Journal Home
Search for

Volume 209, Issue 5, Pages 608-613 (November 2009)


View previous. 10 of 28 View next.

Attaining Negative Margins in Breast-Conservation Operations: Is There a Consensus among Breast Surgeons?

Sarah L. Blair, MD, FACSaCorresponding Author Informationemail address, Kari Thompson, MDb, Joseph Rococco, MDc, Vanessa Malcarne, PhDd, Peter D. Beitsch, MD, FACSe, David W. Ollila, MD, FACSf

Received 22 May 2009; received in revised form 24 July 2009; accepted 27 July 2009. published online 11 September 2009.

Background

The purpose of this survey was to ascertain the most common surgical practices for attaining negative (tumor-free) surgical margins in patients desiring breast-conservation treatment for breast cancer to see if a consensus exists for optimal treatment of patients.

Study Design

We sent a survey to 1,000 surgeons interested in the treatment of breast cancer. Three hundred eighty-one surgeons responded to this survey and 351 were used for the analysis (response rate of 38%).

Results

Answers showed a large variety in clinical practices among breast surgeons across the country. There was little intraoperative margin analysis; only 48% of surgeons examine the margins grossly with a pathologist and even fewer used frozen sections or imprint cytology. Decisions to reexcise specific margins varied greatly. For example, 57% of surgeons would never reexcise for a positive deep margin, but 53% would always reexcise for a positive anterior margin. Most importantly, there was a large range in answers about acceptable margins with ductal carcinoma in situ and invasive carcinoma. Fifteen percent of surgeons would accept any negative margin, 28% would accept a 1-mm negative margin, 50% would accept a 2-mm negative margin, 12% would accept a 5-mm negative margin, and 3% would accept a 10-mm negative margin.

Conclusions

Results of this survey highlight the wide variety of practice patterns in the US for handling surgical margins in breast-conservation treatment. This issue remains controversial, with no prevailing standard of care. Consequently, additional study is needed in the modern era of multimodality treatment to examine the minimal amount of surgical treatment necessary, in conjunction with chemotherapy and radiation, to attain adequate local control rates in breast-conservation treatment.

a University of California San Diego, Moores Cancer Center, La Jolla, CA

b Department of Surgery, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, CA

c Department of Surgery, State University of New York Health Science Center at Syracuse, Syracuse, NY

d Department of Psychology, San Diego State University, San Diego, CA

e Dallas Surgical Group, Dallas, TX

f Department of Surgery, University of North Carolina Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC

Corresponding Author InformationCorrespondence address: Sarah Blair, MD, University of California San Diego, Moores Cancer Center, 3855 Health Sciences Dr #0987, La Jolla, CA 92093-0987

 Disclosure Information: Nothing to disclose.

 This research was supported by a grant from the Department of Defense Idea Grant W81XWH-06-1-052.

PII: S1072-7515(09)01206-X

doi:10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2009.07.026


View previous. 10 of 28 View next.