Applicability of Radioguided Occult Lesion Localization for Non-Palpable Benign Breast Lesions, Comparison with Wire Localization, a Clinical Trial

  • Alikhassi, Afsaneh (Cancer Research Center, Cancer Institute of Iran) ;
  • Saeed, Farzanefar (Department of Nuclear Medicine, Vali-Asr Hospital, School of Medicine, Tehran University of Medical Sciences) ;
  • Abbasi, Mehrshad (Department of Nuclear Medicine, Vali-Asr Hospital, School of Medicine, Tehran University of Medical Sciences) ;
  • Omranipour, Ramesh (Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, Tehran University of Medical Sciences) ;
  • Mahmoodzadeh, Habibollah (Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, Tehran University of Medical Sciences) ;
  • Najafi, Massoome (Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, Tehran University of Medical Sciences) ;
  • Gity, Masoumeh (Department of Radiology, Medical Imaging Center, Tehran University of Medical Sciences) ;
  • Kheradmand, Ali (Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, Tehran University of Medical Sciences)
  • Published : 2016.07.01


Background: This study was designed to compare radioguided versus routine wire localization of nonpalpable non-malignant breast lesions in terms of efficacy for complete excision, ease of use, time saving, and cosmetic outcome. Materials and Methods: Patients with non-palpable breast masses and non-malignant core biopsy results who were candidates for complete surgical lumpectomy were enrolled and randomly assigned to radioguided or wire localization groups. Radiologic, surgical, and pathologic data were collected and analyzed to determine the difficulty and duration of each procedure, ease of use, accuracy, and cosmetic outcomes. Results: This prospective randomized study included 60 patients, randomly divided into wire guided localization (WGL) or radioguided occult lesion localization (ROLL) groups. The mean duration of localization under ultrasound guidance was shorter in the ROLL group (14.4 min) than in the WGL group (16.5 min) (p<0.001). The ROLL method was significantly easier for radiologists (p=0.0001). The mean duration of the surgical procedure was 22.6 min (${\pm}10.3min$) for ROLL and 23.6 min (${\pm}9.6min$) for WGL (p=0.6), a non-significant difference. Radiography of the surgical specimens showed 100% lesion excision with clear margins, as proved by pathologic examination, with both techniques. The surgical specimens were slightly heavier in the ROLL group, but the difference was not significant (p=0.06). Conclusions: The ROLL technique provides effective, fast, and simple localization and excision of non-palpable non-malignant breast lesions.


  1. Deepak J , Mandeep Singh M. (2015). Radioguided occult lesion localization and sentinel node and occult lesion localization in breast cancer, the future beckons. Asian J Oncol, l 1, 73-6.
  2. Fusco R, Petrillo A, Catalano O, et al (2014). Procedures for location of non-palpable breast lesions: a systematic review for the radiologist. Breast Cancer, 21, 522-31.
  3. Imrana M, Shaista A, Gulnaz S, et al (2012). Usefulness of hook wire localization biopsy under imaging guidance for nonpalpable breast lesions detected radiologically. Int J Womens Health, 4, 445-9.
  4. Kolb TM1, Lichy J, Newhouse JH (1998). Occult cancer in women with dense breasts: detection with screening USdiagnostic yield and tumor characteristics. Radiol, 207, 191-9.
  5. Luini A, Zurrida S, Paganelli G, et al (1999). Comparison of radioguided excision with wire localization of occult breast lesions. Br J Surg, 86, 522 -5.
  6. Moss HA, Barter SJ, Nayagam M, et al (2002). The use of carbon suspension as an adjunct to wire localization of impalpable breast lesions. Clin Radiol, 57, 937-44.
  7. Medina H, Abarca-Perez L, Garcia-Alvarez MN, et al (2008). Radioguided occult lesion localization (ROLL) versus wire-guided lumpectomy for non-palpable breast lesions: a randomized prospective evaluation. J Surg Oncol, 97, 108-11.
  8. Fraile M, Mariscal A, Lorenzo C, et al (2005). Radioguided occult lesion localization combined with sentinel node biopsy in women with breast cancer. Cir ESP, 77, 36 -9.
  9. Antonio Mariscal MA, Sola M, de Tudela AP, et al (2009). Radioguided localization of nonpalpable breast cancer lesions: randomized comparison with wire localization in patients undergoing conservative surgery and sentinel node biopsy. AJR, 193, 1001-9.
  10. Mascaro A, Farina M, Gigli R, et al (2010). Recent advances in the surgical care of breast cancer patients. World J Surg Oncol, 8, 5.
  11. Mohamed A, Alaa Eldin M, Ayman A, et al (2015). Role of imaging guided wire localization of nonpalpable breast lesions: Effect of localization accuracy on surgical outcome and histopathological safety margins. Biolife, 3, 883-8.
  12. Nadeem R, Chagla LS, Harris O, et al (2005). Occult breast lesions: a comparison between radioguided occult lesion localization (ROLL) vs. wire-guided lumpectomy (WGL). Breast, 14, 283-5
  13. Nothacker M, Duda V, Hahn M, et al (2009). Early detection of breast cancer: benefits and risks of supplemental breast ultrasound in asymptomatic women with mammographically dense breast tissue. A systematic review. BMC Cancer, 9, 335.
  14. Peter J. Lovrics, Charlie H. Goldsmith, Hodgson N, et al (2011). A multi-centered, randomized, controlled trial comparing radioguided seed localization to standard wire localization for non-palpable, invasive and in situ breast carcinomas. Ann Surgical Oncol, 18, 3407-14.
  15. Postma E. L, Verkooijen H. M, Van Esser S (2012). Efficacy of 'radioguided occult lesion localisation' (ROLL) versus 'wire-guided localisation' (WGL) in breast conserving surgery for non-palpable breast cancer: a randomised controlled multicentre trial. Breast Cancer Res Treat, 136, 469-8.
  16. Povoski ST, Jimenez R, Wang W, et al (2014). Use of an intraoperative ultrasonography-guided localization and tissue fixation device demonstrates less margin positivity during breast-conserving surgery for invasive breast cancer than standard preoperative needle-wire localization: a retrospective comparative analysis in a consecutively treated case series. Clinical Breast Cancer, 14, 46-52.
  17. Rissanen TJ, Makarainen HP, Mattila SI, et al (1993). Wire localization biopsy of breast lesions: a review of 425 cases found in screening or clinical mammography. Clin Radiol, 47, 14 -22.
  18. Rose A, Collins JP, Neerhut P, et al (2003). Carbon localisation of impalpable lesions. Breast, 12, 264-9.
  19. Rampaul RS, Bagnall M, Burrel H, et al (2004). Randomized clinical trial comparing radioisotope occult lesion localization and wire-guided excision for biopsy of occult breast lesions. Br J Surg, 91, 1575-7.
  20. Roos M. A. J., Welvaart W. N., Ong K. H. (2013). Should we abandon wire-guided localization for non-palpable breast cancer? a plea for wire-guided localization. Scandinavian J Surgery, 102, 106-9.
  21. Thind CR, Desmond S, Harris O, et al (2005). Radioguided localization of clinically occult breast lesions (ROLL): a DGH experience. Clin Radiol, 60, 681-6.
  22. Vikram S, Wael E. A (2009). Ultrasound-guided procedures. New York, NY: Thieme, 344-6.
  23. Xi Lin, Jianwei W, Feng H, et al (2012). Analysis of eighty-one cases with breast lesions using automated breast volume scanner and comparison with handheld ultrasound. Eur J Radiol, 81, 873-8.
  24. Zurrida S, Galimberti V, Monti S, et al (1989). Radioguided localization of occult breast lesions. Breast, 7, 11-13.
  25. Zgajnar J, Hocevar M, Frkovic-Grazio S, et al (2004). Radioguided occult lesion localization (ROLL) of the nonpalpable breast lesions. Neoplasma, 51, 385-9.