CorrectClips™

CorrectClips™ 2018-05-01T21:38:39+00:00

The Standard for Tissue Orientation

CorrectClips provide secure orientation of excised tissue on the image. CorrectClips allow a complete view of tissue so that lesions are quickly located. The surgeon applies the sterile clips while in the OR. The clips are translucent on the image; only the letters indicating orientation show brightly. This is superior to metal tags, which block the view of tissue behind the tag, and which cast a shadow that also occludes visibility.

Intraoperative specimen radiographs are recommended by the American Society of Breast Surgeons Consensus Conference 2015.1

The Vector Surgical Tissue Orientation System is comprised of CorrectClips for the intraoperative radiograph and MarginMarker sterile inks for pathology analysis. When CorrectClips are used with MarginMarker, the surgeon clips them onto the specimen after the MarginMarker inks are applied. Paired with the MarginMarker sterile ink kit, CorrectClips can result in improved patient outcomes and greater efficiency. Use of the Vector Surgical System can result in more accurate re-excisions,2,3 fewer unnecessary re-excisions,1,2,4 lower cancer recurrence5,6 and improved cosmesis.1,3

REQUEST A SAMPLE

“Orientation of breast specimens is no more a guessing game with CorrectClips. They are seen in accompanying radiology films. They are easy to remove after applying ink to the specimens.”

Hi Hong, MD
Department of Pathology
Riverview Hospital
Wisconsin Rapids, Wisconsin USA

“Correct orientation of the biopsy is critical to evaluation of margins and clearance of cancer.”

Danny Robinette, MD
Surgeon
Surgery Center of Fairbanks
Fairbanks, Alaska USA

Additional Testimonials

CorrectClips radiographic markers define each margin on the X-ray, providing more secure and accurate designation of tissue margins. Use of Vector Surgical’s Tissue Orientation System can result in:

Better Patient Outcomes

  • Fewer unnecessary re-excisions 12
  • More accurate re-excisions 123
  • Potentially lower cancer recurrence when complete resection is accomplished 456

Efficiency

  • Less time lost to re-imaging due to an obstructed view of the lesion or ambiguous orientation
  • More efficient radiologist-surgeon communication

Safety

  • Eliminates risk of needle stick in the OR

CorrectClips Radiographic Markers

  • Sterile, single-use set of six clips
  • Translucent on X-ray image
  • Letter tags representing tissue margins are visible on X-ray

Performance of CorrectClips

  • Allow an unobstructed view of the specimen
  • Attach securely to both dense and fatty tissue
  • Maintain orientation of specimen in the recommended two orthogonal views 789
  • Are compatible with compression of the tissue
  • Release mechanism allows removal with minimal damage to the tissue

Applications

  • Breast tissue masses, such as excisional biopsies with X-ray localization
  1. Landercasper, J., Attai, D., Atisha, D., Beitsch, P., Bosserman, L., Boughey, J., Carter, J., Edge, S., Feldman, S., Froman, J. and Greenberg, C. “Toolbox to reduce lumpectomy reoperations and improve cosmetic outcome in breast cancer patients: The American Society of Breast Surgeons Consensus Conference.” Annals of Surgical Oncology 22.10 (2015): 3174-3183.
  2. Singh, M.; Singh, G.; Hogan, K.T.; Atkins, K.A.; and Schroen, A.T.“The Effect of Intraoperative Specimen Inking on Lumpectomy Re-excision Rates.” World Journal of Surgical Oncology 8.4 (2010).
  3. Gibson, G.R.; Lesnikoski, B.A.; Yoo, J.; Mott, L.A.; Cady, B.; and Barth, R.J. Jr. “A Comparison of Ink-Directed and Traditional Whole-Cavity Re-Excision for Breast Lumpectomy Specimens with Positive Margins.”  Annals of Surgical Oncology8.9 (2001): 693-704.
  4. Dooley, W.C. and Parker, J. “Understanding the Mechanisms Creating False Positive Lumpectomy Margins.” American Journal of Surgery190 (2005): 606-608.
  5. Gage, I.; Schnitt, S.J.; Nixon, A.J.; Silver, B.; Recht, A.; Troyan, S.L.; Eberlein, T.; Love, S.M.; Gelman, R.; Harris, J.R.; and Connolly, J.L. “Pathologic Margin Involvement and the Risk of Recurrence in Patients Treated with Breast-Conserving Therapy.” Cancer78.9 (1996): 1921-1928.
  6. Menes, T.S.; Tartter, P.I.; Bleiweiss, I.; Godbold, J.H.; Estabrook, A.; and Smith, S.R. “The Consequence of Multiple Re-excisions to Obtain Clear Lumpectomy Margins in Breast Cancer Patients.” Annals of Surgical Oncology12.11 (2005): 881-885.
  7. Rebner, M; Pennes, D.R.; Baker, D.E.; Adler, D.D.; and Boyd, P.“Two-View Specimen Radiography in Surgical Biopsy of Nonpalpable Breast Masses.” American Journal of Roentgenology149 (1987): 283-285.
  8. “Practice Guideline for Breast Conservation Therapy in the Management of Invasive Breast Carcinoma.” American College of Radiology. Jan. 1, 2002.
  9. McCormick, J.T.; Keleher, A.J.; Tikhomirov, V.B.; Budway, R.J.; and Caushaj, P.F.“Analysis of the Use of Specimen Mammography in Breast Conservation Therapy.” American Journal of Surgery 188.4 (2004): 433-436.

Additional Medical References

Vector Surgical, the Vector Surgical Logo and CorrectClips are trademarks of Vector Surgical, LLC. Reg. U.S. Pat & TM Off.