Akie Tanaka1,2, Aya Imai3, Mariko Goto4, Eiichi Konishi5, Nobuhiko Shinkura3. 1. Kyoto Breast Center Sawai Memorial Clinic, 98 Matsumoto-cho, Kamigamo, Kita-Ku, Kyoto, 603-8052, Japan. akietanaka@yahoo.co.jp. 2. Division of General Surgery, Department of Surgery, Shiga University of Medical Science, Shiga, Japan. akietanaka@yahoo.co.jp. 3. Kyoto Breast Center Sawai Memorial Clinic, 98 Matsumoto-cho, Kamigamo, Kita-Ku, Kyoto, 603-8052, Japan. 4. Department of Radiology, Kyoto Prefectural University of Medicine, Kyoto, Japan. 5. Department of Surgical Pathology, Kyoto Prefectural University of Medicine, Kyoto, Japan.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In order to determine the patients who require biopsy for breast clustered microcysts, we retrospectively investigated cases of clustered microcysts that were detected by ultrasonography (US) examinations. METHODS: We investigated 52 patients in whom clustered microcysts were detected by US and who underwent biopsy at our institution between January 2011 and March 2014. These patients were divided into two groups according to histopathological findings: those with invasive carcinoma (IC), ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), or mucocele-like tumor (MLT) (Group 1), and those with benign lesions (Group 2). Mammography (MG) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) findings were assessed in these two groups. RESULTS: There were 12 patients in Group 1 (IC:2, DCIS:6, and MLT:4) and 40 patients in Group 2. In 51 of the 52 patients, MG was performed before biopsy. Since 11 of 12 patients in Group 1 exhibited MG findings (mass, focal asymmetry, coarse heterogeneous calcifications and fine pleomorphic calcifications) at the same site as the clustered microcysts, and that MG findings had a significant probability of detecting clustered microcysts categorized into Group 1 with a sensitivity of 91.7 % and negative predictive value (NPV) of 96.8 % (p < 0.001). In contrast, MRI was performed in 39 of the 52 patients, and only 3 of the 9 Group 1 patients (33.3 %) for whom MRI was performed were detected as MRI Category 4 or 5 enhancement. CONCLUSION: The patients who exhibit clustered microcysts with MG findings (mass, focal asymmetry, coarse heterogeneous calcifications and fine pleomorphic calcifications) appear to require biopsy.
BACKGROUND: In order to determine the patients who require biopsy for breast clustered microcysts, we retrospectively investigated cases of clustered microcysts that were detected by ultrasonography (US) examinations. METHODS: We investigated 52 patients in whom clustered microcysts were detected by US and who underwent biopsy at our institution between January 2011 and March 2014. These patients were divided into two groups according to histopathological findings: those with invasive carcinoma (IC), ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), or mucocele-like tumor (MLT) (Group 1), and those with benign lesions (Group 2). Mammography (MG) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) findings were assessed in these two groups. RESULTS: There were 12 patients in Group 1 (IC:2, DCIS:6, and MLT:4) and 40 patients in Group 2. In 51 of the 52 patients, MG was performed before biopsy. Since 11 of 12 patients in Group 1 exhibited MG findings (mass, focal asymmetry, coarse heterogeneous calcifications and fine pleomorphic calcifications) at the same site as the clustered microcysts, and that MG findings had a significant probability of detecting clustered microcysts categorized into Group 1 with a sensitivity of 91.7 % and negative predictive value (NPV) of 96.8 % (p < 0.001). In contrast, MRI was performed in 39 of the 52 patients, and only 3 of the 9 Group 1 patients (33.3 %) for whom MRI was performed were detected as MRI Category 4 or 5 enhancement. CONCLUSION: The patients who exhibit clustered microcysts with MG findings (mass, focal asymmetry, coarse heterogeneous calcifications and fine pleomorphic calcifications) appear to require biopsy.
Entities:
Keywords:
Biopsy; Breast cancer; Clustered microcysts; Mammography; Mucocele-like tumor