Regina Hampton, MD, FACS
Doctor’s Community Hospital
Lanham, Maryland USA
“I believe the use of MarginMarker prevents margin ‘mistakes,’ and that the initial surgery achieves clear margins and a better cosmetic outcome as a result.”
M. Margaret Hadcock, MD, FACS
Fresno Surgical Hospital & St. Agnes Hospital
Fresno, California USA
“Excellent product. It is easy to use and gives me confidence that my margins are accurate.”
Daniel F. Barnas, MD, FACS
Borgess Medical Center
Kalamazoo, Michigan USA
MarginMarker sterile inks fully define each margin surface, providing more secure and accurate designation of tissue margins. Use of MarginMarker can result in:
Better Patient Outcomes
- More accurate re-excisions1,2
- Fewer unnecessary re-excisions1,3,4
- Potentially lower cancer recurrence when complete resection is accomplished5,6
- Better cosmesis due to re-excision of less tissue2,4
Valuable Time Saved
- More efficient surgeon-pathologist communication
- Less risk of needle stick in the OR
MarginMarker Sterile Ink Kit
- The MarginMarker ink kit is a sterile, single use device. The kit includes six ink colors, applicators, fixative, and annotation labels.
Performance of MarginMarker Inks
- Formulated to securely adhere to tissue, allowing precise and quick application in the OR
- Adhere throughout specimen processing, including after suspension in formalin
- Sterility supports cytogenetic analysis or microbiology testing
- Minimize the risk of cross contamination with multiple specimens
Cancer surgeries in which tissue orientation is important, including:
- General and Oncological Surgeons: breast, pancreas, colon, liver, lip, anus, ovary, uterus, labia and soft tissue
- Plastic, ENT and Dermatological Surgeons: basal skin cancer, squamous cell carcinoma and melanoma
- 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 Oncology8.4 (2010).
- 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.
- Dooley, W.C. and Parker, J. “Understanding the Mechanisms Creating False Positive Lumpectomy Margins.” American Journal of Surgery190 (2005): 606-608.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
Vector Surgical, the Vector Surgical Logo and MarginMarker are trademarks of Vector Surgical, LLC. Reg. U.S. Pat & TM Off.