JUM
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Feld, R. I.
Right arrow Articles by O'Reilly, T.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Feld, R. I.
Right arrow Articles by O'Reilly, T.

Journal of Ultrasound in Medicine, Vol 20, Issue 9 959-966, Copyright © 2001 by American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine

JOURNAL ARTICLE

Intraoperative sonographic localization of breast masses: success with specimen sonography and surgical bed sonography to confirm excision

R. I. Feld, A. L. Rosenberg, L. N. Nazarian, L. Needleman, A. S. Lev-Toaff, S. R. Segal, P. T. Johnson, L. Parker and T. O'Reilly
Department of Radiology, Jefferson Medical College, Thomas Jefferson University Hospital, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19107, USA.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the use of intraoperative sonography for localization of breast masses at excisional biopsy, with specimen and surgical bed sonography to confirm excision. METHODS: A computer search of the 5-year period from January 1993 through January 1998 revealed 138 consecutive women referred for sonographically guided excisional biopsy of 148 masses; 35 masses were excluded because they had no postoperative mammograms. One hundred thirteen masses constituted the study group. Specimen sonography (n = 60) or surgical bed sonography (n = 53) was performed as the initial evaluation to confirm excision, but ultimately, surgical bed sonography may have been necessary after specimen sonography, and specimen sonography may have been necessary after surgical bed sonography. The miss rates determined by postoperative imaging were calculated for each group and compared with those of mammographically guided needle localization series from the literature. RESULTS: Follow-up physical examination and mammography showed no residual mass in the region of surgery in any patient. However, follow-up sonography had 1 miss in the initial specimen sonogram group (1 [1.7%] of 60) and 1 miss in the initial surgical bed group (1 [1.9%] of 53). As shown by the Fisher exact test, there was no significant difference between the miss rates of the 2 initial methods of confirming lesion excision or between the miss rates of these initial methods, both groups combined, and 6 mammographic localization series from the literature. CONCLUSION: Intraoperative breast sonography, using specimen sonography and scanning the surgical bed, has miss rates comparable with those of mammographic needle localization. Follow-up sonography must be performed if there is any doubt of complete excision.


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Ann. Surg. Oncol.Home page
L. Tafra, S. J. Smith, J. E. Woodward, K. L. Fernandez, K. T. Sawyer, and R. T. Grenko
Pilot Trial of Cryoprobe-Assisted Breast-Conserving Surgery for Small Ultrasound-Visible Cancers
Ann. Surg. Oncol., November 1, 2003; 10(9): 1018 - 1024.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2001 by the American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine.