| Literature DB >> 35316902 |
Shi-Fang Zou1, Lin Tao2, Zhen-Chu Feng1, Ji-Yan Wang1, Lin Liu1, Wen-Long Liang1, Jie-Na Liu1, Dan-Dan Xu1, Jia-Yan Lin1, Jian-Guo Zhang1, Xi Chen1.
Abstract
Introduction: The present study aims to clarify the advantages and disadvantages of elite biopsy, to provide a reference for selecting the puncture method. Material and methods: A total of 802 patients with a BI-RADS grade ≥ 4, as evaluated by the molybdenum target, and measurable lesions revealed by colour Doppler ultrasound, who were admitted at our department from January 2017 to January 2018, were enrolled in the present study. These patients were randomly divided into three groups: elite, Mammotome and core needle biopsy groups. The pathological underestimation rate, diagnostic accordance rate, haematoma incidence rate, and costs of these three biopsy methods were compared.Entities:
Keywords: Mammotome biopsy; breast masses; core needle biopsy; diagnosis; elite biopsy
Year: 2019 PMID: 35316902 PMCID: PMC8924845 DOI: 10.5114/aoms.2019.87096
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Arch Med Sci ISSN: 1734-1922 Impact factor: 3.318
Figure 1The flow chart of the study
The basic characteristics of the three groups
| Item | Mammotome biopsy group ( | Elite biopsy group ( | Core needle biopsy group ( |
|---|---|---|---|
| The size of tumour, | |||
| ≤ 2 cm | 129 (50.2) | 134 (49.8) | 139 (50.4) |
| 2 < D ≤ 5 cm | 118 (46.0) | 126 (46.8) | 128 (46.4) |
| > 5 cm | 10 (3.8) | 9 (3.4) | 9 (3.2) |
| Age [years], median | 53 ±9.1 | 54 ±9.5 | 54 ±9.3 |
| Puncture for the first time, | |||
| Yes | 255 (99.2) | 267 (99.3) | 273 (98.9) |
| No | 2 (0.8) | 2 (0.7) | 3 (1.1) |
| Enlarged lymph nodes in the axilla, | |||
| Yes | 92 (35.8) | 96 (35.7) | 99 (35.9) |
| No | 165 (64.2) | 173 (64.3) | 177 (64.1) |
| Colour Doppler ultrasound BI-RADS grade, | |||
| Grade 3 | 16 (6.2) | 17 (6.3) | 17 (6.2) |
| Grade 4A | 35 (13.6) | 37 (13.8) | 38 (13.8) |
| Grade 4B | 40 (15.6) | 42 (15.6) | 43 (15.6) |
| Grade 4C | 87 (33.9) | 91 (33.8) | 94 (34.0) |
| Grade 5 | 79 (30.7) | 82 (30.5) | 84 (30.4) |
| Pathology results, | |||
| Invasive carcinoma | 193 (75.1) | 196 (72.9) | 183 (66.3) |
| DCIS | 15 (5.8) | 14 (5.2) | 8 (2.9) |
| Non-malignant diseases | 48 (18.7) | 50 (18.6) | 48 (17.4) |
| Malignant tumor | 1 (0.4) | 3 (1.1) | 9 (3.3) |
| Undetermined | 0 | 5 (1.8) | 27 (9.8) |
| Lymphoma | 0 | 1 (0.4) | 1 (0.3) |
Most of them are patients undergoing neoadjuvant therapy.
The diagnosis of BI-RADS by molybdenum target was grade 4 or higher. Including the cases diagnosed as invasive carcinoma with intraductal carcinoma and intraductal carcinoma with microinvasion.
Including all benign diseases and atypical hyperplasia.
The biopsy was diagnosed as malignant tumour. However, the type was undetermined.
Undiagnosed cases.
DCIS – ductal carcinoma in situ.
Figure 2Three biopsy apparatus: A – Mammotome, B – elite, C – core needle
Figure 3Instantaneous biopsy pictures of the three apparatus. The red arrow indicates the mass, and the yellow arrow indicates the biopsy needle track, which are marked A, B, and C, respectively. A – Mammotome, B – elite, C – core needle
Comparison of biopsy and postoperative pathology
| Groups | Non-malignant diseases | Undetermined | Intraductal carcinoma | Diagnostic accordance rate (%) | Pathological underestimation rate (%) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Biopsy ( | Underestimation cases ( | Biopsy ( | Underestimation cases ( | Biopsy ( | Underestimation cases ( | |||
| Mammotome biopsy group | 48 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 15 | 0 | 99.6 | 1.6 |
| Elite biopsy group | 50 | 2 | 5 | 2 | 14 | 1 | 98.9 | 7.2 |
| Core needle biopsy group | 48 | 5 | 27 | 18 | 8 | 8 | 94.7 | 37.3 |
| – | – | – | 0.0004 | < 0.0001 | ||||
The underestimation of intraductal carcinoma including the cases diagnosed as invasive carcinoma with intraductal carcinoma and intraductal carcinoma with microinvasion.
The colour Doppler ultrasound BI-RADS grade of three groups
| Rate | Mammotome biopsy group (%) | Elite biopsy group (%) | Core needle biopsy group (%) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Diagnostic accordance rate: | ||||
| Grade 4A | 97.1 | 97.0 | 93.3 | 0.1391 |
| Grade 4B | 100 | 97.6 | 82.1 | < 0.001 |
| Grade 4C | 100 | 98.9 | 97.6 | 0.1071 |
| Grade 5 | 100 | 100 | 97.5 | 0.1111 |
| Pathological underestimation rate: | ||||
| Grade 4A | 2.9 | 6.5 | 15.4 | 0.1942 |
| Grade 4B | 0 | 10.0 | 47.6 | < 0.001 |
| Grade 4C | 0 | 6.7 | 58.8 | < 0.001 |
| Grade 5 | 0 | 0 | 100 | < 0.001 |
The comparison of three groups after puncture
| Treatment | Mammotome biopsy group, | Elite biopsy group, | Core needle biopsy group, | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Neoadjuvant therapy | 45 (17.5) | 47 (17.5) | 49 (17.7) | 0.9956 |
| Breast-conserving operation | 38 (17.9) | 47 (21.2) | 35 (15.4) | 0.285 |
| Mastectomy | 177 (64.6) | 175 (61.3) | 192 (66.9) | |
| Haematoma | 41 (15.9) | 35 (13.0) | 60 (21.7) | 0.0219 |
Some patients gave up breast-conserving due to the severe haematoma.
The breast-conserving rate here is the data after removing the cases of giving up breast-conserving therapy.