Minimally invasive breast cancer excision using the breast lesion excision system under ultrasound guidance

• Published in: Breast cancer research and treatment Vol. 184; no. 1; pp. 37 - 43
• Main Authors: Sanderink, W. B. G., Strobbe, L. J. A., Bult, P., Schlooz-Vries, M. S., Lardenoije, S., Venderink, D. J., Sechopoulos, I., Karssemeijer, N., Vreuls, W., Mann, R. M.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: New York Springer US 01.11.2020; Springer
• Subjects: Breast; Breast cancer; Breast Diseases; Breast Neoplasms - diagnostic imaging; Breast Neoplasms - surgery; Clinical Trial; Comparative analysis; Female; Health aspects; Histochemistry; Humans; Mammography; Medical research; Medicine; Medicine & Public Health; Medicine, Experimental; Oncology; Prospective Studies; Breast; Breast cancer; Vacuum; Biopsy; Minimally invasive
• ISSN: 0167-6806; 1573-7217; 1573-7217
• DOI: 10.1007/s10549-020-05814-z

Purpose To assess the feasibility of completely excising small breast cancers using the automated, image-guided, single-pass radiofrequency-based breast lesion excision system (BLES) under ultrasound (US) guidance. Methods From February 2018 to July 2019, 22 patients diagnosed with invasive carcinomas ≤ 15 mm at US and mammography were enrolled in this prospective, multi-center, ethics board-approved study. Patients underwent breast MRI to verify lesion size. BLES-based excision and surgery were performed during the same procedure. Histopathology findings from the BLES procedure and surgery were compared, and total excision findings were assessed. Results Of the 22 patients, ten were excluded due to the lesion being > 15 mm and/or being multifocal at MRI, and one due to scheduling issues. The remaining 11 patients underwent BLES excision. Mean diameter of excised lesions at MRI was 11.8 mm (range 8.0–13.9 mm). BLES revealed ten (90.9%) invasive carcinomas of no special type, and one (9.1%) invasive lobular carcinoma. Histopathological results were identical for the needle biopsy, BLES, and surgical specimens for all lesions. None of the BLES excisions were adequate. Margins were usually compromised on both sides of the specimen, indicating that the excised volume was too small. Margin assessment was good for all BLES specimens. One technical complication occurred (retrieval of an empty BLES basket, specimen retrieved during subsequent surgery). Conclusions BLES allows accurate diagnosis of small invasive breast carcinomas. However, BLES cannot be considered as a therapeutic device for small invasive breast carcinomas due to not achieving adequate excision.