Advertisement

European Radiology

, Volume 17, Issue 9, pp 2376–2383 | Cite as

Breast lesions with imaging-histologic discordance during US-guided 14G automated core biopsy: can the directional vacuum-assisted removal replace the surgical excision? Initial findings

  • Min Jung Kim
  • Eun-Kyung KimEmail author
  • Ji Young Lee
  • Ji Hyun Youk
  • Byeong-Woo Park
  • Seung-Il Kim
  • Haeryoung Kim
  • Ki Keun Oh
Breast

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to determine the frequency of carcinoma at percutaneous directional vacuum-assisted removal (DVAR) in women with imaging-histologic discordance during ultrasound (US)-guided automated core needle biopsy, and to determine the role of DVAR in breast lesions with imaging-histologic discordance. A US-guided 14-gauge automated core needle biopsy was performed on 837 consecutive lesions. Imaging-histologic discordance was prospectively considered in 33 of 634 benign biopsies. DVAR was recommended in those lesions. Among the 33 lesions, 26 lesions that underwent subsequent DVAR or surgical excision made up our study population. Medical records, imaging studies, and histologic findings were reviewed. Among the 26 lesions, 18 lesions underwent subsequent US–guided DVAR, with 8-gauge probes for 15 of the lesions, and 11-gauge for three of the lesions. Two lesions were diagnosed as having carcinoma (2/18, 11.1% of upgrade rate; 3.1–32.8% CI). The remaining eight lesions underwent subsequent surgical excision, and carcinoma was diagnosed in one case (12.5% of upgrade rate; 2.2–47.1% CI). A US-guided DVAR of the breast mass with imaging-histologic discordance during US-guided 14-gauge automated core needle biopsy is a valuable alternative to surgery as a means of obtaining a definitive histological diagnosis.

Keywords

Breast neoplasms Breast ultrasonography Interventional ultrasound Biopsies 

References

  1. 1.
    Dershaw DD, Morris EA, Liberman L et al (1996) Nondiagnostic stereotaxic core breast biopsy: results of rebiopsy. Radiology 198:323–325PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Liberman L, Dershaw DD, Glassman JR et al (1997) Analysis of cancers not diagnosed at stereotactic core breast biopsy. Radiology 203:151–157PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Philpotts LE, Shaheen NA, Carter D et al (1999) Comparison of rebiopsy rates after stereotactic core needle biopsy of the breast with 11-gauge vacuum suction probe versus 14-gauge needle and automatic gun. AJR Am J Roentgenol 172:683–687PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Meyer JE, Smith DN, Lester SC et al (1998) Large-needle core biopsy: nonmalignant breast abnormalities evaluated with surgical excision or repeat core biopsy. Radiology 206:717–720PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Liberman L, Feng TL, Dershaw DD et al (1998) US-guided core breast biopsy: use and cost-effectiveness. Radiology 208:717–723PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Liberman L, Drotman M, Morris EA et al (2000) Imaging-histologic discordance at percutaneous breast biopsy. Cancer 89:2538–2546PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Lee CH, Egglin TK, Philpotts L et al (1997) Cost-effectiveness of stereotactic core needle biopsy: analysis by means of mammographic findings. Radiology 202:849–854PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Darling ML, Smith DN, Lester SC et al (2000) Atypical ductal hyperplasia and ductal carcinoma in situ as revealed by large-core needle breast biopsy: results of surgical excision. AJR Am J Roentgenol 175:1341–1346PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Jackman RJ, Burbank F, Parker SH et al (2001) Stereotactic breast biopsy of nonpalpable lesions: determinants of ductal carcinoma in situ underestimation rates. Radiology 218:497–502PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Lee CH, Carter D, Philpotts LE et al (2000) Ductal carcinoma in situ diagnosed with stereotactic core needle biopsy: can invasion be predicted? Radiology 217:466–470PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Liberman L, Smolkin JH, Dershaw DD et al (1998) Calcification retrieval at stereotactic, 11-gauge, directional, vacuum-assisted breast biopsy. Radiology 208:251–260PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Meyer JE, Smith DN, Lester SC et al (1999) Large-core needle biopsy of nonpalpable breast lesions. JAMA 281:1638–1641PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Won B, Reynolds HE, Lazaridis CL et al (1999) Stereotactic biopsy of ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast using an 11-gauge vacuum-assisted device: persistent underestimation of disease. AJR Am J Roentgenol 173:227–229PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Fine RE, Whitworth PW, Kim JA et al (2003) Low-risk palpable breast masses removed using a vacuum-assisted hand-held device. Am J Surg 186:362–367PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    American College of Radiology (2003) Breast imaging reporting and data system (BI-RADS), 4th edn. American College of Radiology, RestonGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Berry CC (1990) A tutorial on confidence intervals for proportions in diagnostic radiology. AJR Am J Roentgenol 154:477–480PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Liberman L (2000) Clinical management issues in percutaneous core breast biopsy. Radiol Clin North Am 38:791–807PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Davis PS, Wechsler RJ, Feig SA et al (1988) Migration of breast biopsy localization wire. AJR Am J Roentgenol 150:787–788PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Norton LW, Pearlman NW (1988) Needle localization breast biopsy: accuracy versus cost. Am J Surg 156:13B–15BPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Burbank F, Parker SH, Fogarty TJ (1996) Stereotactic breast biopsy: improved tissue harvesting with the Mammotome. Am Surg 62:738–744PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Mercado CL, Hamele-Bena D, Oken SM et al (2006) Papillary lesions of the breast at percutaneous core-needle biopsy. Radiology 238:801–808PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Rosen EL, Bentley RC, Baker JA et al (2002) Imaging-guided core needle biopsy of papillary lesions of the breast. AJR Am J Roentgenol 179:1185–1192PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Liberman L, Zakowski MF, Avery S et al (1999) Complete percutaneous excision of infiltrating carcinoma at stereotactic breast biopsy: how can tumor size be assessed? AJR Am J Roentgenol 173:1315–1322PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    March DE, Coughlin BF, Barham RB et al (2003) Breast masses: removal of all US evidence during biopsy by using a handheld vacuum-assisted device–initial experience. Radiology 227:549–555PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Parker SH, Klaus AJ, McWey PJ et al (2001) Sonographically guided directional vacuum-assisted breast biopsy using a handheld device. AJR Am J Roentgenol 177:405–408PubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Perez-Fuentes JA, Longobardi IR, Acosta VF et al (2001) Sonographically guided directional vacuum-assisted breast biopsy: preliminary experience in Venezuela. AJR Am J Roentgenol 177:1459–1463PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Flanagan FL, McDermott MB, Barton PT et al (1996) Invasive breast cancer: mammographic measurement. Radiology 199:819–823PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Burak WE Jr, Agnese DM, Povoski SP et al (2003) Radiofrequency ablation of invasive breast carcinoma followed by delayed surgical excision. Cancer 98:1369–1376PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Berg WA, Gutierrez L, NessAiver MS et al (2004) Diagnostic accuracy of mammography, clinical examination, US, and MR imaging in preoperative assessment of breast cancer. Radiology 233:830–849PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Min Jung Kim
    • 1
  • Eun-Kyung Kim
    • 1
    Email author
  • Ji Young Lee
    • 1
  • Ji Hyun Youk
    • 1
  • Byeong-Woo Park
    • 2
  • Seung-Il Kim
    • 2
  • Haeryoung Kim
    • 3
  • Ki Keun Oh
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Research Institute of Radiological ScienceYonsei University College of MedicineSeoulSouth Korea
  2. 2.Department of General SurgeryYonsei University College of MedicineSeoulSouth Korea
  3. 3.Department of PathologyYonsei University College of MedicineSeoulSouth Korea

Personalised recommendations