Annals of Surgical Oncology

, Volume 16, Issue 5, pp 1170–1175 | Cite as

Axillary Staging by Percutaneous Biopsy: Sensitivity of Fine-Needle Aspiration Versus Core Needle Biopsy

  • Roshni Rao
  • Lisa Lilley
  • Valerie Andrews
  • Lee Radford
  • Michael Ulissey
Breast Oncology

Abstract

Background

We sought to determine whether percutaneous core needle biopsy (CNB) of suspicious axillary lymph nodes in patients with breast cancer offers improved diagnostic accuracy compared with fine-needle aspiration (FNA).

Methods

Records of 400 patients were reviewed to identify patients undergoing ultrasound-guided biopsy followed by surgical axillary evaluation (sentinel lymph node biopsy or axillary lymph node dissection). Patients underwent diagnosis and treatment at a single high-volume county hospital. Data collected included demographics, treatment, biopsy, and surgical pathology. Percutaneous biopsy results were compared with results of sentinel lymph node biopsy or axillary lymph node dissection.

Results

Forty-seven patients met final study criteria. Twenty-two patients underwent FNA, and 25 underwent CNB. Sensitivity of FNA was 75% vs. 82% for CNB. Specificity for both was 100%. Additionally, a cost comparison of CNB versus FNA revealed CNB to be $404; FNA cost was $237.

Conclusions

The current data do not support the routine use of CNB over FNA for preoperative axillary staging in breast cancer patients with clinically negative axillas. Additionally, the substantial increase in cost without a marked improvement in sensitivity may favor the performance of FNA.

References

  1. 1.
    Lucci L, McCall M, Beitsch P, et al. Surgical complications associated with sentinel lymph node dissection (SLND) plus axillary lymph node dissection compared with SLND alone in the American College of Surgeons Oncology Group Trial Z0011. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25(24):3657–63.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Burak WE, Hollenbeck ST, Zervos EE, et al. Sentinel lymph node biopsy results in less postoperative morbidity compared with axillary lymph node dissection for breast cancer. Am J Surg 2002:183:23–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Haid A, Kuehn T, Konstantiniuk P, et al. Shoulder-arm morbidity following axillary dissection and sentinel node only biopsy for breast cancer. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2002;28:705–10.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Krishnamurthy S, Sneige N, Bedi DG, et al. Role of ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration of indeterminate and suspicious axillary lymph nodes in the initial staging of breast carcinoma. Cancer. 2002;95(5):982–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Topal U, Punar S, Tasdelen I, et al. Role of ultrasound-guided core needle biopsy of axillary lymph nodes in the initial staging of breast carcinoma. Eur J Radiol. 2005;56(3):382–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Podkrajsek M, Music MM, Kadivec M, et al. Role of ultrasound in the preoperative staging of patients with breast cancer. Eur Radiol. 2005;15(5):1044–50.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Khan A, Sabel MS, Nees A, et al. Comprehensive axillary evaluation in neoadjuvant chemotherapy patients with ultrasonography and sentinel lymph node biopsy. Ann Surg Oncol. 2005;12(9):697–704.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    van Rijk MC, Deurloo EE, Nieweg OE, et al. Ultrasonography and fine-needle aspiration cytology can spare breast cancer patients unnecessary sentinel lymph node biopsy. Ann Surg Oncol. 2006;13(1):31–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Somasundar P, Gass J, Steinhoff M, et al. Role of ultrasound-guided axillary fine-needle aspiration in the management of invasive breast cancer. Am J Surg. 2006;192(4):458–61.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Nori J, Vanzi E, Bazzocchi M, et al. Role of axillary ultrasound examination in the selection of breast cancer patients for sentinel node biopsy. Am J Surg. 2007;193(1):16–20.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    van Deurzen CH, Seldenrijk CA, Koelemij R, et al. The microanatomic location of metastatic breast cancer in sentinel lymph nodes predicts nonsentinel lymph node involvement. Ann Surg Oncol. 2008;15:1309–15.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kuenen-Boumeester V, Menke-Pluymers M, de Kanter AY, et al. Ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration cytology of axillary lymph nodes in breast cancer patients. A preoperative procedure. Eur J Cancer. 2003;39(2):170–4.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Bedrosian I, Bedi D, Kuerer HM. Impact of clinicopathological factors on sensitivity of axillary ultrasoungraphy in the detection of axillary nodal metastases in patients with breast cancer. Ann Surg Oncol. 2003;10(9):1025–30.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Damera A, Evans AJ, Cornford EJ. Diagnosis of axillary nodal metastases by ultrasound-guided core biopsy in primary operable breast cancer. Br J Cancer. 2003;89(7):1310–3.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    He Q, Fan X, Yuan T, et al. Eleven years of experience reveals that fine-needle aspiration cytology is still a useful method for preoperative diagnosis of breast cancer. Breast. 2007;16(3):303–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Philpotts LE, Hooley RJ, Lee CH. Comparison of automated versus vacuum-assisted biopsy methods for sonographically guided core biopsy of the breast. Am J Radiol. 2003;180:347–51.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Simon JR, Kalbhen CL, Cooper RA. Accuracy and complications rates of US-guided vacuum-assisted core breast biopsy: initial results. Radiology. 2000;205:694–7.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Boughey JC, Middleton LP, Harker L, et al. Utility of ultrasound and fine-needle aspiration biopsy of the axilla in the assessment of invasive lobular carcinoma of the breast. Am J Surg. 2007;194:450–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Society of Surgical Oncology 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Roshni Rao
    • 1
  • Lisa Lilley
    • 2
  • Valerie Andrews
    • 1
  • Lee Radford
    • 3
  • Michael Ulissey
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Surgery, Division of Surgical OncologyUniversity of Texas Southwestern Medical CenterDallasUSA
  2. 2.Parkland Memorial Hospital, Women’s Health ServicesUniversity of Texas Southwestern Medical CenterDallasUSA
  3. 3.Department of RadiologyUniversity of Texas Southwestern Medical CenterDallasUSA

Personalised recommendations