Magnetic Seed vs Guidewire Breast Cancer Localization With Magnetic Lymph Node Detection: A Randomized Clinical Trial

磁性种子定位与导丝定位联合磁性淋巴结检测:一项随机临床试验

阅读:1

Abstract

IMPORTANCE: Guidewires have been the standard for breast lesion localization but pose operative and logistic challenges. Paramagnetic seeds have shown promising results, but to the authors' knowledge, no randomized comparison has been performed. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether the combination of a paramagnetic seed and superparamagnetic iron oxide (SPIO) is equivalent to guidewire and SPIO for breast cancer localization and sentinel lymph node detection (SLND). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This was a phase 3, pragmatic, equivalence, 2-arm, open-label, randomized clinical trial conducted at 3 university and/or community hospitals in Sweden from May 2018 to May 2022. Included in the study were patients with early breast cancer planned for breast conservation and SLND. Study data were analyzed July to November 2022. INTERVENTIONS: Participants were randomly assigned 1:1 to a paramagnetic seed or a guidewire. All patients underwent SLND with SPIO. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Re-excision rate and resection ratio (defined as actual resection volume / optimal resection volume). RESULTS: A total of 426 women (median [IQR] age, 65 [56-71] years; median [IQR] tumor size, 11 [8-15] mm) were included in the study. The re-excision rate was 2.90% (95% CI, 1.60%-4.80%), and the median (IQR) resection ratio was 1.96 (1.15-3.44). No differences were found between the guidewire and the seed in re-excisions (6 of 211 [2.84%] vs 6 of 209 [2.87%]; difference, -0.03%; 95% CI, -3.20% to 3.20%; P = .99) or resection ratio (median, 1.93; IQR, 1.18-3.43 vs median, 2.01; IQR, 1.11-3.47; P = .70). Overall SLN detection was 98.6% (95% CI, 97.1%-99.4%) with no differences between arms (203 of 207 [98.1%] vs 204 of 206 [99.0%]; difference, -0.9%; 95% CI, -3.6% to 1.8%; P = .72). More failed localizations occurred with the guidewire (21 of 208 [10.1%] vs 4 of 215 [1.9%]; difference, 8.2%; 95% CI, 3.3%-13.2%; P < .001). Median (IQR) time to specimen excision was shorter for the seed (15 [10-22] minutes vs 18 [12-30] minutes; P = .01), as was the total operative time (69 [56-86] minutes vs 75.5 [59-101] minutes; P = .03). The experience of surgeons, radiologists, and surgical coordinators was better with the seed. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: The combination of SPIO and a paramagnetic seed performed comparably with SPIO and guidewire for breast cancer conserving surgery and resulted in more successful localizations, shorter operative times, and better experience. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN.org Identifier: ISRCTN11914537.

特别声明

1、本页面内容包含部分的内容是基于公开信息的合理引用;引用内容仅为补充信息,不代表本站立场。

2、若认为本页面引用内容涉及侵权,请及时与本站联系,我们将第一时间处理。

3、其他媒体/个人如需使用本页面原创内容,需注明“来源:[生知库]”并获得授权;使用引用内容的,需自行联系原作者获得许可。

4、投稿及合作请联系:info@biocloudy.com。