Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Is Surgical Excision Necessary for Focal Atypical Ductal Hyperplasia Found at Stereotactic Vacuum-Assisted Breast Biopsy?

  • Breast Oncology
  • Published:
Annals of Surgical Oncology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Our goal was to determine the upgrade rate for lesions described as focal atypical ductal hyperplasia (ADH) after 9- or 11-gauge stereotactic vacuum-assisted breast biopsy (VABB) to determine whether surgical excision is indicated in this setting.

Methods

We retrospectively reviewed the results of 991 consecutive 9- or 11-gauge stereotactic core VABB procedures from February 2001 through June 2006 and identified lesions diagnosed as ADH. On the basis of the descriptions in pathology reports each lesion was placed in one of three categories: (1) focal ADH, (2) ADH suspicious for ductal carcinoma-in-situ, or (3) ADH not otherwise specified. The final diagnosis after surgical excisional biopsy was determined from medical records. The frequencies and upgrade rates to carcinoma were calculated and compared for all lesions and for each ADH category.

Results

A total of 141 (14.2%) of 991 lesions yielded ADH at stereotactic core VABB, and 123 (87.2%) of 141 underwent surgical excisional biopsy of the stereotactic core VABB site. A total of 56 (45.5%) of 123 were categorized as focal ADH, and 7 (12.5%) of 56 were upgraded to carcinoma. A total of 49 (39.8%) of 123 were categorized as ADH not otherwise specified, and 11 (22.4%) of 49 were upgraded. Eighteen (14.6%) of 123 were categorized as suspicious for ductal carcinoma-in-situ, and 8 (44.4%) of 18 were upgraded. Neither the frequency of ADH (P = .66) nor the upgrade rates (P = .87) were significantly different between 9- and 11-gauge VABB.

Conclusion

Surgical excisional biopsy is indicated to exclude carcinoma in cases of focal ADH discovered at 9- or 11-gauge VABB.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Liberman L, Dershaw DD, Glassman JR, et al. Analysis of cancers not diagnosed at stereotactic core breast biopsy. Radiology 1997;203:151–7

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Jackman RJ, Nowels KW, Shepard MJ, et al. Stereotaxic large-core needle biopsy of 450 nonpalpable breast lesions with surgical correlation in lesions with cancer or atypical hyperplasia. Radiology 1994;193:91–5

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Liberman L, Cohen MA, Dershaw DD, et al. Atypical ductal hyperplasia diagnosed at stereotaxic core biopsy of breast lesions: an indication for surgical biopsy. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1995;164:1111–3

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Tocino I, Garcia BM, Carter D. Surgical biopsy findings in patients with atypical hyperplasia diagnosed by stereotaxic core needle biopsy. Ann Surg Oncol 1996;3:483–8

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Nguyen M, McCombs MM, Ghandehari S, et al. An update on core needle biopsy for radiologically detected breast lesions. Cancer 1996;78:2340–5

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Burbank F. Stereotactic breast biopsy of atypical ductal hyperplasia and ductal carcinoma in situ lesions: improved accuracy with directional, vacuum-assisted biopsy. Radiology 1997;202:843–7

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Lee CH, Egglin TK, Philpotts L, et al. Cost-effectiveness of stereotactic core needle biopsy: analysis by means of mammographic findings. Radiology 1997;202:849–54

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Moore MM, Hargett CW 3rd, Hanks JB, et al. Association of breast cancer with the finding of atypical ductal hyperplasia at core breast biopsy. Ann Surg 1997;225:726–31

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Gadzala DE, Cederbom GJ, Bolton JS, et al. Appropriate management of atypical ductal hyperplasia diagnosed by stereotactic core needle breast biopsy. Ann Surg Oncol 1997;4:283–6

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Jackman RJ, Burbank F, Parker SH, et al. Atypical ductal hyperplasia diagnosed at stereotactic breast biopsy: improved reliability with 14-gauge, directional, vacuum-assisted biopsy. Radiology 1997;204:485–8

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Brown TA, Wall JW, Christensen ED, et al. Atypical hyperplasia in the era of stereotactic core needle biopsy. J Surg Oncol 1998;67:168–73

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Lin PH, Clyde JC, Bates DM, et al. Accuracy of stereotactic core-needle breast biopsy in atypical ductal hyperplasia. Am J Surg 1998;175:380–2

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Fuhrman GM, Cederbom GJ, Bolton JS, et al. Image-guided core-needle breast biopsy is an accurate technique to evaluate patients with nonpalpable imaging abnormalities. Ann Surg 1998;227:932–9

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Liberman L, Smolkin JH, Dershaw DD, et al. Calcification retrieval at stereotactic, 11-gauge, directional, vacuum-assisted breast biopsy. Radiology 1998;208:251–60

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Jackman RJ, Nowels KW, Rodriguez-Soto J, et al. Stereotactic, automated, large-core needle biopsy of nonpalpable breast lesions: false-negative and histologic underestimation rates after long-term follow-up. Radiology 1999;210:799–805

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Brem RF, Behrndt VS, Sanow L, et al. Atypical ductal hyperplasia: histologic underestimation of carcinoma in tissue harvested from impalpable breast lesions using 11-gauge stereotactically guided directional vacuum-assisted biopsy. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1999;172:1405–7

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Meyer JE, Smith DN, Lester SC, et al. Large-core needle biopsy of nonpalpable breast lesions. JAMA 1999;281:1638–41

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Burak WE Jr, Owens KE, Tighe MB, et al. Vacuum-assisted stereotactic breast biopsy: histologic underestimation of malignant lesions. Arch Surg 2000;135:700–3

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Philpotts LE, Lee CH, Horvath LJ, et al. Underestimation of breast cancer with II-gauge vacuum suction biopsy. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2000;175:1047–50

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. O’Hea BJ, Tornos C. Mild ductal atypia after large-core needle biopsy of the breast: is surgical excision always necessary? Surgery 2000;128:738–43

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Adrales G, Turk P, Wallace T, et al. Is surgical excision necessary for atypical ductal hyperplasia of the breast diagnosed by Mammotome? Am J Surg 2000;180:313–5

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Darling ML, Smith DN, Lester SC, et al. Atypical ductal hyperplasia and ductal carcinoma in situ as revealed by large-core needle breast biopsy: results of surgical excision. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2000;175:1341–6

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Cangiarella J, Waisman J, Symmans WF, et al. Mammotome core biopsy for mammary microcalcification: analysis of 160 biopsies from 142 women with surgical and radiologic followup. Cancer 2001;91:173–7

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Lai JT, Burrowes P, MacGregor JH. Diagnostic accuracy of a stereotaxically guided vacuum-assisted large-core breast biopsy program in Canada. Can Assoc Radiol J 2001;52:223–7

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Jackman RJ, Birdwell RL, Ikeda DM. Atypical ductal hyperplasia: can some lesions be defined as probably benign after stereotactic 11-gauge vacuum-assisted biopsy, eliminating the recommendation for surgical excision? Radiology 2002;224:548–54

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Pandelidis S, Heiland D, Jones D, et al. Accuracy of 11-gauge vacuum-assisted core biopsy of mammographic breast lesions. Ann Surg Oncol 2003;10:43–7

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Winchester DJ, Bernstein JR, Jeske JM, et al. Upstaging of atypical ductal hyperplasia after vacuum-assisted 11-gauge stereotactic core needle biopsy. Arch Surg 2003;138:619–22

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Sohn V, Arthurs Z, Herbert G, et al. Atypical ductal hyperplasia: improved accuracy with the 11-gauge vacuum-assisted versus the 14-gauge core biopsy needle. Ann Surg Oncol 2007;14:2497–501

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Lourenco AP, Mainiero MB, Lazarus E, et al. Stereotactic breast biopsy: comparison of histologic underestimation rates with 11- and 9-gauge vacuum-assisted breast biopsy. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2007;189:W275–9

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Rao A, Parker S, Ratzer E, et al. Atypical ductal hyperplasia of the breast diagnosed by 11-gauge directional vacuum-assisted biopsy. Am J Surg 2002;184:534–7

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Berg WA, Krebs TL, Campassi C, et al. Evaluation of 14- and 11-gauge directional, vacuum-assisted biopsy probes and 14-gauge biopsy guns in a breast parenchymal model. Radiology 1997;205:203–8

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Burbank F. Specimen weights obtained with 14- and 11-gauge breast biopsy probes. Radiology 1998;208:269–70

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Poellinger A, Bick U, Freund T, et al. Evaluation of 11-gauge and 9-gauge vacuum-assisted breast biopsy systems in a breast parenchymal model. Acad Radiol 2007;14:677–84

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Ely KA, Carter BA, Jensen RA, et al. Core biopsy of the breast with atypical ductal hyperplasia: a probabilistic approach to reporting. Am J Surg Pathol 2001;25:1017–21

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Sneige N, Lim SC, Whitman GJ, et al. Atypical ductal hyperplasia diagnosis by directional vacuum-assisted stereotactic biopsy of breast microcalcifications. Considerations for surgical excision. Am J Clin Pathol 2003;119:248–53

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Page DL, Dupont WD, Rogers LW, et al. Atypical hyperplastic lesions of the female breast. A long-term follow-up study. Cancer 1985;55:2698–708

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Page DL, Rogers LW. Combined histologic and cytologic criteria for the diagnosis of mammary atypical ductal hyperplasia. Hum Pathol 1992;23:1095–7

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Tavassoli FA. Atypical hyperplasia: a morphologic risk factor for subsequent development of invasive breast carcinoma. Cancer Invest 1992;10:433–41

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Tavassoli FA, Norris HJ. A comparison of the results of long-term follow-up for atypical intraductal hyperplasia and intraductal hyperplasia of the breast. Cancer 1990;65:518–29

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Grady I, Gorsuch H, Wilburn-Bailey S. Ultrasound-guided, vacuum-assisted, percutaneous excision of breast lesions: an accurate technique in the diagnosis of atypical ductal hyperplasia. J Am Coll Surg 2005;201:14–7

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. National Cancer Institute. SEER statistics 2000–2004. Table IV-17, Female breast cancer (invasive). Available at: http://seer.cancer.gov/csr/1975_2004/results_single/sect_04_table.17.pdf. Accessed July 31, 2008

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Radiology, University of Washington Medical Center, 1959 NE Pacific, Seattle, WA, 98195, USA

    Peter R. Eby MD, Jennifer E. Ochsner MD, Wendy B. DeMartini MD, Sue Peacock MS & Constance D. Lehman MD, PhD

  2. Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, 825 Eastlake Avenue East, G3-200, Seattle, WA, 98109-1023, USA

    Peter R. Eby MD, Jennifer E. Ochsner MD, Wendy B. DeMartini MD, Kimberly H. Allison MD, Sue Peacock MS & Constance D. Lehman MD, PhD

  3. Department of Pathology, University of Washington Medical Center, 1959 NE Pacific, Seattle, WA, 98195, USA

    Kimberly H. Allison MD

Authors
  1. Peter R. Eby MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jennifer E. Ochsner MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Wendy B. DeMartini MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Kimberly H. Allison MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Sue Peacock MS
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Constance D. Lehman MD, PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Peter R. Eby MD.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Eby, P.R., Ochsner, J.E., DeMartini, W.B. et al. Is Surgical Excision Necessary for Focal Atypical Ductal Hyperplasia Found at Stereotactic Vacuum-Assisted Breast Biopsy?. Ann Surg Oncol 15, 3232–3238 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-008-0100-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-008-0100-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation