OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the cytohistologic correlation of breast fibroadenoma (FA) in order to assess the value of cytology in the conservative management of this lesion. STUDY DESIGN: A retrospective analysis of all aspirates diagnosed as FA or fibroadenomatous lesion (n = 1,549) for which a histologic follow-up study was available (n = 362). Forty-three aspirates, including 14 nonrepresentative smears, from histologically proven FAs with a different cytologic report were also included in the study. RESULTS: Cytohistologic agreement was present in 287 of the 362 cytodiagnoses. Lack of correlation was observed in 75 cases. Most diagnostic errors accumulated in the older patient group. The sensitivity of the cytologic diagnosis of FA was 86.9% (90.8% excluding nonrepresentative cases), with a positive predictive value of 79.3%. In 43 cases a histologic diagnosis of FA was given after previous erroneous (n = 29) or nonrepresentative cytodiagnoses (n = 14). The specificity of the cytologic diagnosis of FA reached 93.8%, with a negative predictive value of 96.3% (97.5% excluding nonrepresentative cases). Regarding malignancy, five tumors were diagnosed as FA and were malignant. No false positive diagnoses of malignancy were given, but nine aspirates were included in the category "suspicious for carcinoma." CONCLUSION: FA of the breast remains a diagnostic challenge for the cytopathologist. A considerable amount of benign breast lesions can mimic FA on cytology, and such diagnostic categories as "fibroadenomatous lesion" or "consistent with FA" are associated with low diagnostic accuracy. While the cytologic requisites for entering a program of conservative management of FA are established, it seems that strict diagnostic criteria should be applied even at the expense of diminishing sensitivity.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the cytohistologic correlation of breast fibroadenoma (FA) in order to assess the value of cytology in the conservative management of this lesion. STUDY DESIGN: A retrospective analysis of all aspirates diagnosed as FA or fibroadenomatous lesion (n = 1,549) for which a histologic follow-up study was available (n = 362). Forty-three aspirates, including 14 nonrepresentative smears, from histologically proven FAs with a different cytologic report were also included in the study. RESULTS: Cytohistologic agreement was present in 287 of the 362 cytodiagnoses. Lack of correlation was observed in 75 cases. Most diagnostic errors accumulated in the older patient group. The sensitivity of the cytologic diagnosis of FA was 86.9% (90.8% excluding nonrepresentative cases), with a positive predictive value of 79.3%. In 43 cases a histologic diagnosis of FA was given after previous erroneous (n = 29) or nonrepresentative cytodiagnoses (n = 14). The specificity of the cytologic diagnosis of FA reached 93.8%, with a negative predictive value of 96.3% (97.5% excluding nonrepresentative cases). Regarding malignancy, five tumors were diagnosed as FA and were malignant. No false positive diagnoses of malignancy were given, but nine aspirates were included in the category "suspicious for carcinoma." CONCLUSION: FA of the breast remains a diagnostic challenge for the cytopathologist. A considerable amount of benign breast lesions can mimic FA on cytology, and such diagnostic categories as "fibroadenomatous lesion" or "consistent with FA" are associated with low diagnostic accuracy. While the cytologic requisites for entering a program of conservative management of FA are established, it seems that strict diagnostic criteria should be applied even at the expense of diminishing sensitivity.