Core Needle Biopsy Of Breast Lesions Research Articles

Fine-Needle Aspiration Cytology versus Core-Needle Biopsy for Breast Lesions: A Dilemma of Superiority between the Two

Introduction: Core-needle biopsy (CNB) is a minimally invasive procedure used in preoperative diagnosis of breast lumps. It has been seen that in few years, the CNB seems to be replacing the fine-needle aspiration cytology (FNAC), although no study had yet conclusively proved a superiority of one over the other. Aims and Objectives: The aim of this study was to study the cytohistological spectrum of palpable breast lesions and to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of FNAC versus CNB for breast lesions. Materials and Methods: The study was a cross-sectional study conducted in the Department of Pathology and Surgery, over a period of 1 year in 152 patients. All the patients were subjected to FNAC and CNB. Cytosmears were stained with May-Grunwald Giemsa and hematoxylin and eosin was done on CNB and excision biopsy (EB) specimens. Sensitivity and specificity were calculated in percentage with 95% confidence interval with reference to CNB/surgical specimens. Kappa statistics were used to compare the level of agreement between FNAC versus CNB and CNB versus surgical specimens. Results: A total of 152 patients were taken for FNAC and CNB. EB was performed in only 104 patients. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and accuracy of FNAC verses CNB in correlation with subsequent histopathology were found to be (93.40 vs. 94.06%), (97.50 vs. 100.00%), (99.00 vs. 100.00%), (84.78 vs. 33.33%), and (94.52 vs. 94.23%), respectively. Conclusion: CNB has overcome the pitfall of FNAC but CNB cannot replace FNAC but both procedures are complementary to each other.

Shear‐Wave Elastography‐Guided Core Needle Biopsy for the Determination of Breast Cancer Molecular Subtype

To investigate whether shear-wave elastography (SWE) guidance during core-needle biopsy can improve diagnostic accuracy and accurate determination of the molecular subtypes of breast cancer. This controlled, randomized prospective cohort study included 58 patients (mean age: 56.9 ± 16.2) who were referred for image-guided core-needle biopsy between May 2018 and April 2019 for lesions larger than 1 cm. In Group 1, 30 lesions were biopsied without SWE guidance and recorded as Biopsy A. In Group 2, 30 lesions were examined with SWE before biopsy, and then two different parts of the lesions were biopsied; biopsies from the relatively rigid areas of the lesions were recorded as Biopsy B, and biopsies from the less rigid areas of the lesions were recorded as Biopsy C. The histopathological and immunohistochemical results of biopsies were compared with the surgical results. The sensitivity of Biopsy A, B and C were 96.7%, 100% and 100%, respectively. The benign-malignant concordance rates were 94.7%, 100%, and 90% and the diagnostic concordance rates were 89.5%, 100%, and 90% in Biopsies A, B, and C, respectively. When the 10% differences in the estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR), and Ki67 rates were considered significant, the concordance rate of ER was highest in Biopsy B (77.8%; p = 0.040). The concordance rate of immunohistochemical subtyping was 100% in Biopsy B and 71.4% in Biopsies A and C (p = 0.086). SWE-guided core-needle biopsy of breast lesions increased the sensitivity, diagnostic accuracy, and accuracy of immunohistochemical subtyping to 100%.

Ultrasound-guided core-needle biopsy of breast lesions

ObjectiveTo review the role of ultrasound-guided core-needle biopsy (CNB) in the management of breast lesions.MethodsReview of the most relevant literature on this topic.ResultsThis technique shows a high sensitivity value of about 97.5% and it offers many advantages over other imaging techniques to guide a biopsy: non-ionising radiation, low cost, full control of the needle in real time, accessibility in difficult locations, multidirectional punctures and excellent comfort for patients and radiologists. All of these advantages have made this technique the most widespread used to perform a biopsy for a suspicious breast lesion. The most important limitation is the failure to perform a biopsy for lesions that are not seen on ultrasound. An adequate radiological–pathological correlation is necessary to minimise the false-negative results.ConclusionUltrasound-guided CNB has proven to be a reliable technique for performing a biopsy for breast lesions that can be clearly seen on ultrasound.

O uso da agulha de 16G na core biopsy guiada por ultrassonografia em lesões mamárias

The objective of this study was to develop a standard diagnostic evaluation with 16G core-needle biopsy for breast lesions. We evaluated the ideal number of fragments using standard ultrasound criteria based on the previous results obtained on the size of the lesions. A prospective study was carried out, from may 2004 to September 2005, in 79 patients with lesions that included categories 2,3,4 and 5, according to BIRADS -USTM using 16G core biopsy needle. We took up 5 pieces numbered and placed individually in vials with 10% formalin. In 84 biopsies performed there were 81 conclusive diagnoses (96%), with 43 malignant results (51%) and 38 benign results (45%). The effectiveness of the core biopsy increased with the sample numbers: one sample is 95.24% accurate; two samples reach 96.93%; three samples reach 98.8%; four samples reach 98.81%, and finally, five samples reach 100% accuracy. the resection of three fragments was sufficient for a satisfactory result.

Large-core needle biopsy versus fine-needle aspiration biopsy in solid breast lesions: comparison of costs and diagnostic value

In the current climate of budget constraints and personnel shortages, hospitals are required to demonstrate ever-greater cost effectiveness. In the diagnosis of breast lesions, it is useful to compare the costs and benefits of fine-needle aspiration biopsy (FNAB) and core-needle biopsy (CNB). To determine the total costs of FNAB and CNB of breast lesions, and to compare the costs and diagnostic value of these methods. The material consisted of 688 breast lesion cases from a Finnish breast-imaging unit. All cases underwent FNAB and/or CNB. Based on the primary biopsy method used, the cases were allocated to the FNAB (n=590) or CNB (n=98) group. Data on costs, sensitivity, and specificity were used to compare the cost effectiveness of the two methods. 590 FNABs were performed in the FNAB group and 98 CNBs in the CNB group. In addition, we needed 78 CNBs in the FNAB group and 11 FNABs in the CNB group for further assessment. The false-negative rate for FNAB was 19% and for CNB 11%; the false-positive rates were 9% and 1%, respectively. The average cost of biopsies per case in the FNAB group was euro 66 and in the CNB group euro 221. FNAB was most expensive when performed under ultrasound guidance (euro 44.65) and CNB when performed under stereotactic guidance (euro 246.37). FNAB is a less reliable and less informative diagnostic method than CNB. Although a negative or indeterminate FNAB result requires follow-up or a re-biopsy with core needle, it is still a cost-effective procedure. Stereotactic guidance considerably increases the costs of CNB, and therefore US guidance should be used whenever possible.