BMC Cancer 2009, 9:254 http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2407/9/254 with lumpectomy with or without irradiation in the treat- ment of breast cancer. N Engl J Med 1995, 333:1456-1461. 7. Jacobson JA, Danforth DN, Cowan KH, d'Angelo T, Steinberg SM, Pierce L, Lippman ME, Lichter AS, Glatstein E, Okunieff P: Ten-year results of a comparison of conservation with mastectomy in the treatment of stage I and II breast cancer. N Engl J Med 1995, 332:907-911. 8. Fisher ER: Lumpectomy margins and much more. Cancer 1997, 79:1453-1458. discussion 1459–1460. 9. Carter D: Margins of "lumpectomy" for breast cancer. Hum Pathol 1986, 17:330-332. 10. Gould EW, Robinson PG: The pathologist's examination of the "lumpectomy" – the pathologists' view of surgical margins. Semin Surg Oncol 1992, 8:129-135. 11. Veronesi U: How important is the assessment of resection margins in conservative surgery for breast cancer? Cancer 1994, 74:1660-1661. 12. Klimberg VS, Harms S, Korourian S: Assessing margin status. Surg Oncol 1999, 8:77-84. 13. Bland KI: Surgical margins in breast cancer: how wide? How accurate? How big? Does it make a difference? Curr Surg 2001, 58:248-253. 14. Taghian A, Mohiuddin M, Jagsi R, Goldberg S, Ceilley E, Powell S: Cur- rent perceptions regarding surgical margin status after breast-conserving therapy: results of a survey. Ann Surg 2005, 241:629-639. 15. Jacobs L: Positive margins: the challenge continues for breast surgeons. Ann Surg Oncol 2008, 15:1271-1272. 16. Morrow M: Margins in breast-conserving therapy: have we lost sight of the big picture? Expert Rev Anticancer Ther 2008, 8:1193-1196. 17. Luini A, Rososchansky J, Gatti G, Zurrida S, Caldarella P, Viale G, Rosali dos Santos G, Frasson A: The surgical margin status after breast-conserving surgery: discussion of an open issue. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2009, 113:397-402. 18. Larson RE, Hostetler RP, Edwards BH: Calculus with Analytical Geome- try New York: Houghton Mifflin; 1998. 19. Gilat A, Subramaniam V: Numerical Methods for Engineers and Scientists: An Introduction with Applications using MAT- LAB. New York: John Wiley & Sons; 2008. 20. McCormick B, Kinne D, Petrek J, Osborne M, Cox L, Shank B, Hell- man S, Yahalom J, Rosen PP: Limited resection for breast cancer: a study of inked specimen margins before radiotherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1987, 13:1667-1671. 21. Umpleby HC, Herbert A, Royle GT, Taylor I: Wide excision of pri- mary breast cancer: the incidence of residual carcinoma at the site of excision. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 1988, 70:246-248. 22. England DW, Chan SY, Stonelake PS, Lee MJ: Assessment of exci- sion margins following wide local excision for breast carci- noma using specimen scrape cytology and tumour bed biopsy. Eur J Surg Oncol 1994, 20:425-429. 23. MacMillan RD, Purushotham AD, Mallon E, Ramsay G, George WD: Breast-conserving surgery and tumour bed positivity in patients with breast cancer. Br J Surg 1994, 81:56-58. 24. Schnitt SJ, Abner A, Gelman R, Connolly JL, Recht A, Duda RB, Eber- lein TJ, Mayzel K, Silver B, Harris JR: The relationship between microscopic margins of resection and the risk of local recur- rence in patients with breast cancer treated with breast-con- serving surgery and radiation therapy. Cancer 1994, 74:1746-1751. 25. Beron PJ, Horwitz EM, Martinez AA, Wimbish KJ, Levine AJ, Gus- tafson G, Chen PY, Ingold JA, Vicini FA: Pathologic and mammo- graphic findings predicting the adequacy of tumor excision before breast-conserving therapy. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1996, 167:1409-1414. 26. Gage I, Schnitt SJ, Nixon AJ, Silver B, Recht A, Troyan SL, Eberlein T, Love SM, Gelman R, Harris JR, Connolly JL: Pathologic margin involvement and the risk of recurrence in patients treated with breast-conserving therapy. Cancer 1996, 78:1921-1928. 27. MacMillan RD, Purushotham AD, Mallon E, Love JG, George WD: Tumour bed positivity predicts outcome after breast-con- serving surgery. Br J Surg 1997, 84:1559-1562. 28. Saarela AO, Paloneva TK, Rissanen TJ, Kiviniemi HO: Determinants of positive histologic margins and residual tumor after lumpectomy for early breast cancer: a prospective study with special reference to touch preparation cytology. J Surg Oncol 1997, 66:248-253. 29. Weber S, Storm FK, Stitt J, Mahvi DM: The role of frozen section analysis of margins during breast conservation surgery. Can- cer J Sci Am 1997, 3:273-277. 30. Beck NE, Bradburn MJ, Vincenti AC, Rainsbury RM: Detection of residual disease following breast-conserving surgery. Br J Surg 1998, 85:1273-1276. 31. DiBiase SJ, Komarnicky LT, Schwartz GF, Xie Y, Mansfield CM: The number of positive margins influences the outcome of women treated with breast preservation for early stage breast carcinoma. Cancer 1998, 82:2212-2220. 32. Taylor I, Mullee MA, Carpenter R, Royle G, McKay CJ, Cross M: The significance of involved tumour bed biopsy following wide local excision of breast cancer. Eur J Surg Oncol 1998, 24:110-113. 33. Horiguchi J, Iino Y, Takei H, Maemura M, Yokoe T, Niibe H, Yamakawa M, Nakajima T, Oyama T, Morishita Y: Surgical margin and breast recurrence after breast-conserving therapy. Oncol Rep 1999, 6:135-138. 34. Malik HZ, George WD, Mallon EA, Harnett AN, MacMillan RD, Purushotham AD: Margin assessment by cavity shaving after breast-conserving surgery: analysis and follow-up of 543 patients. Eur J Surg Oncol 1999, 25:464-469. 35. Papa MZ, Zippel D, Koller M, Klein E, Chetrit A, Ari GB: Positive margins of breast biopsy: is reexcision always necessary? J Surg Oncol 1999, 70:167-171. 36. Park CC, Mitsumori M, Nixon A, Recht A, Connolly J, Gelman R, Sil- ver B, Hetelekidis S, Abner A, Harris JR, Schnitt SJ: Outcome at 8 years after breast-conserving surgery and radiation therapy for invasive breast cancer: influence of margin status and sys- temic therapy on local recurrence. J Clin Oncol 2000, 18:1668-1675. 37. Gibson GR, Lesnikoski BA, Yoo J, Mott LA, Cady B, Barth RJ Jr: A comparison of ink-directed and traditional whole-cavity re- excision for breast lumpectomy specimens with positive margins. Ann Surg Oncol 2001, 8:693-704. 38. Jenkinson AD, Al-Mufti RA, Mohsen Y, Berry MJ, Wells C, Carpenter R: Does intraductal breast cancer spread in a segmental dis- tribution? An analysis of residual tumour burden following segmental mastectomy using tumour bed biopsies. Eur J Surg Oncol 2001, 27:21-25. 39. Moore MM, Whitney LA, Cerilli L, Imbrie JZ, Bunch M, Simpson VB, Hanks JB: Intraoperative ultrasound is associated with clear lumpectomy margins for palpable infiltrating ductal breast cancer. Ann Surg 2001, 233:761-768. 40. Swanson GP, Rynearson K, Symmonds R: Significance of margins of excision on breast cancer recurrence. Am J Clin Oncol 2002, 25:438-441. 41. Mai KT, Perkins DG, Mirsky D: Location and extent of positive resection margins and ductal carcinoma in situ in lumpec- tomy specimens of ductal breast carcinoma examined with a microscopic three-dimensional view. Breast J 2003, 9:33-38. 42. Chagpar AB, Martin RC 2nd, Hagendoorn LJ, Chao C, McMasters KM: Lumpectomy margins are affected by tumor size and histo- logic subtype but not by biopsy technique. Am J Surg 2004, 188:399-402. 43. Keskek M, Kothari M, Ardehali B, Betambeau N, Nasiri N, Gui GP: Factors predisposing to cavity margin positivity following conservation surgery for breast cancer. Eur J Surg Oncol 2004, 30:1058-1064. 44. Miller AR, Brandao G, Prihoda TJ, Hill C, Cruz AB Jr, Yeh IT: Positive margins following surgical resection of breast carcinoma: analysis of pathologic correlates. J Surg Oncol 2004, 86:134-140. 45. Fleming FJ, Hill AD, Mc Dermott EW, O'Doherty A, O'Higgins NJ, Quinn CM: Intraoperative margin assessment and re-excision rate in breast conserving surgery. Eur J Surg Oncol 2004, 30:233-237. 46. Balch GC, Mithani SK, Simpson JF, Kelley MC: Accuracy of intraop- erative gross examination of surgical margin status in women undergoing partial mastectomy for breast malig- nancy. Am Surg 2005, 71:22-27. discussion 27–28. 47. Cao D, Lin C, Woo SH, Vang R, Tsangaris TN, Argani P: Separate cavity margin sampling at the time of initial breast lumpec- tomy significantly reduces the need for reexcisions. Am J Surg Pathol 2005, 29:1625-1632. Page 21 of 23 (page number not for citation purposes)