Annals of Surgical Oncology

, Volume 10, Issue 2, pp 113–116 | Cite as

Nonsurgical Evaluation of Pathologic Nipple Discharge

  • Rache Simmons
  • Tara Adamovich
  • Meghan Brennan
  • Paul Christos
  • Mimi Schultz
  • Carolyn Eisen
  • Michael Osborne
Original Articles

Abstract

Background:Nipple discharge is a common breast complaint. Because most nipple discharge is a result of benign processes, less-invasive, nonsurgical diagnostic modalities have been explored to reduce the need for surgical intervention.

Methods:Between September 1994 and December 2000, 108 female patients aged 25 to 77 years underwent duct excision for bloody or clear nipple discharge. Results of various preoperative studies were compared with surgical pathology to determine the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of these tests in detecting malignant ductal pathology.

Results:Of the 108 surgical histopathology specimens, 90 of 108 patients were benign, 5 of 108 patients were atypical, and 13 of 108 patients were malignant. The sensitivity of mammography was 57.1%, specificity was 61.5%, positive predictive value was 16.7%, and negative predictive value was 91.4%. Hemoccult sensitivity was 50%, specificity was 0%, positive predictive value was 20%, and negative predictive value was 0%. The sensitivity of ductography was 0%, specificity was 90%, positive predictive value was 0%, and negative predictive value was 81.8%. The sensitivity of cytology was 11.1%, specificity was 96.3%, positive predictive value was 50%, and negative predictive value was 76.5%.

Conclusions:Preoperative evaluations by mammography, Hemoccult, ductography, and cytology are poor predictors of histological diagnosis. These data suggest that patients with pathologic nipple discharge should undergo surgical biopsy for accurate diagnosis.

Key Words:

Nipple discharge Duct excision Mammography Hemoccult Ductography Cytology 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

REFERENCES

  1. 1.
    Leis HP, Greene FL, Cammarata A, et al. Nipple discharge: surgical significance. South Med J 1998; 81: 22–5.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    RM Simmons, E Rubin, J Pisch. Breast cancer. In: Harvey J, Beattie E eds. Cancer Surgery. Philadelphia: Saunders, 1996:556, 7.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Dawes LG, Bowen C, Venta LA, Morrow M. Ductography for nipple discharge. No replacement for ductal excision. Surgery 1998; 124: 685–91.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ito Y, Tamaki Y, Nakano Y, et al. Nonpalpable breast cancer with nipple discharge: how should it be treated? Anticancer Res 1997; 17: 791–4.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Salmon RJ, Merle S, Boue P. Demonstration of blood in nipple discharge using the Hemoccult. J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod (Paris) 1987; 16: 595–8.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ambrogetti D, Berni D, Catarzi S, Ciatto S. The role of ductal galactography in the differential diagnosis of breast carcinoma. Radiol Med 1996; 91: 198–201.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Sessa M, Ceroni L, Bertolotti A. Proliferative pathology of the mammary ducts: diagnostic value of ductogalactography and cytologic correlations. Radiol Med 1991; 81: 597–600.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Scott S, Morrow M. Breast cancer. Making the diagnosis. Surg Clin North Am 1999; 79: 991–1005.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Society of Surgical Oncology, Inc. 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Rache Simmons
    • 1
    • 5
  • Tara Adamovich
    • 2
  • Meghan Brennan
    • 1
  • Paul Christos
    • 3
  • Mimi Schultz
    • 1
  • Carolyn Eisen
    • 4
  • Michael Osborne
    • 1
  1. 1.Weill Cornell Breast Center, Department of SurgeryNew York
  2. 2.Department of SurgeryThe New York Presbyterian Hospital, The Weill Medical College of Cornell UniversityNew York
  3. 3.Department of Public HealthThe New York Presbyterian Hospital, The Weill Medical College of Cornell UniversityNew York
  4. 4.Department of RadiologyThe New York Presbyterian Hospital, The Weill Medical College of Cornell UniversityNew York
  5. 5.New York

Personalised recommendations