PURPOSE: To measure the effect of biopsy device, probe size, mammographic lesion type, lesion size, and number of samples obtained per lesion on the ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) underestimation rate. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Nonpalpable breast lesions at 16 institutions received a histologic diagnosis of DCIS after 14-gauge automated large-core biopsy in 373 lesions and after 14- or 11-gauge directional vacuum-assisted biopsy in 953 lesions. The presence of histopathologic invasive carcinoma was noted at subsequent surgical biopsy. RESULTS: By performing the chi(2) test, independent significant DCIS underestimation rates by biopsy device were 20.4% (76 of 373) of lesions diagnosed at large-core biopsy and 11.2% (107 of 953) of lesions diagnosed at vacuum-assisted biopsy (P <.001); by lesion type, 24.3% (35 of 144) of masses and 12.5% (148 of 1,182) of microcalcifications (P <.001); and by number of specimens per lesion, 17.5% (88 of 502) with 10 or fewer specimens and 11.5% (92 of 799) with greater than 10 (P <.02). DCIS underestimations increased with lesion size. CONCLUSION: DCIS underestimations were 1.9 times more frequent with masses than with calcifications, 1.8 times more frequent with large-core biopsy than with vacuum-assisted biopsy, and 1.5 times more frequent with 10 or fewer specimens per lesion than with more than 10 specimens per lesion.
PURPOSE: To measure the effect of biopsy device, probe size, mammographic lesion type, lesion size, and number of samples obtained per lesion on the ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) underestimation rate. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Nonpalpable breast lesions at 16 institutions received a histologic diagnosis of DCIS after 14-gauge automated large-core biopsy in 373 lesions and after 14- or 11-gauge directional vacuum-assisted biopsy in 953 lesions. The presence of histopathologic invasive carcinoma was noted at subsequent surgical biopsy. RESULTS: By performing the chi(2) test, independent significant DCIS underestimation rates by biopsy device were 20.4% (76 of 373) of lesions diagnosed at large-core biopsy and 11.2% (107 of 953) of lesions diagnosed at vacuum-assisted biopsy (P <.001); by lesion type, 24.3% (35 of 144) of masses and 12.5% (148 of 1,182) of microcalcifications (P <.001); and by number of specimens per lesion, 17.5% (88 of 502) with 10 or fewer specimens and 11.5% (92 of 799) with greater than 10 (P <.02). DCIS underestimations increased with lesion size. CONCLUSION: DCIS underestimations were 1.9 times more frequent with masses than with calcifications, 1.8 times more frequent with large-core biopsy than with vacuum-assisted biopsy, and 1.5 times more frequent with 10 or fewer specimens per lesion than with more than 10 specimens per lesion.
Authors: Eline E Deurloo; Jincey D Sriram; Hendrik J Teertstra; Claudette E Loo; Jelle Wesseling; Emiel J Th Rutgers; Kenneth G A Gilhuijs Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2012-02-26 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Caecilia S Reiner; Thomas H Helbich; Margaretha Rudas; Lothar Ponhold; Christopher C Riedl; Nina Kropf; Michael H Fuchsjäger Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2009-12 Impact factor: 5.315