Assessing Resection Margin Status in Breast-conserving Surgery Specimens: Comparison Αmong Gross Evaluation, Frozen Section Analysis, and Permanent Section Diagnosis in 725 Patients With Breast Cancer

Background/Aim: An accurate evaluation of resection margin (RM) is critical in breast-conserving surgery (BCS) as negative RM status is critical for successful local control. We compared gross and microscopic methods for RM evaluation and analyzed their concordances. Patients and Methods: Gross evaluation (GE), frozen section analysis (FSA), and permanent section diagnosis (PSD) were compared for specimens from 725 breast cancer patients. Results: The RM was grossly involved in 74 cases (10.2%). The sensitivity and specificity of GE were 22.9% and 96.1%, respectively. FSA revealed positive RM in 290 cases (40.0%), with high sensitivity (86.7%) and specificity (83.1%). With PSD, 240 cases (33.1%) showed RM involvement. Discordant results between gross and microscopic methods were observed in 104 cases (14.3%). Conclusion: Our

Automated summary

An accurate evaluation of resection margin (RM) is critical in breast-conserving surgery (BCS) for successful local control. We compared gross and microscopic methods for RM evaluation and analyzed their concordances. Results showed higher sensitivity and specificity in microscopic methods, but there were discordant results with gross methods.