A prospective comparative study to evaluate the displacement of four commercially available breast biopsy markers
A prospective comparative study to evaluate the displacement of four commercially available breast biopsy markers
复制标题
DOI：
10.1259/bjr.20160149
复制
发表时间：
2016-01-01
影响因子：
2.6
通讯作者：
Shah, Biren A.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Pinkney, David M.;Mychajlowycz, Mirek;Shah, Biren A.
目的：不透射线标记物通常在乳腺活检后部署，以指示靶病变的位置。一个经常遇到的并发症是这些标记的位移。本研究比较了四个新一代标记物之间的位移程度立体定向空芯针pilots.Methods：80个连续活检进行了三个乳房中心网站。这些标记包括：HydroMARK（R）（Mammotome，辛辛那提，OH）、MammoMARK（TM）（Mammotome，辛辛那提，OH）、MammoStar（TM）（Mammotome，辛辛那提，OH）和SecurMark（R）（Hologic，贝德福德，MA）。每个标记物由不透射线芯和独特的聚合物外壳组件组成。结果：MammoMARK（TM）表现出最大的平均净位移，其次是HydroMARK（R）、SecurMark（R）和MammoStar（TM）（分别为13.9、7.7、5.8和4.7mm），尽管这些差异没有达到统计学显著性（p=0.398）。73%的标记物根本没有移位。然而，在发生位移的22个标记中，有19个标记与活检腔的距离> 10 mm。没有统计学显著的影响因素预测位移被发现。结论：新一代的活检标记物执行与另一个。然而，临床显著和不可预测的标记移位仍然存在。与老一代裸金属标记物的多项类似研究相比，新一代标记物的总体位移率似乎更低，这可能是由于使用了在活检腔内自膨胀的聚合物包埋剂。本文比较了乳腺活检标记物的术后移位，由于带有聚合物包埋剂的标记物得到了广泛使用，因此尚未对其进行详细评估或讨论。
Objective: Radiopaque markers are commonly deployed following breast biopsies to indicate the location of the targeted lesion. A frequently encountered complication is the displacement of these markers. This study compared the degree of displacement among four newer generation markers after stereotactic core needle biopsy.Methods: 80 consecutive biopsies were performed at three breast centre sites. The markers included: HydroMARK (R) (Mammotome, Cincinnati, OH), MammoMARK (TM) (Mammotome, Cincinnati, OH), MammoStar (TM) (Mammotome, Cincinnati, OH) and SecurMark (R) (Hologic, Bedford, MA). Each marker was composed of a radiopaque core with a unique polymeric encasing component. Post-procedure mammograms were obtained and the degree of marker displacement was measured.Results: MammoMARK (TM) exhibited the greatest mean net displacement, followed by HydroMARK (R), SecurMark (R) and MammoStar (TM) (13.9, 7.7, 5.8 and 4.7mm, respectively), although these differences did not reach statistical significance (p=0.398). 73% of the markers did not displace at all. However, in the 19 of 22 markers in which displacement occurred, the distance from the biopsy cavity was >10mm. No statistically significant contributing factors to predict displacement were found.Conclusion: Newer generation biopsy markers perform comparably with one another. However, clinically significant and unpredictable marker displacement persists. Compared with multiple similar studies of older generation bare metallic markers, the overall displacement rate of newer generation markers seems to be lower, possibly owing to the use of polymeric embedding agents that self-expand within the biopsy cavity.Advances in knowledge: This article compares the post-procedure displacement of breast biopsy markers, which have not been evaluated or discussed in detail since markers with polymeric embedding agents gained widespread use.