Comparison of 3 Different Systems for Non-wire Localization of Lesions in Breast Cancer Surgery

Kód výsledku v IS VaVaI

<a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F00209805%3A_____%2F23%3A00079318" target="_blank" >RIV/00209805:_____/23:00079318 - isvavai.cz</a>

Nalezeny alternativní kódy

RIV/00216224:14110/23:00133340 RIV/47813059:19510/23:A0000491

Výsledek na webu

<a href="https://www.clinicalkey.com/#!/content/playContent/1-s2.0-S1526820923001118?returnurl=https:%2F%2Flinkinghub.elsevier.com%2Fretrieve%2Fpii%2FS1526820923001118%3Fshowall%3Dtrue&referrer=https:%2F%2Fpubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2F" target="_blank" >https://www.clinicalkey.com/#!/content/playContent/1-s2.0-S1526820923001118?returnurl=https:%2F%2Flinkinghub.elsevier.com%2Fretrieve%2Fpii%2FS1526820923001118%3Fshowall%3Dtrue&referrer=https:%2F%2Fpubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2F</a>

DOI - Digital Object Identifier

<a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.clbc.2023.05.006" target="_blank" >10.1016/j.clbc.2023.05.006</a>

Jazyk výsledku

angličtina

Název v původním jazyce

Comparison of 3 Different Systems for Non-wire Localization of Lesions in Breast Cancer Surgery

Popis výsledku v původním jazyce

PURPOSE: Localizing breast lesions by marking tumors and their detection using probes during surgery is a common part of clinical practice. Various nonwire localization systems were intended to be compared from different perspectives. METHODS: Various measurement experiments were performed. Localization techniques, including radioactive seed (RSLS), magnetically guided (MGLS), or radar (SLS), were compared in signal propagation in water and tissue environments, signal interference by surgical instruments, and the practical experience of surgeons. Individual experiments were thoroughly prospectively planned. RESULTS: The RSLS signal was detectable at the largest evaluated distance, ie, 60 mm. The SLS and MGLS signal detection was shorter, up to 25 mm to 45 mm and 30 mm, respectively. The signal intensity and the maximum detection distance in water differed slightly depending on the localization marker orientation to the probe, especially for SLS and MGLS. Signal propagation in the tissue was noted to a depth of 60 mm for RSLS, 50 mm for SLS, and 20 mm for MGLS. Except for the expected signal interferences by approaching surgical instruments from any direction for MGLS, the signal interruption for RSLS and SLS was observed only by inserting instruments directly between the localization marker and probe. Moreover, the SLS signal interference by instrument touch was noted. Based on surgeons&apos; results, individual systems did not differ significantly for most measurement condition settings. CONCLUSION: Apparent differences noted among localization systems can help experts choose an appropriate system for a specific situation or reveal small nuances that have not yet been observed in clinical practice.

Název v anglickém jazyce

Comparison of 3 Different Systems for Non-wire Localization of Lesions in Breast Cancer Surgery

Popis výsledku anglicky

PURPOSE: Localizing breast lesions by marking tumors and their detection using probes during surgery is a common part of clinical practice. Various nonwire localization systems were intended to be compared from different perspectives. METHODS: Various measurement experiments were performed. Localization techniques, including radioactive seed (RSLS), magnetically guided (MGLS), or radar (SLS), were compared in signal propagation in water and tissue environments, signal interference by surgical instruments, and the practical experience of surgeons. Individual experiments were thoroughly prospectively planned. RESULTS: The RSLS signal was detectable at the largest evaluated distance, ie, 60 mm. The SLS and MGLS signal detection was shorter, up to 25 mm to 45 mm and 30 mm, respectively. The signal intensity and the maximum detection distance in water differed slightly depending on the localization marker orientation to the probe, especially for SLS and MGLS. Signal propagation in the tissue was noted to a depth of 60 mm for RSLS, 50 mm for SLS, and 20 mm for MGLS. Except for the expected signal interferences by approaching surgical instruments from any direction for MGLS, the signal interruption for RSLS and SLS was observed only by inserting instruments directly between the localization marker and probe. Moreover, the SLS signal interference by instrument touch was noted. Based on surgeons&apos; results, individual systems did not differ significantly for most measurement condition settings. CONCLUSION: Apparent differences noted among localization systems can help experts choose an appropriate system for a specific situation or reveal small nuances that have not yet been observed in clinical practice.

Druh

J_imp - Článek v periodiku v databázi Web of Science

CEP obor

—

OECD FORD obor

30204 - Oncology

Projekt

<a href="/cs/project/NV19-03-00354" target="_blank" >NV19-03-00354: Částečné ozáření prsu po konzervativní operaci časného karcinomu prsu pomocí extrakraniální stereotaktické zevní radioterapie.</a><br>

Návaznosti

P - Projekt vyzkumu a vyvoje financovany z verejnych zdroju (s odkazem do CEP)<br>I - Institucionalni podpora na dlouhodoby koncepcni rozvoj vyzkumne organizace

Rok uplatnění

2023

Kód důvěrnosti údajů

S - Úplné a pravdivé údaje o projektu nepodléhají ochraně podle zvláštních právních předpisů

Název periodika

Clinical breast cancer

ISSN

1526-8209

e-ISSN

1938-0666

Svazek periodika

23

Číslo periodika v rámci svazku

6

Stát vydavatele periodika

US - Spojené státy americké

Počet stran výsledku

8

Strana od-do

"e323"-"e330"

Kód UT WoS článku

001055066900001

EID výsledku v databázi Scopus

2-s2.0-85163373281