Abstract
Purpose
Intraoperative margin assessment can reduce positive margins in patients undergoing breast-conserving surgery. However, reports on intraoperative margin assessment have described only the use of either imprint cytology or frozen section. This study was designed to elucidate the effect of intraoperative margin assessment using imprint cytology followed by frozen section.
Methods
Overall, 522 patients were enrolled. First, the entire surgical margin was subjected to imprint cytology. Frozen section was performed only in cases with “positive” or “suspicious” imprint cytology results. An additional intraoperative excision was performed in patients with frozen section-positive lesion sites. All margins were evaluated using postoperative permanent sections after excision.
Results
Among 522 patients, 136 (26.1%) were imprint cytology-positive, and 386 (73.9%) were imprint cytology-negative. Among the 386 imprint cytology-negative patients not subjected to frozen section, 11 (2.1%) were permanent sections-positive (imprint cytology-false-negative). In 47 of the 136 imprint cytology-positive patients, additional intraoperative excision was unnecessary due to the frozen section-negative diagnosis. Moreover, these patients could avoid reoperation, because they were permanent section-negative. The false-positive rate of imprint cytology alone was 13.4%, but adding frozen section to imprint cytology decreased the overall false-positive rate to 2.5%. After undergoing excision, four patients still had positive margins. The overall positive margin rate in the final pathology based on permanent sections was 2.9% (15/522).
Conclusions
Imprint cytology followed by frozen section led to a markedly decreased positive margin rate. This is considered the best method for intraoperative margin assessment, as it can overcome the limitations of cytology and histology performed individually.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Valdes EK, Boolbol SK, Cohen JM, Feldman SM. Intra-operative touch preparation cytology; does it have a role in re-excision lumpectomy? Ann Surg Oncol. 2007;14:1045–50.
Park CC, Mitsumori M, Nixon A, et al. Outcome at 8 years after breast-conserving surgery and radiation therapy for invasive breast cancer: influence of margin status and systemic therapy on local recurrence. J Clin Oncol. 2000;18:1668–75.
Olson TP, Harter J, Muñoz A, Mahvi DM, Breslin T. Frozen section analysis for intraoperative margin assessment during breast-conserving surgery results in low rates of re-excision and local recurrence. Ann Surg Oncol. 2007;14:2953–60.
Eggemann H, Ignatov T, Costa SD, Ignatov A. Accuracy of ultrasound-guided breast-conserving surgery in the determination of adequate surgical margins. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2014. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-014-2932-8.
Laws A, Brar MS, Bouchard-Fortier A, Leong B, Quan ML. Intraoperative margin assessment in wire-localized breast-conserving surgery for invasive cancer: a population-level comparison of techniques. Ann Surg Oncol. 2016. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-016-5401-2.
Moore MM, Whitney LA, Cerilli L, et al. Intraoperative ultrasound is associated with clear lumpectomy margins for palpable infiltrating ductal breast cancer. Ann Surg. 2001;233:761–8.
VanderVelde J, Walters JW, Hsu CH, et al. Awareness of residents’ technical ability can affect margin status in breast conserving operations. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2019 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-019-05344-3.
Weber S, Storm FK, Stitt J, Mahvi DM. The role of frozen section analysis of margins during breast conservation surgery. Cancer J Sci Am. 1997;3:273–7.
Klimberg VS, Westbrook KC, Korourian S. Use of touch preps for diagnosis and evaluation of surgical margins in breast cancer. Ann Surg Oncol. 1998;5:220–6.
D’Halluin F, Tas P, Rouquette S, et al. Intra-operative touch preparation cytology following lumpectomy for breast cancer: a series of 400 procedures. Breast. 2009. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.breast.2009.05.002.
St John ER, Al-Khudairi R, Ashrafian H, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of intraoperative techniques for margin assessment in breast cancer surgery: a meta-analysis. Ann Surg. 2017. https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0000000000001897.
Akaike G, Tsunoda H, Hayashi N, et al. Ultrasonography map** combined with mammography before breast-conserving surgery for primary breast cancer with microcalcifications: a novel approach. Clin Breast Cancer. 2014;14:352–7.
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. J Clin Oncol. 2014. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2013.53.3935.
Gray RJ, Pockaj BA, Garvey E, Blair S. Intraoperative margin management in breast-conserving surgery: a systematic review of the literature. Ann Surg Oncol. 2018. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-016-5756-4.
Esbona K, Li Z, Wilke LG. Intraoperative imprint cytology and frozen section pathology for margin assessment in breast conservation surgery: a systematic review. Ann Surg Oncol. 2012. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-012-2492-2.
Cox CE, Ku NN, Reintgen DS, Greenberg HM, Nicosia SV, Wangensteen S. Touch preparation cytology of breast lumpectomy margins with histologic correlation. Arch Surg. 1991;126:490–3.
Klimberg VS, Harms S, Korourian S. Assessing margin status. Surg Oncol. 1999;8:77–84.
Sumiyoshi K, Nohara T, Iwamoto M, et al. Usefulness of intraoperative touch smear cytology in breast-conserving surgery. Exp Ther Med. 2010;1:641–5.
Osako T, Nishimura R, Nishiyama Y, et al. Efficacy of intraoperative entire-circumferential frozen section analysis of lumpectomy margins during breast-conserving surgery for breast cancer. Int J Clin Oncol. 2015. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10147-015-0827-2.
Laucirica R. Intraoperative assessment of the breast: guidelines and potential pitfalls. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2005;129:1565–74.
Ko S, Chun YK, Kang SS, Hur MH. The usefulness of intraoperative circumferential frozen-section analysis of lumpectomy margins in breast-conserving surgery. J Breast Cancer. 2017. https://doi.org/10.4048/jbc.2017.20.2.176.
Boughey JC, Hieken TJ, Jakub JW, et al. Impact of analysis of frozen-section margin on reoperation rates in women undergoing lumpectomy for breast cancer: evaluation of the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program data. Surgery. 2014;156:190–7.
Osborn JB, Keeney GL, Jakub JW, Degnim AC, Boughey JC. Cost-effectiveness analysis of routine frozen-section analysis of breast margins compared with reoperation for positive margins. Ann Surg Oncol. 2011;18:3204–9.
Adam M Zysk, Kai Chen, Edward Gabrielson, et al. Intraoperative assessment of final margins with a handheld optical imaging probe during breast-conserving surgery may reduce the reoperation rate: results of a multicenter study. Ann Surg Oncol. 2015;22:3356–62.
Schnabel F, Boolbol SK, Gittleman M, et al. A randomized prospective study of lumpectomy margin assessment with use of margin probe in patients with nonpalpable breast malignancies. Ann Surg Oncol. 2014;21:1589–95.
Hutson SW, Cowen PN, Bird CC. Morphometric studies of age related changes in normal human breast and their significance for evolution of mammary cancer. J Clin Pathol. 1985;38:281–7.
Creager AJ, Shaw JA, Young PR, Geisinger KR. Intraoperative evaluation of lumpectomy margins by imprint cytology with histologic correlation: a community hospital experience. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2002;126:846–8.
Singletary SE. Surgical margins in patients with early-stage breast cancer treated with breast conservation therapy. Am J Surg. 2002;184:383–93.
Sneige N, Staerkel GA. Fine-needle aspiration cytology of ductal hyperplasia with and without atypia and ductal carcinoma in situ. Hum Pathol. 1994;25:485–92.
Julie Mook, Rebecca Klein, Anne Kobbermann, et al. Volume of excision and cosmesis with routine cavity shave margins technique. 2012;19:886–91.
Acknowledgments
The authors thank all the staff from the departments of Breast Surgical Oncology and Pathology, Funabashi Municipal Medical Center, for their help in collecting the clinical data.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Disclosure
The authors have nothing to disclose regarding commercial support.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Tamanuki, T., Namura, M., Aoyagi, T. et al. Effect of Intraoperative Imprint Cytology Followed by Frozen Section on Margin Assessment in Breast-Conserving Surgery. Ann Surg Oncol 28, 1338–1346 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-020-08955-z
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-020-08955-z