Optimal Surgical Margin After Breast-Conserving Surgery in Pure Ductal Carcinoma in Situ: Is a 1 mm Margin Sufficient? A Retrospective Single-Center Cohort Study

Background/Objectives: The optimal surgical margin width after breast-conserving surgery (BCS) for pure ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) remains controversial; although current guidelines consider a surgical margin of ≥2 mm sufficient, the clinical safety of narrower margins is unclear. This study aimed to evaluate the association between surgical margin width and ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence (IBTR), with a focus on the 1 mm threshold. Materials and Methods: In this retrospective single-center cohort study, 107 patients with pure DCIS treated with BCS followed by adjuvant radiotherapy (RT) between 1 January 2009 and 1 January 2025 were analyzed. Final surgical margins were categorized as <1 mm, 1–2 mm, and ≥2 mm. The primary endpoint was IBTR. Kaplan–Meier analysis was performed. Results: The median age of the study population was 52 years (IQR: 46–61). High-grade DCIS was present in 48 patients (44.9%), comedo necrosis in 68 (63.6%), and estrogen receptor positivity in 87 (81.3%). Overall, 10 patients (9.3%) underwent re-excision for margin widening. Final surgical margin widths were <1 mm in 36 patients (34%), 1–2 mm in 18 (17%), and ≥2 mm in 53 (49%). IBTR occurred in seven patients (6.5%) during a median follow-up of 48 months (range, 12–217 months), with a median time to recurrence of 33 months. Kaplan–Meier analysis showed no significant difference in recurrence-free survival according to a 2 mm margin threshold, whereas margins < 1 mm were associated with significantly worse outcomes (p = 0.002). Conclusions: Margins < 1 mm were associated with increased IBTR risk, whereas margins < 2 mm did not appear to confer uniform risk. These findings suggest that margin widths between 1 and 2 mm may represent a heterogeneous group, and clinical decision-making in this range should be individualized. However, further studies are needed to validate these outcomes.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Medicina
Published
2026-05-31
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/medicina62061061
Primary Topic
Breast Cancer Treatment Studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Optimal Surgical Margin After Breast-Conserving Surgery in Pure Ductal Carcinoma in Situ: Is a 1 mm Margin Sufficient? A Retrospective Single-Center Cohort Study

Ufuk Karabacak, İsmail Alper Tarım, Murat Derebey, Saim Savaş Yürüker et al.
Medicina
Breast Cancer Treatment Studies
article

Optimal Surgical Margin After Breast-Conserving Surgery in Pure Ductal Carcinoma in Situ: Is a 1 mm Margin Sufficient? A Retrospective Single-Center Cohort Study

Ufuk Karabacak, İsmail Alper Tarım, Murat Derebey, Saim Savaş Yürüker, Bahadır Bülent Güngör, Ayfer Kamali Polat
article en

Abstract

Background/Objectives: The optimal surgical margin width after breast-conserving surgery (BCS) for pure ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) remains controversial; although current guidelines consider a surgical margin of ≥2 mm sufficient, the clinical safety of narrower margins is unclear. This study aimed to evaluate the association between surgical margin width and ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence (IBTR), with a focus on the 1 mm threshold. Materials and Methods: In this retrospective single-center cohort study, 107 patients with pure DCIS treated with BCS followed by adjuvant radiotherapy (RT) between 1 January 2009 and 1 January 2025 were analyzed. Final surgical margins were categorized as <1 mm, 1–2 mm, and ≥2 mm. The primary endpoint was IBTR. Kaplan–Meier analysis was performed. Results: The median age of the study population was 52 years (IQR: 46–61). High-grade DCIS was present in 48 patients (44.9%), comedo necrosis in 68 (63.6%), and estrogen receptor positivity in 87 (81.3%). Overall, 10 patients (9.3%) underwent re-excision for margin widening. Final surgical margin widths were <1 mm in 36 patients (34%), 1–2 mm in 18 (17%), and ≥2 mm in 53 (49%). IBTR occurred in seven patients (6.5%) during a median follow-up of 48 months (range, 12–217 months), with a median time to recurrence of 33 months. Kaplan–Meier analysis showed no significant difference in recurrence-free survival according to a 2 mm margin threshold, whereas margins < 1 mm were associated with significantly worse outcomes (p = 0.002). Conclusions: Margins < 1 mm were associated with increased IBTR risk, whereas margins < 2 mm did not appear to confer uniform risk. These findings suggest that margin widths between 1 and 2 mm may represent a heterogeneous group, and clinical decision-making in this range should be individualized. However, further studies are needed to validate these outcomes.

MedicinaVol. 62(6)
Ondokuz Mayıs University (TR)
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 7%
Breast Cancer Treatment Studies
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.