Usefulness of intraoperative touch smear cytology in breast-conserving surgery

Simiyoshi,Kazuhiro; Nohara,Takehiro; Iwamoto,Mitsuhiko; Tanaka,Satoru; Kimura,Kosei; Takahashi,Yuko; Kurisu,Yoshitaka; Tsuji,Motomu; Tanigawa,Nobuhiko

doi:10.3892/etm_00000100

Usefulness of intraoperative touch smear cytology in breast-conserving surgery

Authors:
- Kazuhiro Simiyoshi
- Takehiro Nohara
- Mitsuhiko Iwamoto
- Satoru Tanaka
- Kosei Kimura
- Yuko Takahashi
- Yoshitaka Kurisu
- Motomu Tsuji
- Nobuhiko Tanigawa
View Affiliations

Affiliations: Department of General and Breast and Endocrine Surgery, Osaka Medical College, Osaka 569-8686, Japan
Published online on: July 1, 2010 https://doi.org/10.3892/etm_00000100
Pages: 641-645

Metrics: Total Views: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )

Metrics: Total PDF Downloads: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )

Cited By (CrossRef): 0 citations Loading Articles...

Abstract

In breast-conserving surgery, positive margins are closely related to intramammary recurrence, but methods of assessing resection stumps during breast-conserving surgery have not been standardized. The present study investigated the usefulness of intraoperative touch smear cytology in our department. From 2005 to 2008, a total of 420 patients underwent breast cancer surgery. Subjects comprised 160 patients who underwent breast-conserving surgery and touch smear cytology. Results of the touch smear cytology were compared to those of the histological tissue analysis. Touch smear cytology displayed 70% sensitivity (14/20), 97.1% specificity (136/140) and a diagnostic accuracy of 93.8% (150/160). Six false-negative cases and 4 false-positive cases were identified. Of the 6 false-negatives, cancer cells were noted in the ductal component in 5 cases, and the degree of cancer cell atypia in the stump was low. Residual cancer cells were noted in the stump in 18 cases, and additional resection was performed in 16 cases. Cancer cells were identified histologically in the additionally resected tissue in 8 of these 16 cases (50%). The direction of positive cytology was towards the nipple in 16 cases, lateral tissue in 5 cases and contralateral nipple in 2 cases. A greater cancer cell volume, as assessed by touch smear cytology, tended to be associated with higher frequency of positive margins, as assessed by histological tissue analysis. Touch smear cytology is easy to perform, offering a very useful technique yielding comparable results to histological tissue analysis.

View Figures

View References

1.	Fisher B, Redmond C, Poisson R, et al: Eight-year results of a randomized clinical trials comparing total mastectomy and lumpectomy with and without radiation on the treatment of breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 320:822–828. 1989.
2.	Polednak AP: Trends in breast-conserving surgery in Connecticut: no effect of negative publicity. Conn Med. 60:527–530. 1996.PubMed/NCBI
3.	Kotwall CA, Covington DL, Rutledge R, et al: Patient, hospital, and surgeon factors associated with breast conservation surgery: a statewide analysis in North Carolina. Ann Surg. 224:419–429. 1996. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
4.	Voogd AC, Nab HW, Crommelin MA, et al: Comparison of breast-conserving therapy with mastectomy for the treatment of early breast cancer in community hospitals. Eur J Surg Oncol. 22:13–16. 1996. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
5.	Park CC, Mitsumori M, Nixon A, et al: Outcome at 8 years after breast-conserving surgery and radiation therapy for invasive breast cancer: influence of margin status and systemic therapy on local recurrence. J Clin Oncol. 18:1668–1675. 2000.PubMed/NCBI
6.	Anscher MS, Jones P, Prosnitz LR, et al: Local failure and margin status in early-stage carcinoma treated with conservation surgery and radiation therapy. Ann Surg. 218:22–28. 1993. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
7.	Kurtz JM, Jacquemier J, Amalric R, et al: Why are local recurrences after breast-conserving therapy more frequent in younger patients? J Clin Oncol. 8:591–598. 1990.PubMed/NCBI
8.	Nixon AJ, Schnitt SJ, Gelman R, et al: Relationship of tumor grade to other pathologic features and to treatment outcome of patients with early stage breast carcinoma treated with breast-conserving therapy. Cancer. 78:1426–1431. 1996. View Article : Google Scholar
9.	Sumiyoshi K, Kani H, Nohara T, et al: A comparison study between multidetector-row CT and histopathological findings in terms of the extension diagnosis of breast cancer. J Jpn Surg Assoc. 67:1463–1472. 2006. View Article : Google Scholar
10.	Cox CE, Ku NN, Reintgen DS, Greenberg HM, Nicosia SV and Wangensteen S: Touch preparation cytology of breast lumpectomy margins with histologic correlation. Arch Surg. 126:490–493. 1991. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
11.	Morita T, Shin E, Takatsuka Y, et al: Significance of intraoperative pathologic consultation in breast-conserving surgery. Jap J Breast Cancer. 12:673–678. 1997.
12.	Miyauchi M, Yamamoto N, Fujita Y, et al: Clinical significance of rapid imprint cytology to ensure the cancer free margin in breast conservative surgery. Jpn J Breast Cancer. 9:1293–1297. 1994.
13.	Kato T, Takahashi H, Ando T, et al: Intraoperative rapid imprint cytologic examination of surgical margin in breast cancer conserving surgery. J Jpn Soc Clin Cytol. 36:119–123. 1997. View Article : Google Scholar
14.	Tohnosu N, Nabeya Y, Matsuda M, et al: Rapid intraoperative scrape cytology assessment of surgical margins in breast conservation surgery. Breast Cancer. 5:165–169. 1998. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
15.	Creager AJ, Shaw JA, Young PR and Geisinger KR: Intraoperative evaluation of lumpectomy margins by imprint cytology with histologic correlation: a community hospital experience. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 126:846–848. 2002.
16.	Nagumo S, Motomura K, Kasugai T, Inaji H and Koyama H: Intraoperative cytological examination: diagnosis of surgical margins and sentinel nodes in breast cancer. Jpn J Breast Cancer. 18:16–23. 2003.
17.	Takahashi K, Akiyama F, Yamashita T and Sakamoto G: Role of radiation therapy in breast conserving therapy in relation to the surgical margin status. Jpn J Breast Cancer. 21:435–441. 2006.