RESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: To conduct qualitative research into breast-conserving surgery for palpable and non-palpable breast tumours and the various methods of excising these, measured by the volume exised and surgical radicality. DESIGN: Retrospective, multicentre study. METHOD: The pathology reports from 726 patients who had undergone breast-conserving surgery for invasive breast cancer were reviewed for excision volume and radicality. Any excess resected breast tissue was expressed by a Calculated Resection Ratio (CRR) and calculated by dividing the volume of the surgical specimen by the tumour volume plus an ideal 1-cm-margin of tumour-free breast tissue. A CRR of 1.0 meant that the volume excised was ideal; a CRR of 2.0 meant that twice the necessary amount of tissue had been removed. RESULTS: Of all the 726 tumours, 72% appeared to be palpable. The median CRR in this group was 2.2 (range: 0.1 - 43.0) and the percentage of tumour-involved margins (irradicality) was 22.5%. Of all the non-palpable tumour (n = 201) excisions, 58% had been guided by wire-localisation, 26% by ultrasonography, and 16% by ROLL (Radio-guided Occult Lesion Localization). The CRRs were 2.8, 3.2 and 3.8, respectively (p < 0.05). Ultrasound-guided surgery resulted in the lowest rate of tumour-involved margins (ultrasound-guided: 3.8%, wire-guided localisation: 21.4%, ROLL: 25.0% (p = 0.05)). CONCLUSION: Breast-conserving surgery is associated with an average of a 2 to 4-fold removal of excessive tissue. Nevertheless, 1 out of 5 excisions are not radical. Ultrasound-guided surgery for non-palpable breast cancer is the most effective method for achieving radical excision. A multicentre, prospective, randomised trial has been started to assess whether ultrasound-guided lumpectomy for palpable breast cancer can lead to optimisation of the excision volume and radicality.