磁粒定位在乳腺不可触及病变中的应用:与钩丝定位的比较

A. Dehaene, A. Smeets, H. Vos, C. Vanongeval, P. Neven, A. Laenen, L. Schops, R. Prevos, T. Thywissen, M. Keupers, I. Nevelsteen
{"title":"磁粒定位在乳腺不可触及病变中的应用:与钩丝定位的比较","authors":"A. Dehaene, A. Smeets, H. Vos, C. Vanongeval, P. Neven, A. Laenen, L. Schops, R. Prevos, T. Thywissen, M. Keupers, I. Nevelsteen","doi":"10.26420/AUSTINJMEDONCOL.2021.1059","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction: Screening programs and improved imaging result in higher frequency of non-palpable breast lesions, requiring preoperative localisation. Several localisation methods have been developed, with Magseed® among the more recent techniques. This observational study registered safety, effectiveness and surgeon satisfaction of Magseed® localisation. Data were compared with hooked-wire procedure. Methods: Data regarding safety, effectiveness and surgeon satisfaction of 100 patients who underwent Magseed® localisation were prospectively collected between September 2018 and April 2019, and compared with retrospectively collected data of 91 patients who underwent hooked-wire localisation between March 2018 and September 2018. Results: In total, 103 seeds and 102 wires were included. All magnetic seeds were placed under ultrasound guidance, with a median of two days preoperative. Complication rate did not significantly differ between Magseed® and hooked-wire (2.97% vs. 2.13%; p = 1.000). 94.06% of the seeds were detected with Sentimag®, with a retrieval rate of 100%. Positive margin rate was lower for Magseed®, although not significant (4.76% vs. 10.39%; p = 0.233). Due to positive margins, 1 additional mastectomy was performed, in contrast with 3 mastectomies and 1 additional re-excision in the hooked-wire group. Surgeons scored 81% of the Magseed® procedures as ’easier than hookedwire’. Conclusion: Rate of positive margins and re-excision/mastectomy showed a tendency to be lower with Magseed® localisation compared to hooked-wire localisation. Complication rate was equal. Moreover, high surgeon satisfaction and logistical advantages designate Magseed® as preferable over hooked-wire.","PeriodicalId":8626,"journal":{"name":"Austin journal of medical oncology","volume":"49 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-04-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Magnetic Seed Localisation for Non-Palpable Breast Lesions: A Comparison with Hooked-Wire\",\"authors\":\"A. Dehaene, A. Smeets, H. Vos, C. Vanongeval, P. Neven, A. Laenen, L. Schops, R. Prevos, T. Thywissen, M. Keupers, I. Nevelsteen\",\"doi\":\"10.26420/AUSTINJMEDONCOL.2021.1059\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Introduction: Screening programs and improved imaging result in higher frequency of non-palpable breast lesions, requiring preoperative localisation. Several localisation methods have been developed, with Magseed® among the more recent techniques. This observational study registered safety, effectiveness and surgeon satisfaction of Magseed® localisation. Data were compared with hooked-wire procedure. Methods: Data regarding safety, effectiveness and surgeon satisfaction of 100 patients who underwent Magseed® localisation were prospectively collected between September 2018 and April 2019, and compared with retrospectively collected data of 91 patients who underwent hooked-wire localisation between March 2018 and September 2018. Results: In total, 103 seeds and 102 wires were included. All magnetic seeds were placed under ultrasound guidance, with a median of two days preoperative. Complication rate did not significantly differ between Magseed® and hooked-wire (2.97% vs. 2.13%; p = 1.000). 94.06% of the seeds were detected with Sentimag®, with a retrieval rate of 100%. Positive margin rate was lower for Magseed®, although not significant (4.76% vs. 10.39%; p = 0.233). Due to positive margins, 1 additional mastectomy was performed, in contrast with 3 mastectomies and 1 additional re-excision in the hooked-wire group. Surgeons scored 81% of the Magseed® procedures as ’easier than hookedwire’. Conclusion: Rate of positive margins and re-excision/mastectomy showed a tendency to be lower with Magseed® localisation compared to hooked-wire localisation. Complication rate was equal. Moreover, high surgeon satisfaction and logistical advantages designate Magseed® as preferable over hooked-wire.\",\"PeriodicalId\":8626,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Austin journal of medical oncology\",\"volume\":\"49 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-04-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Austin journal of medical oncology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.26420/AUSTINJMEDONCOL.2021.1059\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Austin journal of medical oncology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.26420/AUSTINJMEDONCOL.2021.1059","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

简介:筛查程序和影像学的改进导致不可触及的乳房病变的频率更高,需要术前定位。已经开发了几种定位方法,其中Magseed®是最新的技术。这项观察性研究记录了Magseed®定位的安全性、有效性和外科医生满意度。数据与钩丝法比较。方法:前瞻性收集2018年9月至2019年4月期间100例Magseed®定位患者的安全性、有效性和外科医生满意度数据,并与2018年3月至2018年9月期间91例钩丝定位患者的回顾性收集数据进行比较。结果:共获得种子103粒,金属丝102丝。所有磁种子均在超声引导下放置,平均术前2天。Magseed®和有钩钢丝的并发症发生率无显著差异(2.97% vs 2.13%;P = 1.000)。Sentimag®的检出率为94.06%,检出率为100%。Magseed®的阳性利润率较低,但差异不显著(4.76% vs. 10.39%;P = 0.233)。由于边缘阳性,1例追加乳房切除术,相比之下,钩丝组有3例乳房切除术和1例追加再切除术。外科医生认为81%的Magseed®手术“比hookedwire更容易”。结论:与钩丝定位相比,Magseed®定位的阳性边缘率和再切除/乳房切除术率有降低的趋势。并发症发生率相等。此外,高外科医生满意度和物流优势使Magseed®优于钩形钢丝。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Magnetic Seed Localisation for Non-Palpable Breast Lesions: A Comparison with Hooked-Wire
Introduction: Screening programs and improved imaging result in higher frequency of non-palpable breast lesions, requiring preoperative localisation. Several localisation methods have been developed, with Magseed® among the more recent techniques. This observational study registered safety, effectiveness and surgeon satisfaction of Magseed® localisation. Data were compared with hooked-wire procedure. Methods: Data regarding safety, effectiveness and surgeon satisfaction of 100 patients who underwent Magseed® localisation were prospectively collected between September 2018 and April 2019, and compared with retrospectively collected data of 91 patients who underwent hooked-wire localisation between March 2018 and September 2018. Results: In total, 103 seeds and 102 wires were included. All magnetic seeds were placed under ultrasound guidance, with a median of two days preoperative. Complication rate did not significantly differ between Magseed® and hooked-wire (2.97% vs. 2.13%; p = 1.000). 94.06% of the seeds were detected with Sentimag®, with a retrieval rate of 100%. Positive margin rate was lower for Magseed®, although not significant (4.76% vs. 10.39%; p = 0.233). Due to positive margins, 1 additional mastectomy was performed, in contrast with 3 mastectomies and 1 additional re-excision in the hooked-wire group. Surgeons scored 81% of the Magseed® procedures as ’easier than hookedwire’. Conclusion: Rate of positive margins and re-excision/mastectomy showed a tendency to be lower with Magseed® localisation compared to hooked-wire localisation. Complication rate was equal. Moreover, high surgeon satisfaction and logistical advantages designate Magseed® as preferable over hooked-wire.
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信