Mendoza-Rojas JJ, Bautista-Hernández MY, Quintero-Beuló G, Santoyo-Sánchez A, Ramos-Peñafiel CO

Language: Spanish
References: 20
Page: 88-95
PDF size: 339.84 Kb.

ABSTRACT

Objetive: To know the surgical-pathologic correlation to assess the state of the edges in wide local excisions of breast cancer in clinical stages.
Material and methods: retrospective and descriptive study, conducted in Breast Tumors Unit from Oncology Service of the General Hospital of Mexico, in the period from January 2009 to December 2011, with follow-up in December 2012. Were included patients with breast cancer in early clinical stages, subject wide local excisions histopalogic report of a second surgery.
Results: From wide local excisions, 119 (28.5%) were due to breast cancer and included. Positive margins after initial surgery were diagnosed in 63 patients (52.9%). The residual tumor found in the second surgery was 39.7%. The variables associated with the presence of positive margins and statistically significant (p ≤ 0.05) were: multicentricity, tumor size clinical and pathological, histological subtypes, and tumor grade. The age and clinical stage were not statistically significant. The variables associated with the presence of residual tumor and are statistical relevance (p ≤ 0.05) were clinical stage, tumor size, clinical and pathological, histological variant and histological grade. Age and multicentricity were not associated with the presence of residual tumor.
Conclusion: Although each case must be individualized, these results demonstrate the analyzed factors must be taken into account during the planning of breast conservative procedures, and despite an histopalogical report of margin after an initial surgery, even seconds procedures can be performed to conserve the organ.

REFERENCES

1. Lovrics PJ, Cornacchi SD, Farrokhyar F, Garnett A, Chen V, Franic S, et al. The relationship between surgical factors and margin status after breast-conservation surgery for early stage breast cancer. Am J Surg 2009;197:740-746.

2. Morrow M. Breast conservation and negative margins: how much is enough? Breast 2009;18:S84-S86.

3. Wapnir IL, Anderson SJ, Mamounas EP, Geyer CE Jr, Jeong JH, Tan-Chiu E et al. Prognosis after ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence and locoregional recurrences in five National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project node-positive adjuvant breast cancer trials. J Clin Oncol 2006;24:2028- 2037.

4. Kouzminova NB, Aggarwal S, Aggarwal A, Allo MD, Lin AY. Impact of initial surgical margins and residual cancer upon re-excision on outcome of patients with localized breast cancer. Am J Surg 2009;198:771-780.

5. Fisher B, Anderson S, Bryant J, Margolese RG, Deutsch M, Fisher ER et al. Twenty-year follow-up of randomized trial comparing total mastectomy, lumpectomy and lumpectomy plus irradiation for the treatment of invasive breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2002;347:1233-1241.

6. Veronesi U, Cascinelli N, Mariani L, Greco M, Saccozzi R, Luini A et al. Twenty-year follow up of a randomized study comparing breast conserving surgery with radical mastectomy for early breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2002;347:1227-1232.

7. Gangi A, Chung A, Mirocha J, Liou DZ, Leong T, Giuliano AE. Breast-conserving therapy for triple-negative breast cancer. JAMA Surg 2014;149:252-258.

8. Singletary SE. Surgical margins in patients with early-stage breast cancer treated with breast conservation therapy. Am J Surg 2002;184:383-393.

9. Gwin JL, Eisenberg BL, Hoffman JP, Ottery FD, Boraas M, Solin LJ. Incidence of gross and microscopic carcinoma in specimens from patients with breast cancer after reexcision lumpectomy. Ann Surg 1993;218:729-734.

10. Papa MZ, Zippel D, Koller M, Klein E, Chetrit A, Ari GB. Positive margins of breast biopsy: is reexcision always necessary? J Surg Oncol 1999;70:167-171.

11. Klimberg VS, Harms S, Korourian S. Assessing margin status. Surg Oncol 1999;8:77-84.

12. Moran MS, Schnitt SJ, Giuliano AE, Harris JR, Khan SA, Horton J, et al. c. Ann Surg Oncol 2014;21:704-716.

13. Buchholz TA, Somerfield MR, Griggs JJ, El-Eid S, Hammond ME, Lyman GH, et al. Margins for breast-conserving surgery with whole-breast irradiation in stage I and II invasive breast cancer: American Society of Clinical Oncology endorsement of the Society of Surgical Oncology/American Society for Radiation Oncology consensus guideline. J Clin Oncol 2014;32:1502-1506.

14. Houvenaeghel G, Lambaudie E, Buttarelli M, Cohen M, Bannier M, Tallet A, et al. Margin status in invasive breast cáncer. Bull Cancer 2008;95:1161-1170.

15. Holland PA, Gandhi A, Knox WF, Wilson M, Baildam AD, Bundred NJ. Th∫≤e importance of complete excision in the prevention of local recurrence of ductal carcinoma in situ. Br J Cancer 1998;77:110-114.

16. Fernández-Cantón SB, León-Álvarez G, Herrera-Torres MC, Salazar-Delgado E, Sánchez-Díaz MR, Alcalá-Orós RB et al. Perfil Epidemiológico de los Tumores Malignos en México. Ciudad de México: Secretaría de Salud, 2011;157-187

17. DiBiase SJ, Komarnicky LT, Schwartz GF, Xie Y, Mansfield CM. The number of positive margins influences the outcome of women treated with breast preservation for early stage breast carcinoma. Cancer 1998;82:2212-2220.

18. Jenkinson AD, Al-Mufti RA, Mohsen Y, Berry MJ, Wells C, Carpenter R. Does intraductal breast cancer spread in a segmental distribution? An analysis of residual tumour burden following segmental mastectomy using tumour bed biopsies. Euro J Surg Oncol 2001;27:21-25.

19. Mirza NQ, Vlastos G, Meric F, Buchholz TA, Esnaola N, Singletary SE, et al. Predictors of locoregional recurrence among patients with early-stage breast cancer treated with breast-conserving therapy. Ann Surg Oncol 2002;9:256-265.

20. Cárdenas-Sánchez J, Erazo-Valle A, Maafs-Molina E, Poitevin-Chacón A. Consenso Nacional sobre el diagnóstico y Tratamiento del cáncer mamario, Quinta revisión. Colima, México: Masson Doyma México S.A., 2013 (Actualizado 2013 Ago 23; consultado en 2014 Dic 15). Disponible en: http://consensocancermamario.com/publicaciones.html