The SAVE review

Sonographic analysis versus excision for axillary staging in breast cancer

Ronda Henry-Tillman, Katherine Glover-Collins, Michael Preston, Kristalyn Gallagher, Evan Tummel, Yara V. Robertson, Daniela Ochoa, Soheila Korourian, Kent Westbrook, Vicki Klimberg

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

11 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background Health care reform goals involve more cost-effective methods of delivering health care. The cost-effectiveness of axillary ultrasound-guided core needle biopsy (AUS-CNB) was compared with sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) when evaluating the status of the axilla in operable invasive breast cancer. Study Design We performed an IRB-approved retrospective review of patients undergoing ultrasound of the axilla plus core needle biopsy at our institution from 2007 to 2012. An accuracy of technique and cost analysis (TreeAge Pro 2009) of AUS-CNB vs SLNB was conducted. Results The cohort of 95 patients was divided into 2 groups: clinically positive (CP) (32%) and negative (CN) (68%) axilla. In the CP group, 83% had a suspicious AUS, of which 90% were positive. In the CN group, AUS was suspicious in 70%, with a positive biopsy in 59%. The sensitivity and specificity of AUS-CNB were 90% (95% CI 84.8% to 98.8%) and 100% (95% CI 27% to 59.1%), respectively. Cost estimates comparing AUS-CNB with SLNB demonstrated a cost saving of $236,517 in the CP axilla and $248,490 in the CN axilla, for a total cost savings of $485,007. Conclusions Axillary ultrasound-guided core needle biopsy is a sensitive, diagnostic, surgeon-performed procedure. It is time-saving, cost-efficient, and less invasive, making it a viable option when evaluating the status of the axilla in invasive breast cancer or staging before neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)560-567
Number of pages8
JournalJournal of the American College of Surgeons
Volume220
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Apr 1 2015
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Large-Core Needle Biopsy
Axilla
Breast Neoplasms
Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy
Costs and Cost Analysis
Health Care Reform
Cost Savings
Neoplasm Staging
Research Ethics Committees
Cost-Benefit Analysis
Delivery of Health Care
Biopsy
Drug Therapy
Sensitivity and Specificity

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery
  • Medicine(all)

Cite this

The SAVE review : Sonographic analysis versus excision for axillary staging in breast cancer. / Henry-Tillman, Ronda; Glover-Collins, Katherine; Preston, Michael; Gallagher, Kristalyn; Tummel, Evan; Robertson, Yara V.; Ochoa, Daniela; Korourian, Soheila; Westbrook, Kent; Klimberg, Vicki.

In: Journal of the American College of Surgeons, Vol. 220, No. 4, 01.04.2015, p. 560-567.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Henry-Tillman, R, Glover-Collins, K, Preston, M, Gallagher, K, Tummel, E, Robertson, YV, Ochoa, D, Korourian, S, Westbrook, K & Klimberg, V 2015, 'The SAVE review: Sonographic analysis versus excision for axillary staging in breast cancer', Journal of the American College of Surgeons, vol. 220, no. 4, pp. 560-567. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2014.12.033
Henry-Tillman, Ronda ; Glover-Collins, Katherine ; Preston, Michael ; Gallagher, Kristalyn ; Tummel, Evan ; Robertson, Yara V. ; Ochoa, Daniela ; Korourian, Soheila ; Westbrook, Kent ; Klimberg, Vicki. / The SAVE review : Sonographic analysis versus excision for axillary staging in breast cancer. In: Journal of the American College of Surgeons. 2015 ; Vol. 220, No. 4. pp. 560-567.
@article{17c3375d2ab54869ad19a7c322c518a3,
title = "The SAVE review: Sonographic analysis versus excision for axillary staging in breast cancer",
abstract = "Background Health care reform goals involve more cost-effective methods of delivering health care. The cost-effectiveness of axillary ultrasound-guided core needle biopsy (AUS-CNB) was compared with sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) when evaluating the status of the axilla in operable invasive breast cancer. Study Design We performed an IRB-approved retrospective review of patients undergoing ultrasound of the axilla plus core needle biopsy at our institution from 2007 to 2012. An accuracy of technique and cost analysis (TreeAge Pro 2009) of AUS-CNB vs SLNB was conducted. Results The cohort of 95 patients was divided into 2 groups: clinically positive (CP) (32{\%}) and negative (CN) (68{\%}) axilla. In the CP group, 83{\%} had a suspicious AUS, of which 90{\%} were positive. In the CN group, AUS was suspicious in 70{\%}, with a positive biopsy in 59{\%}. The sensitivity and specificity of AUS-CNB were 90{\%} (95{\%} CI 84.8{\%} to 98.8{\%}) and 100{\%} (95{\%} CI 27{\%} to 59.1{\%}), respectively. Cost estimates comparing AUS-CNB with SLNB demonstrated a cost saving of $236,517 in the CP axilla and $248,490 in the CN axilla, for a total cost savings of $485,007. Conclusions Axillary ultrasound-guided core needle biopsy is a sensitive, diagnostic, surgeon-performed procedure. It is time-saving, cost-efficient, and less invasive, making it a viable option when evaluating the status of the axilla in invasive breast cancer or staging before neoadjuvant chemotherapy.",
author = "Ronda Henry-Tillman and Katherine Glover-Collins and Michael Preston and Kristalyn Gallagher and Evan Tummel and Robertson, {Yara V.} and Daniela Ochoa and Soheila Korourian and Kent Westbrook and Vicki Klimberg",
year = "2015",
month = "4",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2014.12.033",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "220",
pages = "560--567",
journal = "Journal of the American College of Surgeons",
issn = "1072-7515",
publisher = "Elsevier Inc.",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - The SAVE review

T2 - Sonographic analysis versus excision for axillary staging in breast cancer

AU - Henry-Tillman, Ronda

AU - Glover-Collins, Katherine

AU - Preston, Michael

AU - Gallagher, Kristalyn

AU - Tummel, Evan

AU - Robertson, Yara V.

AU - Ochoa, Daniela

AU - Korourian, Soheila

AU - Westbrook, Kent

AU - Klimberg, Vicki

PY - 2015/4/1

Y1 - 2015/4/1

N2 - Background Health care reform goals involve more cost-effective methods of delivering health care. The cost-effectiveness of axillary ultrasound-guided core needle biopsy (AUS-CNB) was compared with sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) when evaluating the status of the axilla in operable invasive breast cancer. Study Design We performed an IRB-approved retrospective review of patients undergoing ultrasound of the axilla plus core needle biopsy at our institution from 2007 to 2012. An accuracy of technique and cost analysis (TreeAge Pro 2009) of AUS-CNB vs SLNB was conducted. Results The cohort of 95 patients was divided into 2 groups: clinically positive (CP) (32%) and negative (CN) (68%) axilla. In the CP group, 83% had a suspicious AUS, of which 90% were positive. In the CN group, AUS was suspicious in 70%, with a positive biopsy in 59%. The sensitivity and specificity of AUS-CNB were 90% (95% CI 84.8% to 98.8%) and 100% (95% CI 27% to 59.1%), respectively. Cost estimates comparing AUS-CNB with SLNB demonstrated a cost saving of $236,517 in the CP axilla and $248,490 in the CN axilla, for a total cost savings of $485,007. Conclusions Axillary ultrasound-guided core needle biopsy is a sensitive, diagnostic, surgeon-performed procedure. It is time-saving, cost-efficient, and less invasive, making it a viable option when evaluating the status of the axilla in invasive breast cancer or staging before neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

AB - Background Health care reform goals involve more cost-effective methods of delivering health care. The cost-effectiveness of axillary ultrasound-guided core needle biopsy (AUS-CNB) was compared with sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) when evaluating the status of the axilla in operable invasive breast cancer. Study Design We performed an IRB-approved retrospective review of patients undergoing ultrasound of the axilla plus core needle biopsy at our institution from 2007 to 2012. An accuracy of technique and cost analysis (TreeAge Pro 2009) of AUS-CNB vs SLNB was conducted. Results The cohort of 95 patients was divided into 2 groups: clinically positive (CP) (32%) and negative (CN) (68%) axilla. In the CP group, 83% had a suspicious AUS, of which 90% were positive. In the CN group, AUS was suspicious in 70%, with a positive biopsy in 59%. The sensitivity and specificity of AUS-CNB were 90% (95% CI 84.8% to 98.8%) and 100% (95% CI 27% to 59.1%), respectively. Cost estimates comparing AUS-CNB with SLNB demonstrated a cost saving of $236,517 in the CP axilla and $248,490 in the CN axilla, for a total cost savings of $485,007. Conclusions Axillary ultrasound-guided core needle biopsy is a sensitive, diagnostic, surgeon-performed procedure. It is time-saving, cost-efficient, and less invasive, making it a viable option when evaluating the status of the axilla in invasive breast cancer or staging before neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84925679006&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84925679006&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2014.12.033

DO - 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2014.12.033

M3 - Article

VL - 220

SP - 560

EP - 567

JO - Journal of the American College of Surgeons

JF - Journal of the American College of Surgeons

SN - 1072-7515

IS - 4

ER -