Tags

Type your tag names separated by a space and hit enter

Factors that impact the upgrading of atypical ductal hyperplasia.
Diagn Interv Radiol. 2013 Mar-Apr; 19(2):91-6.DI

Abstract

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to identify the factors that may have an impact on upgrading atypical ductal hyperplasia (ADH) lesions to malignancy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Between February 1999 and December 2010, the records of 150 ADH lesions that had been biopsied were retrospectively reviewed. The biopsy types included 11-gauge stereotactic vacuum-assisted biopsy (SVAB) (n=102) and ultrasonography (US)-guided 14-gauge automated biopsy (n=48). The patients were divided into two groups: those who had cancer in the final pathology and those who did not. Variables associated with underestimation of ADH lesions were compared between the groups.

RESULTS

The underestimation rates according to the biopsy types were 41.7% (20/48) for the US-guided 14-gauge automated biopsy and 20.6% (21/102) for the 11-gauge SVAB (P = 0.007). The rate of underestimation was significantly higher in lesions greater than 7 mm than it was in smaller lesions, with both US-guided 14-gauge automated biopsy and 11-gauge SVAB (P = 0.024 and P = 0.042, respectively). The rate of underestimation was significantly higher with the 11-gauge SVAB (P = 0.025) in lesions that were suspicious (R4) and highly suggestive of malignancy (R5) than in those that were probably benign (R3).

CONCLUSION

The underestimation rate in ADH lesions was significantly higher with US-guided 14-gauge automated biopsy compared to the 11-gauge SVAB. The underestimation rate was also significantly higher in lesions greater than 7 mm regardless of the biopsy type, and in lesions biopsied using SVAB that were regarded as suspicious (R4) or highly suggestive of malignancy (R5) on imaging.

Links

FREE Publisher Full Text

Authors+Show Affiliations

Gümüş H
Department of Radiology, Dicle University School of Medicine, Diyarbakir, Turkey. drhaticegumus@hotmail.com
Mills P
No affiliation info available
Gümüş M
No affiliation info available
Fish D
No affiliation info available
Jones S
No affiliation info available
Jones P
No affiliation info available
Devalia H
No affiliation info available
Sever A
No affiliation info available

MeSH

AdultAgedAged, 80 and overBreastBreast NeoplasmsCarcinoma, Ductal, BreastCarcinoma, Intraductal, NoninfiltratingFemaleHumansHyperplasiaMammographyMiddle AgedRetrospective StudiesStereotaxic TechniquesSupine PositionUltrasonography, InterventionalVacuum

Pub Type(s)

Journal Article

Language

eng

PubMed ID

23019055

Citation

Gümüş, Hatice, et al. "Factors That Impact the Upgrading of Atypical Ductal Hyperplasia." Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology (Ankara, Turkey), vol. 19, no. 2, 2013, pp. 91-6.
Gümüş H, Mills P, Gümüş M, et al. Factors that impact the upgrading of atypical ductal hyperplasia. Diagn Interv Radiol. 2013;19(2):91-6.
Gümüş, H., Mills, P., Gümüş, M., Fish, D., Jones, S., Jones, P., Devalia, H., & Sever, A. (2013). Factors that impact the upgrading of atypical ductal hyperplasia. Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology (Ankara, Turkey), 19(2), 91-6. https://doi.org/10.4261/1305-3825.DIR.5838-12.2
Gümüş H, et al. Factors That Impact the Upgrading of Atypical Ductal Hyperplasia. Diagn Interv Radiol. 2013 Mar-Apr;19(2):91-6. PubMed PMID: 23019055.
* Article titles in AMA citation format should be in sentence-case
TY - JOUR T1 - Factors that impact the upgrading of atypical ductal hyperplasia. AU - Gümüş,Hatice, AU - Mills,Philippa, AU - Gümüş,Metehan, AU - Fish,David, AU - Jones,Sue, AU - Jones,Peter, AU - Devalia,Haresh, AU - Sever,Ali, PY - 2012/9/29/entrez PY - 2012/9/29/pubmed PY - 2014/1/7/medline SP - 91 EP - 6 JF - Diagnostic and interventional radiology (Ankara, Turkey) JO - Diagn Interv Radiol VL - 19 IS - 2 N2 - PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to identify the factors that may have an impact on upgrading atypical ductal hyperplasia (ADH) lesions to malignancy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between February 1999 and December 2010, the records of 150 ADH lesions that had been biopsied were retrospectively reviewed. The biopsy types included 11-gauge stereotactic vacuum-assisted biopsy (SVAB) (n=102) and ultrasonography (US)-guided 14-gauge automated biopsy (n=48). The patients were divided into two groups: those who had cancer in the final pathology and those who did not. Variables associated with underestimation of ADH lesions were compared between the groups. RESULTS: The underestimation rates according to the biopsy types were 41.7% (20/48) for the US-guided 14-gauge automated biopsy and 20.6% (21/102) for the 11-gauge SVAB (P = 0.007). The rate of underestimation was significantly higher in lesions greater than 7 mm than it was in smaller lesions, with both US-guided 14-gauge automated biopsy and 11-gauge SVAB (P = 0.024 and P = 0.042, respectively). The rate of underestimation was significantly higher with the 11-gauge SVAB (P = 0.025) in lesions that were suspicious (R4) and highly suggestive of malignancy (R5) than in those that were probably benign (R3). CONCLUSION: The underestimation rate in ADH lesions was significantly higher with US-guided 14-gauge automated biopsy compared to the 11-gauge SVAB. The underestimation rate was also significantly higher in lesions greater than 7 mm regardless of the biopsy type, and in lesions biopsied using SVAB that were regarded as suspicious (R4) or highly suggestive of malignancy (R5) on imaging. SN - 1305-3612 UR - https://www.unboundmedicine.com/medline/citation/23019055/Factors_that_impact_the_upgrading_of_atypical_ductal_hyperplasia_ L2 - http://www.dirjournal.org/eng/makale/930/57/Full-Text DB - PRIME DP - Unbound Medicine ER -