Hanley Catherine, Kessaram Robert
Division of General Surgery, Department of Surgery, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ont.
Can J Surg. 2006 Jun;49(3):185-92.
We aimed to examine both the diagnostic modalities used to identify breast lesions and their surgical management in an Ontario community hospital.
We conducted a retrospective chart review of the preoperative diagnostic tools used by 6 general surgeons for palpable and nonpalpable breast lesions and considered the types of surgical procedures performed. Patients who underwent noncosmetic breast surgery in the year 2000 were included in the study (n = 180).
Of the 182 breast lesions, 89 (49%) were malignant. Of the 100 palpable lesions removed, fine needle aspiration biopsy (FNAB) was performed on 48. Positive FNABs in this study were highly predictive of malignancy (100%). Only 1 core needle biopsy was performed on a palpable lesion. Of the 78 mammograms obtained for nonpalpable lesions, the PPV (positive predictive value) of malignancy for "suggestive" lesions was 100%, 75% for "suspicious" lesions, 40% for "probably benign" lesions, 0% for "benign" lesions and 37% for lesions categorized as "needs additional imaging." Other preoperative diagnostic tools used were ultrasonography (n = 44) and stereotactic biopsies (n = 3). Of the initial operations performed, 76 were lumpectomies and 88 were needle-localized biopsies. Only 15 patients underwent initial definitive procedures, and of these 5 had positive margins and 8 had close (< or = 1-mm) margins. Positive margins were found in 35% of the needle-localized lumpectomies (61% had a close margin), in 60% of lumpectomies (75% had a close margin) and in 2 of the 5 lumpectomies with axillary node dissections done as first operations. Six frozen sections were obtained. Only 11% of surgical specimens were oriented for pathology. Reoperations were performed on 91% of women with malignancies (or 67% with a close margin).
Considerable variation existed between surgeons with regard to the types of preoperative diagnostic procedure used and operations performed. The rate of positive margins was high, which resulted in many reoperations.
我们旨在研究安大略省一家社区医院用于识别乳腺病变的诊断方法及其手术治疗情况。
我们对6名普通外科医生用于可触及和不可触及乳腺病变的术前诊断工具进行了回顾性病历审查,并考虑了所实施的手术类型。纳入了2000年接受非美容性乳腺手术的患者(n = 180)。
在182个乳腺病变中,89个(49%)为恶性。在切除的100个可触及病变中,48个进行了细针穿刺活检(FNAB)。本研究中FNAB阳性对恶性肿瘤具有高度预测性(100%)。仅对1个可触及病变进行了粗针活检。在为不可触及病变进行的78次乳房X光检查中,“可疑”病变的恶性肿瘤阳性预测值(PPV)为100%,“可疑”病变为75%,“可能良性”病变为40%,“良性”病变为0%,归类为“需要额外影像学检查”的病变为37%。使用的其他术前诊断工具包括超声检查(n = 44)和立体定向活检(n = 3)。在最初进行的手术中,76例为肿块切除术,88例为针定位活检。仅15例患者接受了初始确定性手术,其中5例切缘阳性,8例切缘接近(≤1毫米)。在针定位肿块切除术中,35%切缘阳性(61%切缘接近),在肿块切除术中60%切缘阳性(75%切缘接近),在最初进行腋窝淋巴结清扫术的5例肿块切除术中2例切缘阳性。获取了6份冰冻切片。仅11%的手术标本进行了病理定位。91%的恶性肿瘤女性患者(或67%切缘接近的患者)进行了再次手术。
外科医生在术前诊断程序类型和所实施手术方面存在很大差异。切缘阳性率很高,导致许多患者进行了再次手术。