» Articles » PMID: 17346402

A Review of Current Practices in Breast Conservation Surgery in the UK

Overview
Specialty General Surgery
Date 2007 Mar 10
PMID 17346402
Citations 8
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Introduction: The aim of this study was to assess whether surgeons in the UK were practising wide excision consistent with current guidelines and current evidence.

Patients And Methods: Questionnaires were sent to 200 breast surgeons throughout the UK to determine current practices in breast conserving surgery.

Results: When performing a wide excision for invasive cancer, 61% of respondents always remove full thickness of breast tissue and 37% usually do. Of surgeons, 60% rarely use specimen X-ray for palpable lesions. However, 91% always take specimen X-rays in impalpable lesions, but 9% do not always take specimen X-rays for impalpable lesions. In 93% of units, the pathologist always reports the distance to the nearest margin. For both invasive and in situ cancer, there is a wide variation in what is considered an adequate radial margin. There is wide variation in the practice of re-excision. Of surgeons, 50% indicated that they wish wider margins in the presence of an extensive in situ component and 39% wish wider margins in younger women.

Conclusions: The results show a large variation in practice with many surgeons not treating patients in accordance with current guidelines and evidence.

Citing Articles

Secondary Resections and Survival After Breast-Conserving Surgery in Breast Cancer Patients: A Cancer Registry-Based Cohort Study.

Ovchinnikov M, Kluttig A, Burger E, Thies S, Lacruz M, Schmidt-Pokrzywniak A Cancers (Basel). 2025; 17(3).

PMID: 39941738 PMC: 11815734. DOI: 10.3390/cancers17030369.


The approach to an isolated close anterior margin in breast conserving surgery.

OConnell L, Walsh S, Evoy D, ODoherty A, Quinn C, Rothwell J Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 2019; 101(4):268-272.

PMID: 30855173 PMC: 6432959. DOI: 10.1308/rcsann.2019.0017.


Practical consensus recommendations for tumor margins and breast conservative surgery.

Sarin R, Somsekhar S, Kumar R, Pawan G, Sumeet J, Pramoj J South Asian J Cancer. 2018; 7(2):72-78.

PMID: 29721467 PMC: 5909299. DOI: 10.4103/sajc.sajc_105_18.


Breast Cancer in Nepal: Current status and future directions.

Giri M, Giri M, Thapa R, Upreti B, Pariyar B Biomed Rep. 2018; 8(4):325-329.

PMID: 29541453 PMC: 5838313. DOI: 10.3892/br.2018.1057.


Breast Cancers Activate Stromal Fibroblast-Induced Suppression of Progenitors in Adjacent Normal Tissue.

Chatterjee S, Basak P, Buchel E, Safneck J, Murphy L, Mowat M Stem Cell Reports. 2017; 10(1):196-211.

PMID: 29233553 PMC: 5768884. DOI: 10.1016/j.stemcr.2017.11.002.


References
1.
Smitt M, Nowels K, Zdeblick M, Jeffrey S, Carlson R, STOCKDALE F . The importance of the lumpectomy surgical margin status in long-term results of breast conservation. Cancer. 1995; 76(2):259-67. DOI: 10.1002/1097-0142(19950715)76:2<259::aid-cncr2820760216>3.0.co;2-2. View

2.
Haffty B, Fischer D, Rose M, Beinfield M, MCKHANN C . Prognostic factors for local recurrence in the conservatively treated breast cancer patient: a cautious interpretation of the data. J Clin Oncol. 1991; 9(6):997-1003. DOI: 10.1200/JCO.1991.9.6.997. View

3.
Sacchini V, Luini A, Tana S, Lozza L, Galimberti V, Merson M . Quantitative and qualitative cosmetic evaluation after conservative treatment for breast cancer. Eur J Cancer. 1991; 27(11):1395-400. DOI: 10.1016/0277-5379(91)90019-a. View

4.
Fisher B, Costantino J, Redmond C, Fisher E, MARGOLESE R, Dimitrov N . Lumpectomy compared with lumpectomy and radiation therapy for the treatment of intraductal breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 1993; 328(22):1581-6. DOI: 10.1056/NEJM199306033282201. View

5.
Chan K, Knox W, Sinha G, Gandhi A, Barr L, Baildam A . Extent of excision margin width required in breast conserving surgery for ductal carcinoma in situ. Cancer. 2001; 91(1):9-16. DOI: 10.1002/1097-0142(20010101)91:1<9::aid-cncr2>3.0.co;2-e. View