A diagnostic strategy for breast calcifications based on a long-term follow-up of 615 lesions.
Adult
Aged
Aged, 80 and over
Biopsy, Needle
/ methods
Breast
/ diagnostic imaging
Breast Diseases
/ diagnostic imaging
Breast Neoplasms
/ diagnostic imaging
Calcinosis
/ diagnostic imaging
Diagnosis, Differential
Female
Follow-Up Studies
Humans
Image-Guided Biopsy
/ methods
Mammography
/ methods
Middle Aged
Retrospective Studies
Stereotaxic Techniques
Time
Vacuum
Young Adult
Breast cancer
Calcifications
Mammography
Stereotactic vacuum-assisted breast biopsy
Journal
Japanese journal of radiology
ISSN: 1867-108X
Titre abrégé: Jpn J Radiol
Pays: Japan
ID NLM: 101490689
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Mar 2019
Mar 2019
Historique:
received:
17
09
2018
accepted:
13
12
2018
pubmed:
21
12
2018
medline:
15
5
2019
entrez:
21
12
2018
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
To clarify the long-term outcomes of breast calcifications after stereotactic vacuum-assisted breast biopsy (SVAB) and to develop strategy after SVAB. Subject comprised 594 patients with 615 calcifications who underwent SVAB. 371 (60.3%) lesions were diagnosed as benign, 38 (6.2%) as indeterminate, and 206 (33.5%) as malignant. We retrospectively reviewed post-biopsy courses of non-malignant lesions which were followed. A histopathological review was performed for false negatives to clarify the reasons. Of the 308 patients with benign lesions, with a median follow-up time of 55.8 months, re-biopsy was performed for 11 (3.6%) due to changes of imaging, and 4 (1.3%) were diagnosed as breast cancer. Of the 36 patients with indeterminate lesion, re-biopsy was performed for 16 (44.4%), and 8 (22.2%) were diagnosed as breast cancer, while 20 (55.6%) showed no changes in imaging with a median follow-up time of 91.7 months without re-biopsy. Weak atypism of intraductal carcinoma may cause a false-negative diagnosis in SVAB for breast calcifications. When SVAB results in non-malignant, patients may be followed by annual screening, while re-biopsy needs to be performed for the patients with a discordant result of SVAB and with changes in an imaging finding during a follow-up.
Identifiants
pubmed: 30569402
doi: 10.1007/s11604-018-0803-7
pii: 10.1007/s11604-018-0803-7
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
237-244Références
Eur J Cancer. 2000 Sep;36(14):1769-72
pubmed: 10974624
Breast J. 2002 Jul-Aug;8(4):187-91
pubmed: 12100109
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2002 Dec;179(6):1503-7
pubmed: 12438044
Eur J Radiol. 2003 Sep;47(3):232-6
pubmed: 12927668
J Clin Pathol. 2004 Sep;57(9):897-902
pubmed: 15333647
Radiol Clin North Am. 2004 Sep;42(5):845-51, vi
pubmed: 15337420
Breast Cancer. 2005;12(2):140-4
pubmed: 15858446
Eur J Cancer. 2008 Mar;44(4):539-44
pubmed: 18267357
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2009 Feb;192(2):341-51
pubmed: 19155393
Radiology. 2011 Feb;258(2):380-7
pubmed: 21079199
Insights Imaging. 2011 Apr;2(2):171-176
pubmed: 22347945
Diagn Interv Radiol. 2015 Jan-Feb;21(1):22-7
pubmed: 25323837
Radiology. 2015 Apr;275(1):54-60
pubmed: 25423143
Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2016 Sep;159(2):203-13
pubmed: 27522516