282 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 8174059)
21. The Usefulness of Intraoperative Circumferential Frozen-Section Analysis of Lumpectomy Margins in Breast-Conserving Surgery.
Ko S; Chun YK; Kang SS; Hur MH
J Breast Cancer; 2017 Jun; 20(2):176-182. PubMed ID: 28690654
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. Economic Implications of Widespread Expansion of Frozen Section Margin Analysis to Guide Surgical Resection in Women With Breast Cancer Undergoing Breast-Conserving Surgery.
Boughey JC; Keeney GL; Radensky P; Song CP; Habermann EB
J Oncol Pract; 2016 Apr; 12(4):e413-22. PubMed ID: 26907452
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. Influence of frozen-section analysis of sentinel lymph node and lumpectomy margin status on reoperation rates in patients undergoing breast-conservation therapy.
McLaughlin SA; Ochoa-Frongia LM; Patil SM; Cody HS; Sclafani LM
J Am Coll Surg; 2008 Jan; 206(1):76-82. PubMed ID: 18155571
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. Clinical and Financial Implications of Positive Margins After Nonmelanoma Skin Cancer Resection: A Longitudinal Evaluation.
Ranganath B; Teixeira RM; Patel T; Garza R; Murphy RX
Ann Plast Surg; 2021 Jul; 87(1):80-84. PubMed ID: 33009148
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. Touch preparation cytology of breast lumpectomy margins with histologic correlation.
Cox CE; Ku NN; Reintgen DS; Greenberg HM; Nicosia SV; Wangensteen S
Arch Surg; 1991 Apr; 126(4):490-3. PubMed ID: 2009065
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. Implications of New Lumpectomy Margin Guidelines for Breast-Conserving Surgery: Changes in Reexcision Rates and Predicted Rates of Residual Tumor.
Merrill AL; Coopey SB; Tang R; McEvoy MP; Specht MC; Hughes KS; Gadd MA; Smith BL
Ann Surg Oncol; 2016 Mar; 23(3):729-34. PubMed ID: 26467458
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. Minimizing local recurrence after breast conserving therapy using intraoperative shaved margins to determine pathologic tumor clearance.
Camp ER; McAuliffe PF; Gilroy JS; Morris CG; Lind DS; Mendenhall NP; Copeland EM
J Am Coll Surg; 2005 Dec; 201(6):855-61. PubMed ID: 16310688
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. Impact of analysis of frozen-section margin on reoperation rates in women undergoing lumpectomy for breast cancer: evaluation of the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program data.
Boughey JC; Hieken TJ; Jakub JW; Degnim AC; Grant CS; Farley DR; Thomsen KM; Osborn JB; Keeney GL; Habermann EB
Surgery; 2014 Jul; 156(1):190-7. PubMed ID: 24929768
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. The influence of additional surgical margins on the total specimen volume excised and the reoperative rate after breast-conserving surgery.
Huston TL; Pigalarga R; Osborne MP; Tousimis E
Am J Surg; 2006 Oct; 192(4):509-12. PubMed ID: 16978962
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. Effect of Intraoperative Imprint Cytology Followed by Frozen Section on Margin Assessment in Breast-Conserving Surgery.
Tamanuki T; Namura M; Aoyagi T; Shimizu S; Suwa T; Matsuzaki H
Ann Surg Oncol; 2021 Mar; 28(3):1338-1346. PubMed ID: 32815080
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. Interoperative frozen section for margin assessment in breast conserving energy.
Dener C; Inan A; Sen M; Demirci S
Scand J Surg; 2009; 98(1):34-40. PubMed ID: 19459270
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. Predictors of reexcision findings and recurrence after breast conservation.
Smitt MC; Nowels K; Carlson RW; Jeffrey SS
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys; 2003 Nov; 57(4):979-85. PubMed ID: 14575828
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. Close/positive margins after breast-conserving therapy: additional resection or no resection?
Wood WC
Breast; 2013 Aug; 22 Suppl 2():S115-7. PubMed ID: 24074771
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. Clinical outcomes of breast-conserving surgery in patients using a modified method for cavity margin assessment.
Chen K; Zeng Y; Jia H; Jia W; Yang H; Rao N; Song E; Cox CE; Su F
Ann Surg Oncol; 2012 Oct; 19(11):3386-94. PubMed ID: 22488098
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. Accuracy of Frozen Section Analysis of Urethral and Ureteral Margins During Radical Cystectomy for Bladder Cancer: A Systematic Review and Diagnostic Meta-Analysis.
Laukhtina E; Rajwa P; Mori K; Moschini M; D'Andrea D; Abufaraj M; Soria F; Mari A; Krajewski W; Albisinni S; Teoh JY; Quhal F; Sari Motlagh R; Mostafaei H; Katayama S; Grossmann NC; Enikeev D; Zimmermann K; Fajkovic H; Glybochko P; Shariat SF; Pradere B;
Eur Urol Focus; 2022 May; 8(3):752-760. PubMed ID: 34127436
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. Trends in Reoperation After Initial Lumpectomy for Breast Cancer: Addressing Overtreatment in Surgical Management.
Morrow M; Abrahamse P; Hofer TP; Ward KC; Hamilton AS; Kurian AW; Katz SJ; Jagsi R
JAMA Oncol; 2017 Oct; 3(10):1352-1357. PubMed ID: 28586788
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. Local recurrence of breast cancer after cytological evaluation of lumpectomy margins.
Cox CE; Pendas S; Ku NN; Reintgen DS; Greenberg HS; Nicosia SV
Am Surg; 1998 Jun; 64(6):533-7; discussion 537-8. PubMed ID: 9619174
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. The Accuracy of Sequential Urethral Frozen Section and its Impact on Urethral Recurrence After Radical Cystectomy.
Gakis G; Schmid MA; Hassan F; Stenzl A; Renninger M
Clin Genitourin Cancer; 2022 Oct; 20(5):e390-e395. PubMed ID: 35577732
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. Close and Positive Lumpectomy Margins are Associated with Similar Rates of Residual Disease with Additional Surgery.
Fitzgerald S; Romanoff A; Cohen A; Schmidt H; Weltz C; Bleiweis IJ; Jaffer S; Port ER
Ann Surg Oncol; 2016 Dec; 23(13):4270-4276. PubMed ID: 27581606
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. Variability in reexcision following breast conservation surgery.
McCahill LE; Single RM; Aiello Bowles EJ; Feigelson HS; James TA; Barney T; Engel JM; Onitilo AA
JAMA; 2012 Feb; 307(5):467-75. PubMed ID: 22298678
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
