Breast-conserving surgery (BCS) followed by radiotherapy is preferred for early-stage breast cancer because its survival rate is equivalent to that of mastectomy. Achieving negative surgical margins in BCS is crucial to minimize the risk of recurrence. Intraoperative ultrasound (IOUS) enhances surgical accuracy, but its efficacy is operator dependent. This study aimed to compare the success of achieving negative margins using IOUS between an experienced breast surgeon and general surgical residents and to evaluate the learning curve for the residents. A prospective study involving 96 patients with BCS who underwent IOUS guidance was conducted. Both the breast surgeon and residents assessed the surgical margins using IOUS, with the breast surgeon making the final margin adequacy decision. Permanent histopathological analysis was used to confirm the status of the margins and was considered the gold standard for comparison. The breast surgeon accurately assessed the margin status in all 96 cases (100% accuracy), with 93 negative and three positive margins. All of these were ductal carcinomas in situ. Initially, the residents demonstrated low accuracy rates in predicting margin positivity using intraoperative ultrasonography. However, the learning curves of the three residents demonstrated that, with an average 12th case onwards, a significant improvement in the cumulative accuracy rates was observed, which reached the level of the breast surgeon. IOUS is an effective tool for accurately predicting the margin status in BCS, with an acceptable learning curve for novice surgeons. Training and experience are pivotal for optimizing surgical outcomes. These findings support the integration of IOUS training into surgical education programs to enhance proficiency and improve patient outcomes.

Intraoperative frozen section (IFS) is used with the intention to improve functional and oncological outcomes for patients undergoing radical prostatectomy (RP). High resource requirements of IFS techniques such as NeuroSAFE may preclude widespread adoption, even if there are benefits to patients. Recent advances in fresh-tissue microscopic digital imaging technologies may offer an attractive alternative, and there is a growing body of evidence regarding these technologies. In this narrative review, we discuss some of the familiar limitations of IFS and compare these to the attractive counterpoints of modern digital imaging technologies such as the speed and ease of image generation, the locality of equipment within (or near) the operating room, the ability to maintain tissue integrity, and digital transfer of images. Confocal laser microscopy (CLM) is the modality most frequently reported in the literature for margin assessment during RP. We discuss several imitations and obstacles to widespread dissemination of digital imaging technologies. Among these, we consider how the \'en-face\' margin perspective will challenge urologists and pathologists to understand afresh the meaning of positive margin significance. As a part of this, discussions on how to describe, categorize, react to, and evaluate these technologies are needed to improve patient outcomes. Limitations of this review include its narrative structure and that the evidence base in this field is relatively immature but developing at pace.

Synovial sarcomas are uncommon and highly aggressive sarcomas. Typically, they start in the soft tissues of the extremities, although they may develop in the head and neck region in rare cases. When they do, they usually present with localized symptoms in the affected area. Our patient is a 20-year-old man without a medical history who complained of a three-month history of submental swelling of the left side with a non-tender, palpable 5 cm mass. Initially believed to be a plunging ranula, the patient underwent transoral excision of the left submandibular soft tissue mass in the neck by the ear, nose, and throat (ENT) specialist. The pathological analysis of the mass confirmed the presence of a poorly differentiated synovial sarcoma. A postoperative neck imaging was performed, which showed a significant decrease in mass size compared to the previous imaging; however, the mass was still present. This is one of the few described cases of a poorly differentiated synovial sarcoma located on the floor of the mouth. Therefore, it highlights the importance of considering it as a possible differential diagnosis of head and neck pathologies.

BACKGROUND: Bone sarcoma or direct pelvic carcinoma invasion of the sacrum represent indications for partial or total sacrectomy. The aim was to describe the oncosurgical management and complication profile and to analyze our own outcome results following sacrectomy.
METHODS: In a retrospective analysis, 27 patients (n = 8/10/9 sarcoma/chordoma/locally recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC)) were included. There was total sacrectomy in 9 (incl. combined L5 en bloc spondylectomy in 2), partial in 10 and hemisacrectomy in 8 patients. In 12 patients, resection was navigation-assisted. For reconstruction, an omentoplasty, VRAM-flap or spinopelvic fixation was performed in 20, 10 and 13 patients, respectively.
RESULTS: With a median follow-up (FU) of 15 months, the FU rate was 93%. R0-resection was seen in 81.5% (no significant difference using navigation), and 81.5% of patients suffered from one or more minor-to-moderate complications (especially wound-healing disorders/infection). The median overall survival was 70 months. Local recurrence occurred in 20%, while 44% developed metastases and five patients died of disease.
CONCLUSIONS: Resection of sacral tumors is challenging and associated with a high complication profile. Interdisciplinary cooperation with visceral/vascular and plastic surgery is essential. In chordoma patients, systemic tumor control is favorable compared to LRRC and sarcomas. Navigation offers gain in intraoperative orientation, even if there currently seems to be no oncological benefit. Complete surgical resection offers long-term survival to patients undergoing sacrectomy for a variety of complex diseases.

BACKGROUND: A major challenge in the clinical management of oral cavity squamous cell carcinoma is local relapse. Even when surgical margins are tumor-free, local relapses occur frequently, and relapse prediction by histology remains suboptimal. In leukoplakia, an oral potentially malignant disorder, the presence of architectural dysplasia is a critical risk factor for malignant transformation. This study aimed to investigate whether the presence of architectural dysplasia in oral cavity squamous cell carcinoma surgical margins is a risk factor for local relapse.
METHODS: Hematoxylin and eosin-stained slides of resection margins from a consecutive cohort of surgically treated patients diagnosed with stage I-IV oral cavity squamous cell carcinoma between 2008 and 2014 were assessed for the presence of architectural dysplasia (N = 311). Five-year local relapse-free survival rates of oral cavity squamous cell carcinoma with architectural dysplasia were compared to those of oral cavity squamous cell carcinoma without architectural dysplasia.
RESULTS: In total, 92 of 311 (29.6%) of oral cavity squamous cell carcinoma displayed architectural dysplasia in the margins. The presence of architectural dysplasia was associated with higher patient age, female sex, less pack years, lower cT-stage, and a cohesive tumor growth pattern. In oral cavity squamous cell carcinomas with architectural dysplasia, postoperative (chemo)radiotherapy was less often indicated compared with oral cavity squamous cell carcinoma without architectural dysplasia (19.5% vs. 36.1%, p = 0.009). Five-year local relapse-free survival was significantly lower in oral cavity squamous cell carcinoma with architectural dysplasia than in oral cavity squamous cell carcinoma without architectural dysplasia (83.1% vs. 94.9%, p = 0.017).
CONCLUSIONS: Oral cavity squamous cell carcinoma arising in the background of architectural dysplasia displays relatively favorable clinical and histopathological characteristics. Nonetheless, the presence of architectural dysplasia in oral cavity squamous cell carcinoma surgical margins is associated with a higher risk of local relapse, indicating its clinical relevance.

UNASSIGNED: The preservation of the bladder neck during robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) could improve urinary continence recovery and limit the risk of positive surgical margins (PSMs). We refined our lateral approach to the bladder neck technique and compared its outcomes with those of the standard anterior approach.
UNASSIGNED: From a retrospective analysis of 599 consecutive RARPs, 171 patients treated with the lateral and 171 patients treated with the anterior approach were pair-matched 1:1 on the basis of age, grade, and pathological stage. We described our surgical technique and compared the two approaches in terms of basal PSMs, recovery of urinary continence, and complications.
UNASSIGNED: As compared to the anterior approach, the lateral approach had shorter operative times and comparable rates of basal PSMs and postoperative complications. The rates of urinary continence after one, three, and 12 months were comparable between the two groups and were generally higher in localized disease. At regression analysis, predictors of urinary incontinence were only age, pathological stage T3b, ISUP grade 5 and nerve-sparing surgery.
UNASSIGNED: The lateral approach leads to an anatomical dissection of the bladder neck without increasing the risk of PSMs. However, no significant benefits in terms of continence recovery were demonstrated over the standard anterior approach.

BACKGROUND: The study determined the proportion of patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PDAC) who had margin-positive disease and no other adverse pathologic findings (APF) using institutional and administrative datasets.
METHODS: Patients with clinical stage I or II PDAC in the National Cancer Database (NCDB 2010-2020) and those who underwent pancreatectomy at the authors\' institution (2010-2021) were identified. Isolated margin positivity (IMP) was defined as a positive surgical margin with no APF (negative nodes, no lymphovascular/perineural invasion).
RESULTS: The study included 225 patients from the authors\' institution and 23,598 patients from the NCDB. The margin-positive rates were 21.8% and 20.3%, and the IMP rates were 0.4% and 0.5%, respectively. In the institutional cohort, 68.4% of the patients had recurrence, and most of the patients (65.6%) had distant recurrences. The median recurrence-free survival (RFS) was 63.3 months for no APF, not reached for IMP, 14.8 months for negative margins & 1 APF, 20.3 months for positive margins & 2 APFs, and 12.9 months with all APF positive. The patients in the NCDB with IMP had a lower median OS than the patients with no APF (20.5 vs 390 months), but a higher median OS than those with margin positivity plus 1 APF (20.5 vs 18.0 months) or all those with APF positivity (20.5 vs 15.4 months). Based on institutional rates of IMP, any margin positivity, neck margin positivity (NMP), and no APF, the fraction of patients who might benefit from neck margin revision was 1 in 100,000, and those likely to benefit from any margin revision was 1 in 18,500. In the NCDB, those estimated to derive potential benefit from margin revision was 1 in 25,000.
CONCLUSIONS: Isolated margin positivity in resected PDAC is rare, and most patients experience distant recurrence. Revision of IMP appears unlikely to confer benefit to most patients.

BACKGROUND: Despite being a key metric with a significant correlation with the outcomes of patients with rectal cancer, the optimal surgical approach for total mesorectal excision (TME) has not yet been identified. The aim of this study was to assess the association of the surgical approach on the quality of TME and surgical margins and to characterize the surgical and long-term oncologic outcomes in patients undergoing robotic, laparoscopic, and open TME for rectal cancer.
METHODS: Patients with primary, nonmetastatic rectal adenocarcinoma who underwent either lower anterior resection or abdominoperineal resection via robotic (Rob), laparoscopic (Lap), or open approaches were selected from the US Rectal Cancer Consortium database (2007-2017). Quasi-Poisson regression analysis with backward selection was used to investigate the relationship between the surgical approach and outcomes of interest.
RESULTS: Among the 664 patients included in the study, the distribution of surgical approaches was as follows: 351 (52.9%) underwent TME via the open approach, 159 (23.9%) via the robotic approach, and 154 (23.2%) via the laparoscopic approach. There were no significant differences in baseline demographics among the three cohorts. The laparoscopic cohort had fewer patients with low rectal cancer (<6 cm from the anal verge) than the robotic and open cohorts (Lap 28.6% versus Rob 59.1% versus Open 45.6%, P = 0.015). Patients who underwent Rob and Lap TME had lower intraoperative blood loss compared with the Open approach (Rob 200 mL [Q1, Q3: 100.0, 300.0] versus Lap 150 mL [Q1, Q3: 75.0, 250.0] versus Open 300 mL [Q1, Q3: 150.0, 600.0], P < 0.001). There was no difference in the operative time (Rob 243 min [Q1, Q3: 203.8, 300.2] versus Lap 241 min [Q1, Q3: 186, 336] versus Open 226 min [Q1, Q3: 178, 315.8], P = 0.309) between the three approaches. Postoperative length of stay was shorter with robotic and laparoscopic approach compared to open approach (Rob 5.0 d [Q1, Q3: 4, 8.2] versus Lap 5 d [Q1, Q3: 4, 8] versus Open 7.0 d [Q1, Q3: 5, 9], P < 0.001). There was no statistically significant difference in the quality of TME between the robotic, laparoscopic, and open approaches (79.2%, 64.9%, and 64.7%, respectively; P = 0.46). The margin positivity rate, a composite of circumferential margin and distal margin, was higher with the robotic and open approaches than with the laparoscopic approach (Rob 8.2% versus Open 6.6% versus Lap 1.9%, P = 0.17), Rob versus Lap (odds ratio 0.21; 95% confidence interval 0.05, 0.83) and Rob versus Open (odds ratio 0.5; 95% confidence interval 0.22, 1.12). There was no difference in long-term survival, including overall survival and recurrence-free survival, between patients who underwent robotic, laparoscopic, or open TME (Figure 1).
CONCLUSIONS: In patients undergoing surgery with curative intent for rectal cancer, we did not observe a difference in the quality of TME between the robotic, laparoscopic, or open approaches. Robotic and open TME compared to laparoscopic TME were associated with higher margin positivity rates in our study. This was likely due to the higher percentage of low rectal cancers in the robotic and open cohorts. We also reported no significant differences in overall survival and recurrence-free survival between the aforementioned surgical techniques.

BACKGROUND: In up to 72 % of HER2+ invasive breast cancer (IBC), a ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) component is present. The presence of DCIS is associated with increased positive surgical margins after breast-conserving surgery (BCS). The aim of this study was to assess surgical margins, recurrence and survival in a nationwide cohort of HER2+ IBC with versus without a DCIS component, treated with neoadjuvant systemic therapy (NST) and BCS.
METHODS: Women diagnosed with HER2+ IBC treated with NST and BCS, between 2010 and 2019, were selected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry and linked to the Dutch Nationwide Pathology Databank. Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression analyses were performed to determine locoregional recurrence rate (LRR) and overall survival (OS) and associated clinicopathological variables. Surgical outcomes and prognosis were compared between IBC only and IBC+DCIS.
RESULTS: A total of 3056 patients were included: 1832 with IBC and 1224 with IBC+DCIS. Patients with IBC+DCIS had significantly more often positive surgical margins compared to IBC (12.8 % versus 4.9 %, p < 0.001). Five-year LRR was significantly higher in patients with IBC+DCIS compared to IBC (6.8 % versus 3.6 %, p < 0.001), but the presence of DCIS itself was not significantly associated with LRR after adjusting for confounders in multivariable analysis. Five-year OS did not differ between IBC+DCIS and IBC (94.9 % versus 95.7 %, p = 0.293).
CONCLUSIONS: The presence of DCIS is associated with higher rates of positive surgical margins, but not with LRR and lower OS when adjusted for confounders. Further research is necessary to adequately select IBC+DCIS patients for BCS after NST.

UNASSIGNED: Defining prostate cancer contours is a complex task, undermining the efficacy of interventions such as focal therapy. A multireader multicase study compared physicians\' performance using artificial intelligence (AI) vs standard-of-care methods for tumor delineation.
UNASSIGNED: Cases were interpreted by 7 urologists and 3 radiologists from 5 institutions with 2 to 23 years of experience. Each reader evaluated 50 prostatectomy cases retrospectively eligible for focal therapy. Each case included a T2-weighted MRI, contours of the prostate and region(s) of interest suspicious for cancer, and a biopsy report. First, readers defined cancer contours cognitively, manually delineating tumor boundaries to encapsulate all clinically significant disease. Then, after ≥ 4 weeks, readers contoured the same cases using AI software. Using tumor boundaries on whole-mount histopathology slides as ground truth, AI-assisted, cognitively-defined, and hemigland cancer contours were evaluated. Primary outcome measures were the accuracy and negative margin rate of cancer contours. All statistical analyses were performed using generalized estimating equations.
UNASSIGNED: The balanced accuracy (mean of voxel-wise sensitivity and specificity) of AI-assisted cancer contours (84.7%) was superior to cognitively-defined (67.2%) and hemigland contours (75.9%; P < .0001). Cognitively-defined cancer contours systematically underestimated cancer extent, with a negative margin rate of 1.6% compared to 72.8% for AI-assisted cancer contours (P < .0001).
UNASSIGNED: AI-assisted cancer contours reduce underestimation of prostate cancer extent, significantly improving contouring accuracy and negative margin rate achieved by physicians. This technology can potentially improve outcomes, as accurate contouring informs patient management strategy and underpins the oncologic efficacy of treatment.