Causes of Breast Tissue Marker Malposition
Research type
Research Study
Full title
A single centre study to investigate factors which may cause breast tissue marker malposition.
IRAS ID
199750
Contact name
Ann Mumby
Contact email
Sponsor organisation
Queen Margaret University
Duration of Study in the UK
0 years, 4 months, 20 days
Research summary
This study will investigate the position of tissue markers placed after x-ray guided biopsy of the breast during investigation for suspected breast cancer in women screened by the West of Scotland Breast Screening Service.
X-ray guided biopsy is used where disease cannot be felt (palpated) and cannot be seen using ultrasound.
Markers are inserted to allow the site of biopsy to be identified should further treatment be required.
Images taken following the biopsy procedure and marker insertion are retained in order to confirm marker position.
It is often the case that the marker inserted may not be in the exact area where the biopsy samples were taken from. When looking at the available evidence it is suggested that this is a fairly random process and cannot be predicted.
This can lead to problems in identifying the biopsy site as it heals up and if no record other than the marker is left, if the marker is not in an accurate position it can lead to inaccuracies prior to or during surgery in determining the site of the breast disease.
By looking at the type of equipment used, and some of the non-identifiable factors involved in the procedure (such as the composition of participants breast tissue, compression used on the breast), it may be possible to determine if these factors contribute to the final position of the marker in the images.
This study aims to investigate marker malposition retrospectively. No further imaging will take place and the factors above will be compared with marker position. This allows our current position to be established and compared against the evidence available.
Should the results of this study show marker malposition does not happen by chance, recommendations for further research may be appropriate based on the findings.REC name
London - Brighton & Sussex Research Ethics Committee
REC reference
16/LO/0563
Date of REC Opinion
27 Mar 2016
REC opinion
Favourable Opinion