Table 2 Tumor-free resection margins and re-excision rate after IOUS and WGL
Author | Type of the Study | IOUS | WGL | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
No of pts. | No of oper | No of neg. marg. | No of re-excision | No of pts. | No of oper | No of neg. marg. | No of re-excision | ||
Rahusen | prosp | 19 | 20 | 17 (89%) | nd | 43 | 43 | 17 (40%) | nd |
Snider | retro | 22 | 22 | 18 (82%) | nd | 22 | 22 | 18 (82%) | nd |
Harlow | retro | 62 | 65 | 63 (97%) | 3(4.80%) | nd | nd | nd | nd |
Smith | retro | 81 | 81 | 24/25 mg (96%) | nd | nd | nd | nd | nd |
Rahusen 2 | prosp | 27 | 27 | 24 (89%) | nd | 22 | 22 | 12(55%) | nd |
Kaufman | prosp | 100 | 101 | 90(89%) | 9 (9%) | nd | nd | nd | nd |
Gittleman | retro | 15 | 15 | 14(92%) | 1(8%) | nd | nd | nd | nd |
Beneth | prosp | 103 | 115 | 39/42 mg (93%) | 3(7%) | 24 | 24 | 19 (83%) | 5(17%) |
Haid | retro | 299 | 299 | 242 (81%) | 57(19%) | 61 | 61 | 38 (62%) | 23 38%) |
Potter | retro | 32 | 32 | 28(88%) | nd | nd | nd | nd | nd |
Ngo | prosp | 70 | 70 | 66 (94%) | 3(4%) | nd | nd | nd | nd |
Fortunato | prosp | 77 | 77 | 75 (97%) | 2(3%) | nd | nd | nd | nd |
Bouton | retro | 28 | 28 | 25 (91%) | 3(9%) | nd | nd | nd | 26% |
Berentz | prosp | 120 | 120 | 112 (93%) | 15(13%) | 138 | 138 | 129(93.5%) | 15(11%) |
Ramos | retro | 225 | 225 | 216 (96%) | 9(4%) | nd | nd | 12(55%) | nd |
James | retro | 96 | 96 | 10(10%) | 20(20%) | 59 | 59 | 52(88%) | 18(30%) |