Axillary ultrasound in invasive breast cancer: experience of our surgeons

Safety and efficacy of tomosynthesis-guided breast biopsies in the prone position: monocentric study and review of the literature

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study is to describe the safety and efficacy of 9G needle biopsy under tomosynthesis guidance with the patient in the prone position.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This is a retrospective observational study conducted on patients with non-palpable breast mass exclusively detectable through tomosynthesis, performed from the 1st January 2018 to the 1st August 2020. The procedures were performed by taking 12 tissue samples from each mass. The evaluated technical success was considered as a conclusive sample for histological diagnosis. We performed a comparison between the procedural data of interventions in patients who have a lesion < or = 10 mm and > 10 mm and between high-contrast and low-contrast masses. The histological data of the samples were analyzed.

RESULTS

Five hundred biopsies of the total 1500 performed from the 1st January 2018 to the 1st August 2020 were included in the study; repetitions for inadequate withdrawal occurred 0.4% (3/500). No major complications have ever been observed. Two cases (0.2%) of minor bleeding were observed with self-limited bleeding from the skin breach at 90 min without clinical sequelae in an asymptomatic patient. The biopsy samples showed carcinoma in 55.2% (276/500).

CONCLUSION

Our study suggests that the 9G needle sampling biopsy procedure through tomosynthesis guide with prone patient is a safe and effective procedure for the characterization of indeterminate breast mass.

Diagnostic Accuracy of Fine-Needle Aspiration Cytology and Core-Needle Biopsy in the Assessment of the Axillary Lymph Nodes in Breast Cancer-A Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

The present study aims to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy between ultrasonography-guided fine-needle aspiration cytology (US-FNAC) and core needle biopsy (CNB) of axillary lymph nodes (ALNs) in patients with breast cancer through a meta-analysis and a diagnostic test accuracy (DTA) review.

METHODS

The present meta-analysis and DTA review included 67 eligible studies. The diagnostic accuracy of various preoperative assessments, including US-FNAC and CNB, was evaluated for ALNs assessments in patients with breast cancer. In addition, a subgroup analysis based on methods of cytologic preparation was performed. In the DTA review, the sensitivity, specificity, diagnostic odds ratio (OR) and area under the curve (AUC) on the summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curve were calculated.

RESULTS

The diagnostic accuracy of the preoperative assessments of ALNs was 0.850 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.833-0.866) for patients with breast cancer. The diagnostic accuracy of CNB was significantly higher than that of US-FNAC (0.896, 95% CI 0.844-0.932 vs. 0.844, 95% CI 0.825-0.862; p = 0.044 in a meta-regression test). In the subgroup analysis based on cytologic preparation, the diagnosis accuracies were 0.860, 0.861 and 0.859 for the methods of conventional smear, liquid-based preparation and cell block, respectively. In the DTA review, CNB showed higher sensitivity than US-FNAC (0.849 vs. 0.760). However, there was no difference in specificity between US-FNAC and CNB (0.997 vs. 1.000). US-FNAC with liquid-based preparation and CNB showed the highest diagnostic OR and AUC on the SROC, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Both US-FNAC and CNB are useful in preoperative assessments of ALNs in patients with breast cancer. Although the most sensitive test was found to be CNB in this study, there was no difference in specificity between various preoperative evaluations and the application of US-FNAC or CNB may be impacted by various factors.

Comparison between Ultrasound and Pathologic Status of Axillary Lymph Nodes in Clinically Node-negative Breast Cancer Patients

Sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) is the standard of care for axillary staging in clinically node-negative breast cancer patients. Ultrasound (US) has shown promise when used to assess axillary lymph nodes preoperatively, thus aiding surgical decision making. We examined the correlation between preoperative US and SLNB results to further clarify the role of US in clinicopathologic staging of breast cancer when the axilla is clinically negative on physical examination. Our institutional cancer registry was used to identify clinically node-negative patients diagnosed with breast cancer from January 1, 2009 to December 31, 2012. Variables including age, body mass index, date of surgery, date of diagnosis, US results, US-directed biopsy results, SLNB results, and final pathology were recorded. Incomplete charts were excluded. In all, 249 patients were included. Sensitivity/specificity of US in the clinically negative axilla were 7.4 per cent and 91.8 per cent, respectively. The false-positive rate was 80 per cent, whereas the negative predictive value was 78 per cent. The effect of time from diagnosis/US to SLNB, interpreting radiologist, year in which US was performed, and body mass index were not statistically significant. US in the clinically node-negative patient, although useful when it leads to a positive needle biopsy result, is unlikely to replace SLNB owing to its low sensitivity and a high false-positive rate. Further prospective study into the role of US in the evaluation of the clinically negative axilla is warranted.

Surgeon-performed touch preparation of breast core needle biopsies may provide accurate same-day diagnosis and expedite treatment planning

BACKGROUND

We aimed to determine the accuracy of surgeon-performed touch-preparation cytology (TPC) of breast core-needle biopsies (CNB) and the ability to use TPC results to initiate treatment planning at the same patient visit.

METHODS

A single-institution retrospective review of TPC results of ultrasound-guided breast CNB was performed. All TPC slides were prepared by surgeons performing the biopsy and interpreted by the pathologist. TPC results were reported as positive/suspicious, atypical, negative/benign, or deferred; these were compared with final pathology of cores to calculate accuracy. Treatment planning was noted as having taken place if the patient had requisition of advanced imaging, referrals, or surgical planning undertaken during the same visit.

RESULTS

Four hundred forty-seven CNB specimens with corresponding TPC were evaluated from 434 patient visits, and 203 samples (45.4 %) were malignant on final pathology. When the deferred, atypical, and benign results were considered negative and positive/suspicious results were considered positive, sensitivity and specificity were 83.7 % (77.9-88.5 %) and 98.4 % (95.9-99.6 %), respectively; positive and negative predictive values were 97.7 % (94.2-99.4 %) and 87.9 % (83.4-91.5 %), respectively. In practice, patients with atypical or deferred results were asked to await final pathology. An accurate same-day diagnosis (TPC positive/suspicious) was hence feasible in 83.7 % (170 of 203) of malignant and 79.5 % (194 of 244) of benign cases (TPC negative). Of patients who had a same-day diagnosis of a new malignancy, 77.3 % had treatment planning initiated at the same visit.

CONCLUSIONS

Surgeon-performed TPC of breast CNB is an accurate method of same-day diagnosis that allows treatment planning to be initiated at the same visit and may serve to expedite patient care.