30 Scopus citations


Background: We sought to determine the re-excision rate following lumpectomy for palpable breast cancers using intraoperative ultrasound (US). A secondary aim was to investigate the impact on surgical decision-making. Methods: We identified 73 women who underwent US-guided lumpectomy for palpable breast cancer between 2006 and 2010. A cohort of 124 women who underwent palpation-guided lumpectomy was used for a comparison group. Data included patient demographics, tumor characteristics, intraoperative findings, and pathologic outcomes. Descriptive statistics were used for data summary and compared by chi-square or t test, as appropriate. Results: A total of 73 women underwent US-guided lumpectomy, and 124 women underwent palpation-guided lumpectomy (median age 55 years). Patients undergoing palpation-guided lumpectomy had smaller tumors that were more likely to be HER2/neu amplified compared with patients undergoing US-guided lumpectomy (P <0.05 for each). There were no differences between the 2 groups with respect to patient age, tumor grade, and estrogen/progesterone receptor status (P>0.05 for each). Re-excision rates were similar in both groups [17 (23%) in the US group versus 31 (25%) in the palpation group; P>0.05]. In the US group, 45 patients (62%) had additional shave margins taken based on US interrogation of the specimen, and 12 patients (16%) were spared a 2nd procedure based on the use of intraoperative US. Conclusions: Although palpable breast cancers can be excised based on direct palpation or needle localization, we believe that US guidance provides an excellent tool to aid the breast surgeon. Only 10% of patients had a positive margin on final pathology as a result, and the overall re-excision rate was acceptable.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)3198-3203
Number of pages6
JournalAnnals of Surgical Oncology
Issue number11
StatePublished - Oct 2011


Dive into the research topics of 'Ultrasound-guided lumpectomy for palpable breast cancers'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this