Fine Needle Aspiration of Breast Cytology

  • Rana S. Hoda
  • Rema A. Rao


Breast carcinoma is the most common malignant tumor and the leading cause of carcinoma-related deaths in women worldwide [1]. Fine needle aspiration (FNA) continues to play an integral part in the pre-operative assessment of a breast mass [2, 3] and is the least invasive, fastest, and most cost-effective technique available. Although needle core biopsy (NCB) has largely replaced FNA for diagnosing most solid breast lesions, particularly in the USA, FNA is still used in most countries and displays good clinical performance [1–4].


FNA of breast Fine needle aspiration Needle core biopsy Breast mass Breast lesion Nipple discharge Metastatic breast carcinoma Lymph nodes Histologic correlation 


  1. 1.
    Hoda SA, Brogi E, Koerner FC, Rosen PP. Rosen’s diagnosis of breast pathology by needle core biopsy. 4th ed. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2016.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Dong J, Ly A, Arpin R, Ahmed Q, Brachtel E. Breast fine needle aspiration continues to be relevant in a large academic medical center: experience from Massachusetts General Hospital. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2016;158:297–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ly A, Ono JC, Hughes KS, Pitman MB, Balassanian R. Fine-needle aspiration biopsy of palpable breast masses: patterns of clinical use and patient experience. J Natl Compr Cancer Netw. 2016;14:527–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Topps AR, Barr SP, Pikoulas P, Pritchard SA, Maxwell AJ. Pre-operative axillary ultrasound-guided needle sampling in breast cancer: comparing the sensitivity of fine needle aspiration cytology and core needle biopsy. Ann Surg Oncol. 2018;25:148–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kwak JY, Kim EK, Park HL, Kim JY, Oh KK. Application of the breast imaging reporting and data system final assessment system in sonography of palpable breast lesions and reconsideration of the modified triple test. J Ultrasound Med. 2006;25:1255–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hoda RS. Non-gynecologic cytology on liquid-based preparations: a morphologic review of facts and artifacts. Diagn Cytopathol. 2007;35:621–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Alwahaibi NY, Alsubhi MS, Aldairi N, Alshukaili A, Bai UR. Comparison of ultrafast papanicolaou stain with the standard papanicolaou stain in body fluids and fine needle aspiration specimens. J Lab Phys. 2016;8:19–24.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Arul P, Masilamani S. Application of National Cancer Institute recommended terminology in breast cytology. J Cancer Res Ther. 2017;13:91–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Field AS. Breast FNA biopsy cytology: current problems and the International Academy of Cytology Yokohama standardized reporting system. Cancer. 2017;125:229–30.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ly TY, Barnes PJ, MacIntosh RF. Fine-needle aspiration cytology of mammary fibroadenoma: a comparison of ThinPrep® and Cytospin preparations. Diagn Cytopathol. 2011;39:181–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Heymann JJ, Halligan AM, Hoda SA, Facey KE, Hoda RS. Fine needle aspiration of breast masses in pregnant and lactating women: experience with 28 cases emphasizing ThinPrep findings. Diagn Cytopathol. 2015;43:188–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Yu SN, Li J, Wong SI, Tsang JYS, Ni YB, Chen J, et al. Atypical aspirates of the breast: a dilemma in current cytology practice. J Clin Pathol. 2017;70:1024–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Haji BE, Das DK, Al-Ayadhy B, Pathan SK, George SG, Mallik MK, et al. Fine-needle aspiration cytologic features of four special types of breast cancers: mucinous, medullary, apocrine, and papillary. Diagn Cytopathol. 2007;35:408–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Jha A, Agrawal V, Tanveer N, Khullar R. Metaplastic breast carcinoma presenting as benign breast lump. J Cancer Res Ther. 2017;13:593–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Green KM, Turyan HV, Jones JB, Hoda RS. Metastatic lobular carcinoma in a ThinPrep Pap test: cytomorphology and differential diagnosis. Diagn Cytopathol. 2005;33:58–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Ohashi R, Matsubara M, Watarai Y, Yanagihara K, Yamashita K, Tsuchiya SI, et al. Pleomorphic lobular carcinoma of the breast: a comparison of cytopathological features with other lobular carcinoma variants. Cytopathology. 2017;28:122–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Michael CW, Buschmann B. Can true papillary neoplasms of breast and their mimickers be accurately classified by cytology? Cancer. 2002;96:92–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Plonczak AM, DiMarco AN, Dina R, Gujral DM, Palazzo FF. Breast cancer metastases to the thyroid gland – an uncommon sentinel for diffuse metastatic disease: a case report and review of the literature. J Med Case Rep. 2017;11:269.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Rao R, Hoda SA, Marcus A, Hoda RS. Metastatic breast carcinoma in cerebrospinal fluid: a cytopathological review of 15 cases. Breast J. 2017;23:456–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Shabaik A, Lin G, Peterson M, Hasteh F, Tipps A, Datnow B, et al. Reliability of Her2/neu, estrogen receptor, and progesterone receptor testing by immunohistochemistry on cell block of FNA and serous effusions from patients with primary and metastatic breast carcinoma. Diagn Cytopathol. 2011;39:328–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Peng Y, Butt YM, Chen B, Zhang X, Tang P. Update on immunohistochemical analysis in breast lesions. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2017;141(8):1033–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Georgiannos SN, Chin J, Goode AW, Sheaff M. Secondary neoplasms of the breast: a survey of the 20th century. Cancer. 2001;92:2259–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.CBLPathRye BrookUSA
  2. 2.Papanicolaou Cytology LaboratoryWeill Cornell Medicine/New York Presbyterian HospitalNew YorkUSA

Personalised recommendations