Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2024 Jan 31;14(2):204.
doi: 10.3390/life14020204.

SENOSI Confocal Microscopy: A New and Innovating Way to Detect Positive Margins in Non-Palpable Breast Cancer?

Affiliations

SENOSI Confocal Microscopy: A New and Innovating Way to Detect Positive Margins in Non-Palpable Breast Cancer?

Deborah Wernly et al. Life (Basel). .

Abstract

In Switzerland, breast cancer is the leading cancer among women, with breast-conserving surgery (BCS) being the preferred treatment for small tumors. The margin status post-surgery is a critical predictor of local recurrence. Achieving negative margins remains a challenge, leading to re-excision in 20-30% of cases. Traditional methods like intraoperative examination palpation and radiography have limitations in assessing excised margins. This study introduces the Histolog® Scanner, a confocal microscopy tool, as a potential solution. It provides real-time images of tissue architecture, allowing for rapid and accurate assessment of excised margins. Our research compared the Histolog® Scanner with standard per-operative radiography in patients with non palpable breast cancer. Preliminary results indicate that the Histolog® Scanner offers a reliable and time-efficient method for margin assessment, suggesting its potential for clinical integration.

Keywords: breast cancer; confocal microscopy; margins; surgery.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Histolog Scanner confocal imaging device (top) and full surgical specimen (unsliced) placed on the device for imaging (bottom).
Figure 2
Figure 2
Diagram presenting the observational workflow implemented for the study.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Distribution of breast cancer types identified by the final pathology assessment in study participants.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Detection performance and associated confidence intervals for individual techniques of the study.
Figure 5
Figure 5
High-magnification Histolog images of a normal lumpectomy margin presenting healthy tissue with vessels (V) and fatty tissue (F). Scale bar is 100 µm.
Figure 6
Figure 6
Study case with a DCIS-positive margin. (A) Radiography of the surgical specimen. Several microcalcifications can be seen in the center and in the upper-left quadrant. Some of them (*) are close to the surface of the margin (purple dashed line). The graphical insert shows the area within the white frame at higher magnification. (B) Low-magnification HS image of the surface of the cancer-positive margin corresponding to the specimen area with the purple dash line in the radiography figure. Areas delimited with red annotations are DCIS lesions. Graphical insert shows a DCIS lesion (#) at higher magnification, corresponding to the area within the back frame.
Figure 7
Figure 7
Bar plot displaying the number of intraoperative recuts recommended by individual techniques (radiography, HS surgeon, HS pathologist, and the standard-of-care (SoC)).
Figure 8
Figure 8
Mean time of utilization of the Histolog Scanner vs. radiography. The brackets, the cross (×), and the bar (-) represent the standard deviation, mean, and the medial of the collected values, respectively.

References

    1. World Health Organization: Regional Office for Europe . World Cancer Report: Cancer Research for Cancer Development. IARC; Lyon, France: 2020.
    1. Ligue Suisse Contre le Cancer Le Cancer en Suisse: Les Chiffres Période Déterminante: 2015–2019 (Moyenne Annuelle) 2022. [(accessed on 27 November 2023)]. Available online: https://www.bfs.admin.ch/bfs/fr/home/actualites/quoi-de-neuf.assetdetail....
    1. Agarwal S., Pappas L., Neumayer L., Kokeny K., Agarwal J. Effect of Breast Conservation Therapy vs. Mastectomy on Disease-Specific Survival for Early-Stage Breast Cancer. JAMA Surg. 2014;149:267. doi: 10.1001/jamasurg.2013.3049. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Yoon G.Y., Cha J.H., Kim H.H., Shin H.J., Chae E.Y., Choi W.J. Recurrent and Second Breast Cancer Detected on Follow-Up Mammography and Breast Ultrasound after Breast-Conserving Surgery: Imaging Findings and Clinicopathologic Factors. J. Korean Soc. Radiol. 2016;74:15. doi: 10.3348/jksr.2016.74.1.15. - DOI
    1. Atkins J., Mushawah F.A., Appleton C.M., Cyr A.E., Gillanders W.E., Aft R.L., Eberlein T.J., Gao F., Margenthaler J.A. Positive margin rates following breast-conserving surgery for stage I–III breast cancer: Palpable versus nonpalpable tumors. J. Surg. Res. 2012;177:109–115. doi: 10.1016/j.jss.2012.03.045. - DOI - PMC - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources