Radioactive Seed Localization Versus Wire Localization for Lumpectomies: A Comparison of Outcomes

Standard wire localization (WL) and excision of nonpalpable breast lesions has several shortcomings. Ninety-seven women with nonpalpable breast lesions were prospectively randomized to radioactive seed localization (RSL) or WL. For RSL, a titanium seed containing 125I was placed at the site of the lesion by using radiographical guidance. The surgeon used a handheld gamma detector to locate and excise the seed and lesion. Both techniques resulted in 100% retrieval of the lesions. Fewer RSL patients required resection of additional margins than WL patients (26% vs. 57%, respectively, P = .02). There were no significant differences in mean times for operative excision (5.4 vs. 6.1 minutes) or radiographical localization (13.9 vs. 13.2 minutes). There were also no significant differences in the subjective ease of the procedures as rated by surgeons, radiologists, and patients. All WLs were carried out on the same day as the excision, whereas RSL was performed up to 5 days before the operative procedure. RSL is as effective as WL for the excision of nonpalpable breast lesions and reduces the incidence of pathologically involved margins of excision. RSL also reduces scheduling conflicts and may allow elimination of intraoperative specimen mammography. RSL is an attractive alternative to WL.

Studies suggest radioguided seed localization (RSL) yields fewer positive margins than wire-guided localization (WL). The goal of this study is to determine whether RSL is superior to WL.

This study aims to validate radioactive seed localization (RSL) as an alternative to wire localization (WL) in the operative excision of nonpalpable breast lesions. Eligible patients were recruited sequentially. A sample of 99 patients treated with WL was compared to the next 383 patients treated with RSL. Margins were considered "negative" if > or =2 mm from in-situ and invasive disease. Pain and convenience scores were recorded on a 10-point scale. Patient characteristics and histology were similar. The lesion and localization device were retrieved in all patients. Margins of the first specimen were negative in 73% of RSL patients, versus 54% of WL patients (p < 0.001). A second operation was required in 8% of RSL patients to achieve negative margins, versus 25% of WL patients (p < 0.001). Pain scores were not statistically different. However, the RSL group had higher convenience scores (p = 0.015). RSL is safe, effective, and compared to WL, reduces the rates of intraoperative re-excision and reoperation for positive margins by 68%. Patient satisfaction is improved with RSL. We strongly favor RSL over WL.