Lauren Zeitlinger, George M Chavez, Machelle D Wilson, Morgan Darrow, Robert J Canter, R Lor Randall, Steven W Thorpe
{"title":"Intraoperative Peripheral Frozen Margin Assessment in Soft Tissue Sarcoma.","authors":"Lauren Zeitlinger, George M Chavez, Machelle D Wilson, Morgan Darrow, Robert J Canter, R Lor Randall, Steven W Thorpe","doi":"10.1002/jso.27935","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background/objectives: </strong>Intraoperative peripheral margin sampling in soft tissue sarcoma (STS) is a routine practice among musculoskeletal oncologists. Practice patterns are variable, and evidence to support it is lacking. Rates of peripheral margin sampling at our institution were analyzed in addition to its clinical utility and cost-effectiveness.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Peripheral margin sampling patterns at a tertiary sarcoma center were retrospectively evaluated. Concordance between peripheral margins and final pathology was assessed using McNemar's test and κ Coefficient. Clinical outcomes were compared, and a cost-utility analysis was performed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 179 patients were included. 66% had peripheral margins sampled of which 23% had frozen margins analyzed. Ten patients had positive margins (5.5% of all patients; 8.4% in those with margins sampled) and R1 margins on the final tumor specimen were identified in 15 patients (8.4%). There were no R2 resections. Three patients underwent repeat surgical resection (20%). Three patients with R1 resections had negative peripheral margins sampled, suggesting falsely reassuring peripheral margins. Peripheral margin sampling averaged $5000/patient.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Routine peripheral margin sampling in STS resection is of questionable utility with added cost. Prospective studies are warranted to determine the optimal approach to surgical margin assessment.</p>","PeriodicalId":17111,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Surgical Oncology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Surgical Oncology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/jso.27935","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background/objectives: Intraoperative peripheral margin sampling in soft tissue sarcoma (STS) is a routine practice among musculoskeletal oncologists. Practice patterns are variable, and evidence to support it is lacking. Rates of peripheral margin sampling at our institution were analyzed in addition to its clinical utility and cost-effectiveness.
Methods: Peripheral margin sampling patterns at a tertiary sarcoma center were retrospectively evaluated. Concordance between peripheral margins and final pathology was assessed using McNemar's test and κ Coefficient. Clinical outcomes were compared, and a cost-utility analysis was performed.
Results: A total of 179 patients were included. 66% had peripheral margins sampled of which 23% had frozen margins analyzed. Ten patients had positive margins (5.5% of all patients; 8.4% in those with margins sampled) and R1 margins on the final tumor specimen were identified in 15 patients (8.4%). There were no R2 resections. Three patients underwent repeat surgical resection (20%). Three patients with R1 resections had negative peripheral margins sampled, suggesting falsely reassuring peripheral margins. Peripheral margin sampling averaged $5000/patient.
Conclusions: Routine peripheral margin sampling in STS resection is of questionable utility with added cost. Prospective studies are warranted to determine the optimal approach to surgical margin assessment.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Surgical Oncology offers peer-reviewed, original papers in the field of surgical oncology and broadly related surgical sciences, including reports on experimental and laboratory studies. As an international journal, the editors encourage participation from leading surgeons around the world. The JSO is the representative journal for the World Federation of Surgical Oncology Societies. Publishing 16 issues in 2 volumes each year, the journal accepts Research Articles, in-depth Reviews of timely interest, Letters to the Editor, and invited Editorials. Guest Editors from the JSO Editorial Board oversee multiple special Seminars issues each year. These Seminars include multifaceted Reviews on a particular topic or current issue in surgical oncology, which are invited from experts in the field.