Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

De l’image aux prélèvements mammaires Cytoponctions, microbiopsies, macrobiopsies sous aspiration et système Intact®

  • Conference paper
Cancer du sein

  • 539 Accesses

Résumé

Le cancer du sein est le cancer féminin le plus fréquent et reste la première cause de mortalité par cancer chez la femme. En l’absence de tout moyen de prévention primaire, le diagnostic précoce des lésions de petites tailles au stade infraclinique est un des éléments les plus significatifs qui apporte un gain pronostique significatif et une réduction de mortalité par cancer. L’imagerie interventionnelle en représente une étape importante. Son principal objectif est l’optimisation du diagnostic et du traitement. En cas de malignité, la connaissance des résultats en préopératoire facilite l’annonce du diagnostic, l’élaboration du projet thérapeutique et permet d’optimiser la chirurgie (programmation du geste ganglionnaire, réduction du temps d’extemporané, amélioration de la qualité d’exérèse) [1]. Enfin, sur le plan économique, les biopsies permettent une réduction des coûts de prise en charge. Environ 1 femme sur 6 aura besoin d’une biopsie dans sa vie et l’amélioration des techniques d’imagerie va encore augmenter le nombre de biopsies. Un élément essentiel commun à toutes les techniques de biopsies sera la représentativité et la fiabilité des prélèvements. La qualité des résultats dépendra de l’expérience de l’opérateur, de la qualité de l’indication, des prélèvements, de la lecture cyto-anatomopathologique et enfin de l’intégration des résultats à l’ensemble du dossier médico-radiologique. La prise en charge de ces anomalies est codifiée selon la classification BIRADS de l’American College of Radiology (ACR) qui permet de standardiser une conduite à tenir, et en particulier de poser les indications de prélèvements.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Références

  1. Golub RM, Bennett CL, Stinson T et al. (2004) Cost minimization study of imageguided core biopsy versus surgical excisional biopsy for women with abnormal mammograms. J Clin Oncol 22: 2430–2437

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Burbank F (1997) Stereotactic breast biopsy: comparison of 14-and 11-gauge Mammotome probe performance and complication rates. Am Surg 63: 988–995

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Diaz Leslie K, Wiley E L, Venta Luz A (1999) Are Malignant cells displaced by large-Gauge Needle Core Biopsy of the breast. AJR 173: 1303–1313

    Google Scholar 

  4. Heywang-Kobrunner S, Schaumloffel U, Viehweg P, Hofer H, Buchmann J, Lampe D (1998) Minimally invasive stereotaxic vacuum core breast biopsy. Eur Radiol 8: 377–385

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Jackman RJ, Marzoni FA Jr, Nowels KW (1998) Percutaneous removal of benign mammographic lesions: comparison of automated large-core and directional vacuum-assisted stereotactic biopsy techniques. AJR Am J Roentgenol 171: 1325–1330

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Libermann L, Dershaw DD, Rosen PP, Deutch BM, Abramson AF, Hann LE (1994) Stereotaxic 14-Gauge Breast Biopsy: How Many core Biopsy Specimens are needed. Radiology: 192: 793–795

    Google Scholar 

  7. Steve PH, Jobe WE, Dennis MA et al. (1993) US-guided Automated Large-core breast biopsy. Radiology 187: 507–511

    Google Scholar 

  8. Seror JY, Sananes S, Nizard J et al. (1999) Modalités récentes de prise en charge diagnostique des microcalcifications mammaires. Reproduction humaine et hormones XII: 471–488

    Google Scholar 

  9. Uzan S, Merviel P, Seror J-Y, Chopier J, Antoine M, Sananes S (1996) Place des microbiopsies dans la stratégie diagnostique et thérapeutique à l’égard des microcalcifications mammaires. XIes journées de techniques avancées en gynécologie obstétrique. AGPA éditions, PMA et pédiatrie, Fort-de-France

    Google Scholar 

  10. Burbank F, Parker S, Forgaty TJ (1996) Stereotactic Breast Biopsy: Improved Tissue Harvesting With The Mammotome. Am Surg 62: 343–347

    Google Scholar 

  11. Burbank F (1997) Stereotactic Breast Biopsy: Comparison Of 14-And 11-Gauge Mammotome Probe Performance And Complication Rates. Am Surg 63: 988–995

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Diaz Leslie K, Wiley E L, Venta Luz A (1999) Are Malignant Cells Displaced By Large-Gauge Needle Core Biopsy Of The Breast. AJR 173: 1303–1313

    Google Scholar 

  13. Feillel V, Le Bouedec G, Lafaye C, De Latour M et al. (1999) Le système A.B.B.I®: Expérience du centre Jean Perrin. Présentation aux IXes Journées du Dama-Sein. Paris, Tenon, décembre 1999

    Google Scholar 

  14. Ferzli GS, Hurwitz JB, Puza T et al. (1997) Advanced Brest Biopsy Instrumentation: A Critique. J Am Coll Surg 145: 51

    Google Scholar 

  15. Heywang-Kobrunner SH, Schaumloffel U, Viehweg P, Hofer H, Buchmann J, Lampe D (1998) Minimally Invasive Stereotaxic Vacuum Core Breast Biopsy. Eur Radiol 8: 377–385

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Jackman RJ, Marzoni FA Jr, Nowels KW (1998) Percutaneous removal of benign mammographic lesions: comparison of automated large-core and directional vacuum-assisted stereotactic biopsy techniques. AJR Am J Roentgenol 171: 1325–1330

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Jackson VP, Reynolds HE. Stereotaxic needle core biopsy and fine needle aspiration cytologic evaluation of non palpable breast lesions. Radiology 1991; 81:745–750

    Google Scholar 

  18. Kelley WE, Melzig E, Knayasi G et al. (1998) Stereotactic Automated Surgical Biopsy Of The Breast With The Abbi Device: Technique And Results 6th World Congress Of Endoscopie Surgury, Rome Italy, 3–4 June 1998

    Google Scholar 

  19. L Levy, J Michelin, G Teman, A Lacan et al. (1997) Cancers infracliniques du sein: apport de l’échographie et de l’imagerie interventionnelle. Cancers du sein infraclinique: du dépistage au traitement. Actualités en cancérologie gynécologique et mammaire. IVe Session. Paris: Eska; 69–78

    Google Scholar 

  20. Steve PH, Jobe WE, Dennis MA et al. (1993) Us-Guided Automated Large-Core Breast Biopsy. Radiology 187: 507–511

    Google Scholar 

  21. Seror JY, Sananes S, Nizard J et al. (1999) Modalités récentes de prise en charge diagnostique des microcalcifications mammaires. Reproduction Humaine Et Hormones XII: 471–488

    Google Scholar 

  22. Uzan S, Merviel P, Seror JY, Chopier J, Antoine M, Sananes S (1996) Place des microbiopsies dans la stratégie diagnostique et thérapeutique à l’égard des microcalcifications mammaires. XIes Journées de techniques avancées en gynécologie obstétrique. PMA et pédiatrie, Agpa Éditions Fort De France, 11–18 janvier 1996

    Google Scholar 

  23. Uzan S, Seror JY, Chopier J, Antoine M, Bigot JM (1999) Lésions infra-cliniques du sein: microbiopsies, macro biopsies, chirurgie stéréotaxique, chirurgie conventionnelle? Seins Actualités 1–4

    Google Scholar 

  24. Uzan S, Seror JY, Antoine M, Chopier J (2000) Place Des microbiopsies dans la prise en charge des microcalcifications du sein. Cancer Du Sein, Tribune Libre 13–15

    Google Scholar 

  25. Kollur SM, El Hag IA (2006) FNA of breast fibroadenoma: observer variability and review of cytomorphology with cytohistological correlation. Cytopathology 17: 239–244

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Klijanienko EA (2001) Critical clinicopathologic analysis of 23 cases of FNAC initially recorded as false positive. The 44 Years Experiences Of The Institut Curie Cancer

    Google Scholar 

  27. Collet JF (2004) Les possibilités et les difficultés de la cytopathologie mammaire. Ann Pathol 24: 1981–1982

    Google Scholar 

  28. Pfarl G, Helbich TH, Riedl CC et al. (2002) Stereotactic 11-gauge vacuum-assisted breast biopsy: a validation study. AJR Am J Roentgenol 179: 1503–1507

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Ciatto S, Brancato B, Risso G et al. (2007) Accuracy of fine needle aspiration cytology (FNAC) of axillary lymph nodes as a triage test in breast cancer staging. Breast Cancer Res Treat 103: 85–91

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Sever AR, O’Brien ME, Humphreys S, Singh I, Jones SE, Jones PA (2005) Radiopaque coil insertion into breast cancers prior to neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Breast 14: 108–117

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Burbank F, Forcier N (1997) Tissue marking clip for stereotaxic breast biopsy: initial placement accuracy, long-term stability, and usefulness as a guide for wire localization, Radiology 205: 407–415

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Liberman L, Dershaw DD, Morris EA et al. (1997) Clip placement after stereotaxic vacuum-assisted breast biopsy, Radiology 205: 417–422

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Lomoschitz FM, Helbich TH, Rudas M et al. (2004) Stereotactic 11-gauge vacuumassisted breast biopsy: influence of number of specimens on diagnostic accuracy. Radiology 232: 897–903

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Lai JTW, Burrowes P, Mcgregor JH (1999) Vacuum-assisted large core breast biopsy: complications and their incidence. JACR 51: 232–236

    Google Scholar 

  35. Heywang-Kobrunner SH, Schaumloffel U, Viehweg P, Hofer H, Buchmann J, Lampe D (1998) Minimally invasive stereotaxic vacuum core breast biopsy. Eur Radiol 8: 377–385

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Deutch BM (1997) Stereotactic core breast biopsy of a minimal carcinoma complicated by hematoma: a management dilemna. Radiology 202: 431–433

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Melotti MK, Berg WA (2000) Core Needle Biopsy In Patients Undergoing Anticoagulation Therapy: Preliminary Results AJR 174: 245–249

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Heywang-Kobrunner SH, Schreer I, Decker T, Bocker W (2003) Interdisciplinary consensus on the use and technique of vacuum-assisted stereotactic breast biopsy. Eur J Radiol 47: 232–236

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Seror JY, Antoine M, Scetbon F et al. (2000) Use of stereotaxic aspiration macrobiopsies in managing breast microcalcifications: first series of 115 prospective cases. Gynecol Obstet Fertil 28: 806–819

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Liberman L, Smolkin JH, Dershaw DD, Morris EA, Abramson AF, Rosen PP (1998) Calcification retrieval at stereotactic, 11-gauge, directional, vacuum-assisted breast biopsy. Radiology 208: 251–260

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. Burak WE Jr, Owens KE, Tighe MB et al. (2000) Vacuum-assisted stereotactic breast biopsy: histologic underestimation of malignant lesions. Arch Surg 135: 700–703

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Adrales G, Turk P, Wallace T, Bird R, Norton HJ, Greene F (2000) Is surgical excision necessary for atypical ductal hyperplasia of the breast diagnosed by Mammotome? Am J Surg 180: 313–315

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  43. Jackman RJ, Birdwell RL, Ikeda DM (2002) Atypical ductal hyperplasia: can some lesions be defined as probably benign after stereotactic 11-gauge vacuum-assisted biopsy, eliminating the recommendation for surgical excision? Radiology 224: 548–554

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Sneige N, Lim SC, Whitman GJ et al. (2003) Atypical ductal hyperplasia diagnosis by directional vacuum-assisted stereotactic biopsy of breast microcalcifications. Considerations for surgical excision. Am J Clin Pathol 119: 248–253

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Liberman L, Kaplan JB, Morris EA, Abramson AF, Menell JH, Dershaw DD (2002) To excise or to sample the mammographic target: what is the goal of stereotactic 11-gauge vacuum-assisted breast biopsy? AJR Am J Roentgenol 179: 679–683

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Sanders ME, Page DL, Simpson JF, Schuyler PA, Dale Plummer W, Dupont WD (2006) Interdependence of radial scar and proliferative disease with respect toinvasive breast carcinoma risk in patients with benign breast biopsies. Cancer 106: 1453–1461

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Jacobs TW, Connolly JL, Schnitt SJ (2002) Non malignant lesions in breast core needle biopsies: to excise or not to excise? Am J Surg Pathol 26: 1095–1110

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Marcy PY, Magné M, Hannoun-Lévi JM, Namer M (2001) Complications médicales et implications médicolégales après un geste percutané interventionnel sur le sein. Bull Cancer 88: 1159–1166

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  49. Brenner RJ, Jackman RJ, Parker SH et al. (2002) Percutaneous core needle biopsy of radial scars of the breast: when is excision necessary? AJR Am J Roentgenol 179: 1179–1184

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Cawson JN, Malara F, Kavanagh A, Hill P, Balasubramanium G, Henderson M (2003) Fourteen-gauge needle core biopsy of mammographically evident radial scars: is excision necessary? Cancer 97: 345–351

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Parikh J (2005) Clip migration within 15 days of 11-gauge vacuum-assisted stereotaxic breast biopsy. Case report. AJR 184: 43–46

    Google Scholar 

  52. Beck RM, Gotz L, Heywang-Kobrunner SH (2000) Stereotaxic vacuum core breast biopsy. Experience of 560 Patients. Swiss Surg 6: 108–110

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  53. Lee CH, Philpotts LE, Horvath LJ et al. (1999) Follow-up of breast lesions diagnosed as benign with stereotactic core-needle biopsy: frequency of mammographic change and false-negative rate. Radiology 212: 189–194

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  54. Pfarl G, Helbich TH, Riedl CC et al. (2002) Stereotactic 11-gauge vacuum-assisted breast biopsy: a validation study. AJR Am J Roentgenol 179: 1503–1507

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Bussieres E, Barreau B, De La Quintane BD et al. (2003) Breast biopsies: stereotactic vacuum-assisted core biopsy and stereotactic surgical breast biopsy. Gynecol Obstet Fertil 31: 256–264

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  56. Brenner RJ, Jackman RJ, Parker SH et al. (2002) Percutaneous core needle biopsy of radial scars of the breast: when is excision necessary? AJR Am J Roentgenol 179: 1179–1184

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Dennis MA, Parker SH, Kaske TI et al. (2000) Incidental treament of nipple discharge caused by benign intraductal papilloma though diagnostic Mammotome biopsy. AJR 174: 1263–1268

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  58. Sebag P, Tourasse C, Rouyer N, Lebas P, Denier JF, Michenet P (2006) Value of vacuum assisted biopsies under sonography guidance: results from a multicentric study of 650 lesions. J Radiol 87: 29–34

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  59. Fine RE, Whitworth PW, Kim JA, Harness JK, Boyd BA, Burak WE Jr (2003) Lowrisk palpable breast masses removed using a vacuum-assisted hand-held device. Am J Surg 186: 362–367

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Grady I, Gorsuch H, Wilburn-Bailey S (2005) Ultrasound-guided, vacuum-assisted, percutaneous excision of breast lesions: an accurate technique in the diagnosis of atypical ductal hyperplasia. J Am Coll Surg 201: 14–17

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Philpotts LE, Hooley RJ, Lee CH (2003) Comparison of automated versus vacuumassisted biopsy methods for sonographically guided core biopsy of the breast. AJR Am J Roentgenol 180: 347–351

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Alonso B (2004) Sonographically guided 11-G directional vacuum-assisted breast biopsy as an alternative to surgical excision: utility and cost study in probably benign lesions. Acta Radiol 45: 390–396

    Article  Google Scholar 

  63. Liberman L, Smolkin JH, Dershaw DD, Morris EA, Abramson AF, Rosen PP (1998) Calcification retrieval at stereotactic, 11-gauge, directional, vacuum-assisted breast biopsy. Radiology 208: 251–260

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  64. Burak WE Jr, Owens KE, Tighe MB et al. (2000) Vacuum-assisted stereotactic breast biopsy: histologic underestimation of malignant lesions. Arch Surg 135: 700–703

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Adrales G, Turk P, Wallace T, Bird R, Norton HJ, Greene F (2000) Is surgical excision necessary for atypical ductal hyperplasia of the breast diagnosed by Mammotome? Am J Surg 180: 313–315

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  66. Jackman RJ, Birdwell RL, Ikeda DM (2002) Atypical ductal hyperplasia: can some lesions be defined as probably benign after stereotactic 11-gauge vacuum-assisted biopsy, eliminating the recommendation for surgical excision? Radiology 224: 548–554

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Sneige N, Lim SC, Whitman GJ et al. (2003) Atypical ductal hyperplasia diagnosis by directional vacuum-assisted stereotactic biopsy of breast microcalcifications. Considerations for surgical excision. Am J Clin Pathol 119: 248–253

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  68. Grady I, Gorsuch H, Wilburn-Bailey S (2005) Ultrasound-guided, vacuum-assisted, percutaneous excision of breast lesions: anaccurate technique in the diagnosis of atypical ductal hyperplasia. J Am Coll Surg 201: 14–17

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  69. Sie A, Bryan DC, Gaines V et al. (2006) Multicenter evaluation of the breast lesion excision system, a percutaneous, vacuum-assisted, intact-specimen breast biopsy device. Cancer 107: 945–949

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  70. Killebrew LK, Oneson RH (2006) Comparison of the Diagnostic Accuracy of a Vacuum-Assisted Percutaneous Intact Specimen Sampling Device to a Vacuum-Assisted Core Needle Sampling Device for Breast Biopsy: Initial Experience. Breast J 12: 302–308

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  71. Seror JY, Lesieur B, Scheuer-Niro B, Zerat L, Rouzier R, Uzan S (2011) Predictive factors for complete excision and underestimation of one-pass en bloc excision of non-palpable breast lesions with the Intact Breast Lesion Excision System. Eur J Radiol (in press)

    Google Scholar 

  72. Bussieres E, Barreau B, De La Quintane BD et al. (2003) Breast biopsies: stereotactic vacuum-assisted core biopsy and stereotactic surgical breast biopsy. Gynecol Obstet Fertil 31: 256–264

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors
  1. J.-Y. Seror
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2012 Springer-Verlag France, Paris

About this paper

Cite this paper

Seror, JY. (2012). De l’image aux prélèvements mammaires Cytoponctions, microbiopsies, macrobiopsies sous aspiration et système Intact®. In: Cancer du sein. Springer, Paris. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-2-8178-0245-9_18

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-2-8178-0245-9_18

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Paris

  • Print ISBN: 978-2-8178-0244-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-2-8178-0245-9

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation