Skip to main content
Log in

Evaluation of stereotactic core needle biopsy (SCNB) of the breast at a single institution

  • Published:
Breast Cancer Research and Treatment Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Stereotactic core needle biopsy (SCNB) has become a popular method for diagnosis of occult breast abnormalities. There are few large series of SCNB from a single institution. Data on patients undergoing SCNB for mammographic abnormalities were collected prospectively over 43 months at a university hospital. Mammographic findings were categorized as benign, probably benign, indeterminate, suspicious or malignant. For lesions with SCNB pathology that were non-diagnostic, showed atypical hyperplasia or malignancy (in situ or invasive), or were discordant with the pre-biopsy mammogram findings, surgical excision was recommended. Subsequent surgical pathology was reviewed. All remaining lesions were followed mammographically after SCNB. SCNB was performed on 692 lesions in 607 patients. There were 79 malignancies, for a positive SCNB rate of 11.4%. The 349 SCNB performed for benign, probably benign and indeterminate lesions on mammography had a positive SCNB rate of only 4%. Surgery was recommended for 127 (18.3%) lesions, while 565 (81.6%) were followed mammographically after SCNB. A compliance rate of 61% for at least one follow-up mammogram was obtained, with a median follow-up of 17.2 months and with no cancers found. The sensitivity for malignancy with SCNB was 93%. SCNB provides a minimally invasive method to assess mammographic abnormalities. Abnormalities considered radiographically to be other than malignant or suspicious yielded few cancers. In this series a low positive SCNB rate resulted in no false negatives on mammographic follow-up. The optimal positive biopsy rate for SCNB is debatable.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Bassett L, Winchester DP, Caplan RB, et al.: Stereotactic coreneedle biopsy of the breast: a report of the Joint Task Force of the American College of Radiology, American College of Surgeons, and College of American Pathologists. CA-A Cancer J Clin 47: 171–190, 1997

    Google Scholar 

  2. Parker SH, Burbank F, Jackman RJ, et al.: Percutaneous largecore breast biopsy: a multi-institutional study. Radiology 193: 359–364, 1994

    Google Scholar 

  3. Bauer RL, Sung J, Eckhert KH, Koul A, Castillo NB, Nemoto T: Comparison of histologic diagnosis between stereotactic core needle biopsy and open surgical biopsy. Annals Surg Oncol 4: 316–320, 1997

    Google Scholar 

  4. Parker SH, Lovin JD, Jobe WE, et al.: Stereotactic breast biopsy with a biopsy gun. Radiology 176: 741–747, 1999

    Google Scholar 

  5. Elvecrog EL, Lechner MC, Nelson MT: Nonpalpable breast lesions: correlation of stereotactic large-core needle biopsy and surgical biopsy results. Radiology 188: 453–455, 1993

    Google Scholar 

  6. Parker SH, Lovin JD, Jobe WE, Burke BJ, Hopper KD, Yakes WF: Nonpalpable breast lesions: stereotactic automated largecore biopsies. Radiology 180: 403–407, 1991

    Google Scholar 

  7. Gisvold JJ, Goellner JR, Grant CS, et al.: Breast biopsy: a comparative study of stereotactically guided core and excisional techniques. Am J Radiol 162: 815–820, 1994

    Google Scholar 

  8. Cross MJ, Evans WP, Peters GN, Cheek JH, Jones RC, Krakos P: Stereotactic breast biopsy as an alternative to open excixional biopsy. Annals Surg Oncol 2: 195–200, 1995

    Google Scholar 

  9. Frazee RC, Roberts JW, Symmonds JW, et al.: Open versus sterotactic breast biopsy. Am J Surg 172: 491–493, 1996

    Google Scholar 

  10. Bernstein JR: Role of stereotactic breast biopsy. Semin Surg Oncol 12: 299, 1996

    Google Scholar 

  11. Mitnick JS, Vazquez MF, Pressman PI, Harris MN, Roses DF: Stereotactic fine-needle aspiration biopsy for the evaluation of non-palpable breast lesions: report of an experience based on 2, 988 cases. Annals Surg Oncol 3: 185–191, 1996

    Google Scholar 

  12. Burbank F: Stereotactic breast biopsy: its history, its present, and its future. Am Surg 62: 128–150, 1996

    Google Scholar 

  13. Kopans DB: Caution on core (letter). Radiology 193: 325–326, 1994

    Google Scholar 

  14. Vetto JT: (invited commentary). World J Surg 21: 798, 1997

    Google Scholar 

  15. Stolier AJ: Stereotactic breast biopsy: a surgical series. J Am College Surg 185: 224–228, 1997

    Google Scholar 

  16. Park S, Galbo C, Ghosh BC: Stereotactic breast biopsy as an alternative to excisional biopsy. World J Surg 21: 794–798, 1997

    Google Scholar 

  17. Pettine S, Place R, Babu S, Williard W, Kim D, Carter P: Stereotactic breast biopsy is accurate, minimally invasive, and cost effective. Am J Surg 171: 474–476, 1996

    Google Scholar 

  18. Devia A, Murray KA, Nelson EW: Stereotactic core needle biopsy and the workup of mammographic breast lesions. Archives Surg 132: 512–516, 1997

    Google Scholar 

  19. Israel PZ: The revolution in breast biopsy: where is the surgeon? Am Surg 62: 93–95, 1996

    Google Scholar 

  20. Taft R, Chao K, Dear P, King C: The role of core biopsy in the diagnosis of mammographically detected lesions. Australian New Zealand J Surg 66: 664–667, 1996

    Google Scholar 

  21. Nguyen M, McCombs MM, Ghandehari S, et al: An update in core needle biopsy for radiologically detected breast lesions. Cancer 78: 2340–2345, 1996

    Google Scholar 

  22. Bear HD: Image-guided breast biopsy - how, when, and by whom? J Surg Oncol 67: 1–5, 1998

    Google Scholar 

  23. Dershaw DD, Liberman L: Stereotactic breast biopsy: indications and results. Oncology 12: 907–916, 1998

    Google Scholar 

  24. Seoudi H, Mortier J, Basile R, Curletti E: Stereotactic core needle biopsy of needle biopsy of non-palpable breast lesions. Archives Surg 133: 366–372, 1998

    Google Scholar 

  25. Brenner RJ, Sickles EA: Surveillance mammography and stereotactic core breast biopsy for probably benign lesions: a cost comparison analysis. Acad Radiol 4: 419–425, 1997

    Google Scholar 

  26. Sickles EA: Periodic mammographic follow-up of probably benign lesions: results in 3184 consecutive cases. Radiology 179: 463–468, 1991

    Google Scholar 

  27. Lindfors KK, O'Connor J, Acredolo CR, et al.: Short-interval follow-up mammography versus immediate core biopsy of benign breast lesions: assessment of patient stress. Am J Roentgenol 171: 55–58, 1998

    Google Scholar 

  28. Brown TA, Wall JW, Christensen ED, et al.: Atypical hyperplasia in the era of stereotactic core needle biopsy. J Surg Oncol 67: 168–173, 1998

    Google Scholar 

  29. Parker SH, Burbank F, Jackman RJ, et al.: Response to “Caution on Core” (letter). Radiology 193: 326–327, 1994

    Google Scholar 

  30. Burbank F: Mammographic findings after 14-guage automated needle and 14-guage directional, vacuum-assisted stereotactic breast biopsies. Radiology 204: 153–156, 1997

    Google Scholar 

  31. Frazee RC: (invited commentary). Oncology 12: 916, 1998

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Latosinsky, S., Cornell, D., Bear, H.D. et al. Evaluation of stereotactic core needle biopsy (SCNB) of the breast at a single institution. Breast Cancer Res Treat 60, 277–283 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1006449319179

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1006449319179

Navigation