Diagnostic underestimation of atypical ductal hyperplasia and ductal carcinoma in situ at percutaneous core needle and vacuum-assisted biopsies of the breast in a Brazilian reference institution

• Autor(a) principal: Badan,Gustavo Machado
• Data de Publicação: 2016
• Outros Autores: Roveda Júnior,Decio, Piato,Sebastião, Fleury,Eduardo de Faria Castro, Campos,Mário Sérgio Dantas, Pecci,Carlos Alberto Ferreira, Ferreira,Felipe Augusto Trocoli, D'Ávila,Camila
• Tipo de documento: Artigo
• Idioma: eng
• Título da fonte: Radiologia Brasileira (Online)
• Texto Completo: http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0100-39842016000100006
• topic: Breast neoplasia; Core needle biopsy; Vacuum-assisted biopsy; Diagnostic techniques and procedures; Noninvasive intraductal carcinoma

Abstract Objective: To determine the rates of diagnostic underestimation at stereotactic percutaneous core needle biopsies (CNB) and vacuum-assisted biopsies (VABB) of nonpalpable breast lesions, with histopathological results of atypical ductal hyperplasia (ADH) or ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) subsequently submitted to surgical excision. As a secondary objective, the frequency of ADH and DCIS was determined for the cases submitted to biopsy. Materials and Methods: Retrospective review of 40 cases with diagnosis of ADH or DCIS on the basis of biopsies performed between February 2011 and July 2013, subsequently submitted to surgery, whose histopathological reports were available in the internal information system. Biopsy results were compared with those observed at surgery and the underestimation rate was calculated by means of specific mathematical equations. Results: The underestimation rate at CNB was 50% for ADH and 28.57% for DCIS, and at VABB it was 25% for ADH and 14.28% for DCIS. ADH represented 10.25% of all cases undergoing biopsy, whereas DCIS accounted for 23.91%. Conclusion: The diagnostic underestimation rate at CNB is two times the rate at VABB. Certainty that the target has been achieved is not the sole determining factor for a reliable diagnosis. Removal of more than 50% of the target lesion should further reduce the risk of underestimation.