWL). Results: Reoperation rates: PUGWL 17.7% versus IUGWL 13.9% (p = 0.28) . Complication rates: PUGWL 5.8% versus IUGWL 6.6% (p = 0.72) . Average specimen weight: PUGWL 34.2 g versus IUGWL 24.3 g (p < 0.0001) . Trainees needed 15 supervised cases to be IUGWL competent. Performing IUGWL saves £289 per localization. Conclusion: IUGWL outcomes are comparable to those of PUGWL. IUGWL is cost-effective, patient-friendly and easy to learn and replicate. IUGWL merits wider dissemination and further planned research.\",\"PeriodicalId\":43086,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Breast Cancer Management\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-05-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Breast Cancer Management\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2217/BMT-2020-0013\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"ONCOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Breast Cancer Management","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2217/BMT-2020-0013","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

摘要

背景：不可预测的乳腺病变需要定位，其金标准是术前超声引导下的金属丝定位（PUGWL）。我们的单位还采用了术中超声引导导线定位（IUGWL）。在这里，我们评估了2014年至2018年间PUGWL和IUGWL的结果。主要结果是再次手术率、并发症发生率和平均标本重量。学员的反馈和成本分析评估了IUGWL的可行性。方法：收集前瞻性记录的数据。包括511名患者（241名PUGWL和270名IUGWL）。结果：再次手术率：PUGWL 17.7%对IUGWL 13.9%（p=0.28）。并发症发生率：PUGW 5.8%对IUGW 6.6%（p＝0.72）。平均标本重量：PUGW 34.2g对IUGWL24.3g（p＜0.0001）。受训者需要15个监督病例才能胜任IUGWL。执行IUGWL每次本地化可节省289英镑。结论：IUGWL的疗效与PUGWL相当。IUGWL具有成本效益，对患者友好，易于学习和复制。IUGWL值得更广泛的传播和进一步的计划研究。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文本刊更多论文

Outcomes of intraoperative versus preoperative ultrasound-guided wire localization of nonpalpable breast lesions

Background: Nonpalpable breast lesions require localization, the gold standard for which is preoperative ultrasound-guided wire localization (PUGWL). Our unit also employs intraoperative ultrasound-guided wire localization (IUGWL). Here we evaluate PUGWL and IUGWL outcomes between 2014 and 2018. Primary outcomes were reoperation rates, complication rates and average specimen weights. Trainee feedback and cost analysis assessed IUGWL viability. Methods: Prospectively recorded data were collected. 511 patients were included (241 PUGWL and 270 IUGWL). Results: Reoperation rates: PUGWL 17.7% versus IUGWL 13.9% (p = 0.28) . Complication rates: PUGWL 5.8% versus IUGWL 6.6% (p = 0.72) . Average specimen weight: PUGWL 34.2 g versus IUGWL 24.3 g (p < 0.0001) . Trainees needed 15 supervised cases to be IUGWL competent. Performing IUGWL saves £289 per localization. Conclusion: IUGWL outcomes are comparable to those of PUGWL. IUGWL is cost-effective, patient-friendly and easy to learn and replicate. IUGWL merits wider dissemination and further planned research.

求助全文

通过发布文献求助，成功后即可免费获取论文全文。去求助

来源期刊

Breast Cancer Management ONCOLOGY-

CiteScore

0.60

自引率

0.00%

发文量

审稿时长

13 weeks

期刊介绍： Breast Cancer Management (ISSN: 1758-1923) addresses key issues in disease management by exploring the best patient-centered clinical research and presenting this information both directly, as clinical findings, and in practice-oriented formats of direct relevance in the clinic. The journal also highlights significant advances in basic and translational research, and places them in context for future therapy. Breast Cancer Management provides oncologists and other health professionals with the latest findings and opinions on reducing the burden of this widespread disease. Recent research findings and advances clinical practice in the field are reported and analyzed by international experts. The journal presents this information in clear, accessible formats. All articles are subject to independent review by a minimum of three independent experts. Unsolicited article proposals are welcomed and authors are required to comply fully with the journal’s Disclosure & Conflict of Interest Policy as well as major publishing guidelines, including ICMJE and GPP3. Coverage includes: Diagnosis and imaging, Surgical approaches, Radiotherapy, Systemic therapies, Cancer clinical trials, Genetic aspects of disease, Personalized medicine, Translational research and biomarker studies, Management of psychological distress, Epidemiological studies, Pharmacoeconomics, Evidence-based treatment guidelines.