Study to Evaluate Surgical Excision Margins in Malignant Breast Lumpectomies With the PEAK PlasmaBlade

July 10, 2019 updated by: Sarah Blair, M.D.

A Prospective, Controlled Study To Evaluate Surgical Excision Margins in Malignant Breast Lumpectomies With the PEAK PlasmaBlade Compared to Traditional Electrosurgery

The purpose of this research study is to find out more about distinguishing between cancerous and non-cancerous breast cancer cells at the edges of tumors. Using an FDA approved device to remove tumors, this device will be tested to see if it causes less tissue damage and therefore makes it easier to examine the tumor and make sure it is all excised. The tumors will be excised by standard surgical technique, and then the effects of the device on the removed tissues will be studied.

Study Overview

Status

Completed

Conditions

Detailed Description

Breast conservation therapy (BCT) is the standard surgical treatment for breast cancer. The goal of BCT is total excision of the malignant lesion while simultaneously preserving the cosmetic appearance and functionality of the breast. Despite advances in technique and pathologic analysis; however, 20-50% of malignant breast lump excisions have cancer present to the edge of the excision margin (defined as a "positive" margin). Excisions that are found to be margin positive require a secondary excision; however, in these cases residual disease is found to be present in only 40-70% of cases. Some researchers have hypothesized that re-excision was unnecessary in a certain percentage of cases. Currently there are no routinely utilized method for intra-operative interpretation of surgical margins. Touch preps or imprint cytology has been used in the past in some centers but it is not used routinely because an experienced cytopathologist is needed to correctly interpret the slides.

The standard of care to evaluate surgical margins is based on permanent section. Margins are considered negative if there is greater than 1 mm of normal tissue between cancer cells to the excised surface. Many factors for this discrepancy have been postulated, including artifact associated with the inking process and with electrosurgery induced damage of the margin during excision (thermal injury); therefore, creating a "false positive" impression of tumor cells present at surgical margins. We propose a clinical study to evaluate the effects of thermal injury in breast cancer excision using traditional electrosurgery (i.e., the "Bovie") compared to the pulsed RF technology with the PEAK PlasmaBlade. We hypothesize that the PlasmaBlade will impart less thermal injury to the incised breast tissue (malignant and normal) and will increase the specificity of the margin status. The majority of breast cancers are removed by traditional electrocautery. We are just starting to utilize this new technology for soft tissue dissection at UCSD.

The PEAK PlasmaBlade is a family of disposable surgical cutting and coagulation devices that offer the exacting control of a scalpel and the bleeding control of traditional electrosurgery without extensive collateral damage. The PlasmaBlade is based on proprietary pulsed plasma technology. This technology represents an evolutionary leap in the advancement of radiofrequency surgical technologies, which originated with traditional electrosurgery and progressed to plasma-mediated energy devices. The PlasmaBlade tissue dissection devices are FDA-cleared and commercially available.

Study Type

Observational

Enrollment (Actual)

21

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Locations

    • California
      • La Jolla, California, United States, 92037
        • Thornton Hospital
      • La Jolla, California, United States, 92093
        • Rebecca and John Moores Cancer Center
      • San Diego, California, United States, 92103
        • UCSD Medical Center

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Ages Eligible for Study

  • Child
  • Adult
  • Older Adult

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Genders Eligible for Study

Female

Sampling Method

Non-Probability Sample

Study Population

Patients recruited from the Moores UCSD Cancer Center and the UCSD Medical Center

Description

Inclusion Criteria

  • Women or men with an established diagnosis of an invasive ductal carcinoma
  • Women or men with tumors > 1cm
  • Women undergoing Breast Conservation Operations
  • Women or men may have had prior chemotherapy as long as their treatment was completed >2 weeks prior to enrollment with recovery from any toxicities

Exclusion Criteria

  • No established diagnosis of breast cancer
  • Women or men with tumors <1 cm
  • Women or men undergoing total mastectomy
  • Women or men who have had prior radiation

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Time Frame
To compare the thermal injury artifact produced by traditional electrosurgery vs. the PEAK PlasmaBlade by intensive pathologic analysis both by gross inspection, touch imprint, and permanent histologic analysis.
Time Frame: 1 year
1 year

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Investigators

  • Principal Investigator: Sarah L Blair, MD, University of California, San Diego

Publications and helpful links

The person responsible for entering information about the study voluntarily provides these publications. These may be about anything related to the study.

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start

July 1, 2009

Primary Completion (Actual)

July 1, 2010

Study Completion (Actual)

November 1, 2010

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

September 3, 2009

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

September 3, 2009

First Posted (Estimate)

September 4, 2009

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Actual)

July 12, 2019

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

July 10, 2019

Last Verified

July 1, 2019

More Information

Terms related to this study

Other Study ID Numbers

  • 090314

This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.

Clinical Trials on Breast Cancer

Subscribe