吲哚菁绿荧光引导保乳术与超声引导切除术治疗不可触及乳腺癌的比较。

Indocyanine Green Fluorescence-Guided Lumpectomy of Nonpalpable Breast Cancer Versus Ultrasound-Guided Excision.

机构信息

The Breast Center, Department of Surgery, Dalian Central Hospital, 74545Dalian Medical University, Dalian, China.

出版信息

Surg Innov. 2022 Oct;29(5):573-578. doi: 10.1177/15533506211039962. Epub 2022 Feb 26.

DOI:10.1177/15533506211039962

PMID:35225072

Abstract

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the use of indocyanine green-guided nonpalpable breast cancer lesion localization (INBCL) and to compare it with ultrasound localization (US).

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed 78 consecutive patients undergoing breast-conserving surgery for nonpalpable breast cancer (NBC). Of all 78 excisions, 42 cases were guided by INBCL and 36 by US.

RESULTS

The rate of clear margins was 90.5% (38/42) in the INBCL group compared to the 83.3% (30/36) in the US ( = .548). A comparison of the margins at first excision for both INBCL and US, in the INBCL series, 92.9% (39/42) of cases had a margin less than 5 mm, whereas for US series, it was 72.2% (26/36) ( = .033). When results of the excised tissue are taken into account, the mean specimen volume for INBCL was 58 cm, but for US it was 73 cm, with difference in mean volume being 15 cm ( = .062).

CONCLUSIONS

INBCL for NBCs was more accurate than US because a smaller volume of the tissue may be excised by using the technique, without compromising margin status in nonpalpable lesions.

摘要

目的

本研究旨在评估吲哚菁绿引导的不可触及乳腺癌病灶定位（INBCL）的应用，并与超声定位（US）进行比较。

方法

我们回顾性分析了 78 例因不可触及乳腺癌（NBC）而行保乳手术的连续患者。在所有 78 例切除术中，42 例采用 INBCL 引导，36 例采用 US 引导。

结果

在 INBCL 组，切缘清晰率为 90.5%（38/42），而在 US 组为 83.3%（30/36）（=.548）。对 INBCL 和 US 两组首次切除的切缘进行比较，在 INBCL 系列中，92.9%（39/42）的病例切缘小于 5mm，而在 US 系列中为 72.2%（26/36）（=.033）。当考虑到切除组织的结果时，INBCL 的标本平均体积为 58cm，而 US 的标本平均体积为 73cm，体积差异为 15cm（=.062）。