FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W4220803054> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W4220803054 endingPage "10" @default.
• W4220803054 startingPage "P3" @default.
• W4220803054 abstract "Abstract Background: Ensuring negative margins at the time of breast conserving surgery for invasive breast cancer or ductal carcinoma in situ is necessary to minimize the chance of local recurrence and avoid re-excisions that cause patient concern and may delay adjuvant therapy. However, about 25% of women who have lumpectomy have a second surgery to remove residual disease, suggesting an ongoing need for improved methods of intraoperative margin assessment. This study aimed to perform a contemporary review of methods of intraoperative margin assessment during breast conservation surgery. Methods: A review of the scientific literature from 2009 to 2021 comprising 62 manuscripts of the current and proposed. intraoperative techniques for breast margin assessment during breast conservation surgery was conducted via PubMed and Google Scholar. The methods assessed were grouped into 10 categories based on the technology employed: bioimpedance/radiofrequency, high-resolution imaging, optical imaging, mass spectrometry, magnetic-resonance imaging, 2D/3D specimen CT, X-ray, multimodal optical microscopy, pharmacologic and pathological margin assessment. All technologies were reviewed for overall effectiveness in lowering re-excision rates derived from their respective advantages, limitations, sensitivity, and specificity. Results: Overall, 8 current and 7 technologies under development were assessed (Table 1). Frozen section and cytology yielded the highest diagnostic accuracy; however, these can be time-consuming, resource-intensive, and have limited sampling points. Conversely, 2D specimen CT provides rapid results but is limited by relatively low sensitivity. Future technologies such as optical coherence tomography showed promising results in demonstrating higher diagnostic accuracy for lumpectomy and margin shaves, but remain to be proven in clinical practice. Conclusion: Intraoperative margin assessments can lower final positive margins and subsequent re-excisions rates. A number of current and upcoming technologies that assess margin status range in their respective efficacies and limitations. There remains demand for improved margin assessment at the time of breast conserving surgery, but which technologies will become standard of care remains, at present, unclear. Table 1.Methods of intraoperative margin assessmentMethod:Brand:Sensitivity:Specificity:Source:Bioimpedence• ClearEdge™87.3%75.6%Dixon et al. 2016• MarginProbe75.2%70-87%Schanabel et al., 2014Cytology:• Imprint72%97%Esbona & Zhanhai 2012; Qui et al., 2018Frozen Section–83%95%Schmidt et al, 2020; Schwarz & Schmidt, 2020Mass Spectrometry• iKnife93.4-94.7%94.7-96.2%St. John et al., 2017• MasSpec Pen83-95%95-100%Garza et al., 2020Multimodal optical microscopy• fluorescence imaging combination withRCM/OCT subsystemTBDTBDScimone et al., 2021MRI• ClearSight™93%92%Moshe et al., 2016Optical Coherence Tomography (OCT)• OTIS™96%92%Mojahed et al., 2020; Schmidt et al. 2020Pharmacology• Bevacizumab98%79%Koch et al., 2017• Lumicell2-3D specimen CT• Mozart®93%78%Black et al., [poster]• Faxitron78.6-85.6%100%Emmadi & Wiley 2012; Bathla et al. 2011• MicroCT56%100%Qiu et al. 2018X-ray• XPCI83%83%Massimi et al. 2021 Citation Format: Huma Javaid, Ivan Marin, Jessica Montalvan, Logan Healy, Brian Menegaz, Cary Hsu, Eric Silberfein, Elizabeth Bonefas, Stacey A. Carter, Alastair M. Thompson. Current options and future perspectives for breast margin assessment in clinical practice [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2021 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2021 Dec 7-10; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2022;82(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P3-18-10." @default.
• W4220803054 created "2022-04-03" @default.
• W4220803054 creator A5002901755 @default.
• W4220803054 creator A5017040476 @default.
• W4220803054 creator A5021333841 @default.
• W4220803054 creator A5027846283 @default.
• W4220803054 creator A5036194021 @default.
• W4220803054 creator A5046734879 @default.
• W4220803054 creator A5048585585 @default.
• W4220803054 creator A5063975585 @default.
• W4220803054 creator A5065643633 @default.
• W4220803054 creator A5065883143 @default.
• W4220803054 date "2022-02-15" @default.
• W4220803054 modified "2023-10-04" @default.
• W4220803054 title "Abstract P3-18-10: Current options and future perspectives for breast margin assessment in clinical practice" @default.
• W4220803054 doi "https://doi.org/10.1158/1538-7445.sabcs21-p3-18-10" @default.
• W4220803054 hasPublicationYear "2022" @default.
• W4220803054 type Work @default.
• W4220803054 citedByCount "0" @default.
• W4220803054 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W4220803054 hasAuthorship W4220803054A5002901755 @default.
• W4220803054 hasAuthorship W4220803054A5017040476 @default.
• W4220803054 hasAuthorship W4220803054A5021333841 @default.
• W4220803054 hasAuthorship W4220803054A5027846283 @default.
• W4220803054 hasAuthorship W4220803054A5036194021 @default.
• W4220803054 hasAuthorship W4220803054A5046734879 @default.
• W4220803054 hasAuthorship W4220803054A5048585585 @default.
• W4220803054 hasAuthorship W4220803054A5063975585 @default.
• W4220803054 hasAuthorship W4220803054A5065643633 @default.
• W4220803054 hasAuthorship W4220803054A5065883143 @default.
• W4220803054 hasConcept C119857082 @default.
• W4220803054 hasConcept C121608353 @default.
• W4220803054 hasConcept C126322002 @default.
• W4220803054 hasConcept C126838900 @default.
• W4220803054 hasConcept C141071460 @default.
• W4220803054 hasConcept C143409427 @default.
• W4220803054 hasConcept C19527891 @default.
• W4220803054 hasConcept C2777704003 @default.
• W4220803054 hasConcept C2777757722 @default.
• W4220803054 hasConcept C2779572924 @default.
• W4220803054 hasConcept C2780862961 @default.
• W4220803054 hasConcept C2781467025 @default.
• W4220803054 hasConcept C41008148 @default.
• W4220803054 hasConcept C530470458 @default.
• W4220803054 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W4220803054 hasConcept C774472 @default.
• W4220803054 hasConceptScore W4220803054C119857082 @default.
• W4220803054 hasConceptScore W4220803054C121608353 @default.
• W4220803054 hasConceptScore W4220803054C126322002 @default.
• W4220803054 hasConceptScore W4220803054C126838900 @default.
• W4220803054 hasConceptScore W4220803054C141071460 @default.
• W4220803054 hasConceptScore W4220803054C143409427 @default.
• W4220803054 hasConceptScore W4220803054C19527891 @default.
• W4220803054 hasConceptScore W4220803054C2777704003 @default.
• W4220803054 hasConceptScore W4220803054C2777757722 @default.
• W4220803054 hasConceptScore W4220803054C2779572924 @default.
• W4220803054 hasConceptScore W4220803054C2780862961 @default.
• W4220803054 hasConceptScore W4220803054C2781467025 @default.
• W4220803054 hasConceptScore W4220803054C41008148 @default.
• W4220803054 hasConceptScore W4220803054C530470458 @default.
• W4220803054 hasConceptScore W4220803054C71924100 @default.
• W4220803054 hasConceptScore W4220803054C774472 @default.
• W4220803054 hasIssue "4_Supplement" @default.
• W4220803054 hasLocation W42208030541 @default.
• W4220803054 hasOpenAccess W4220803054 @default.
• W4220803054 hasPrimaryLocation W42208030541 @default.
• W4220803054 hasRelatedWork W2009413874 @default.
• W4220803054 hasRelatedWork W2028123175 @default.
• W4220803054 hasRelatedWork W2042994332 @default.
• W4220803054 hasRelatedWork W2074391593 @default.
• W4220803054 hasRelatedWork W2078344316 @default.
• W4220803054 hasRelatedWork W2153021874 @default.
• W4220803054 hasRelatedWork W2810744765 @default.
• W4220803054 hasRelatedWork W2912705243 @default.
• W4220803054 hasRelatedWork W3179589969 @default.
• W4220803054 hasRelatedWork W4242438590 @default.
• W4220803054 hasVolume "82" @default.
• W4220803054 isParatext "false" @default.
• W4220803054 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W4220803054 workType "article" @default.