Incidental Lesions Detected in Reduction Mammoplasty Specimens
- 33 Downloads
The incidence of breast lesions detected in reduction mammoplasty specimens varies with patients’ previous history of breast cancer, patients’ age, and the number of submitted pathological sections. The incidence of proliferative lesions with atypia including invasive carcinoma varies in different studies between 0.2% and 1.1%. In a retrospective review, 392 patients who underwent reduction mammoplasty mainly for symptomatic macromastia or breast symmetry were included in this study. All specimens of reduction mammoplasty were submitted for pathological examination and at least four tissue sections were taken for each breast. Among 392 patients, pathological examinations revealed proliferative lesions with atypia in 7 patients (1.7%) and invasive carcinoma in 1 patient (0.2%). Although proliferative lesions with atypia were found to increase in number compared with the patients under 40 years, there was no statistical significance found. Ductal in situ carcinoma was demonstrated in 1 patient (1%) younger than 40 years. Although there is no consensus formed for when to send mammoplasty specimens for pathological analysis or how many numbers of tissue sections to submit, we recommend routine pathological analysis of mammoplasty specimens and submitting at least four tissue sections regardless of patients’ age.
KeywordsMacromastia Reduction mammoplasty Proliferative lesions Invasive cancer
Compliance with Ethical Standards
This study was designed as a single left and retrospective study which was approved by the institutional review board.
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
- 2.American Society of Plastic Surgeons (2014) Reconstructive plastic surgery statistics. 2014. Available at: http://www.plasticsurgery.org/Documents/newsresources/statistics/2014-statistics/reconstructiveprocedure-trends-2014.pdf. Accessed 24 June 2015
- 3.American Society of Plastic Surgeons (2014) Cosmetic plastic surgery statistics. 2014. Available at: http://www.plasticsurgery.org/Documents/news-resources/statistics/2014-statistics/cosmetic-procedure-trends-2014.pdf. Accessed 28 Oct 2015
- 8.Ishag MT, Bashinsky DY, Beliaeva IV, Niemann TH, Marsh WL Jr (2003) Pathologic findings in reduction mammoplasty specimens. Am J ClinPathol 120:377–380Google Scholar
- 12.Fitzgibbons PL, Henson DE, Hutter RV (1998) Benign breast changes and the risk for subsequent breast cancer: an update of the 1985 consensus statement. Cancer Committee of the College of American Pathologists. Arch Pathol Lab Med 122:1053e5Google Scholar
- 15.Degnim AC, Winham SJ, Frank RD, Pankratz VS, Dupont WD, Vierkant RA, Frost MH, Hoskin TL, Vachon CM, Ghosh K, Hieken TJ, Carter JM, Denison LA, Broderick B, Hartmann LC, Visscher DW, Radisky DC (2018) Model for predicting breast cancer risk in women with atypical hyperplasia. J Clin Oncol 36(18):1840–1846CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 16.Hartmann LC, Radisky DC, Frost MH, Santen RJ, Vierkant RA, Benetti LL, Tarabishy Y, Ghosh K, Visscher DW, Degnim AC (2014) Understanding the premalignant potential of atypical hyperplasia through its natural history: a longitudinal cohort study. Cancer Prev Res (Phila) 7(2):211–217CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 17.McEvoy MP, Coopey SB, Mazzola E, Buckley J, Belli A, Polubriaginof F, Merrill AL, Tang R, Garber JE, Smith BL, Gadd MA, Specht MC, Guidi AJ, Roche CA, Hughes KS (2015) Breast cancer risk and follow-up recommendations for young women diagnosed with atypical hyperplasia and lobular carcinoma in situ (LCIS). Ann Surg Oncol 22(10):3346–3349CrossRefGoogle Scholar