Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Breast Cancer
Published in: Breast Cancer 2/2010

01-04-2010 | Original Article

False-negative ultrasound-guided vacuum-assisted biopsy of the breast: difference with US-detected and MRI-detected lesions

Authors: Naomi Sakamoto, Mitsuhiro Tozaki, Kuniki Higa, Satoko Abe, Shinji Ozaki, Eisuke Fukuma

Published in: Breast Cancer | Issue 2/2010

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

The purpose of this study was to retrospectively examine the frequency and causes of a false-negative result of ultrasound (US)-guided vacuum-assisted biopsy.

Methods

A retrospective review was performed of 835 patients with 986 consecutive lesions who had undergone US-guided vacuum-assisted biopsy (US-VAB) using 11-gauge probes. We divided the lesions into two groups (US-detected and MRI-detected lesions). The sizes of the lesions on US, number of cores taken, rates of repeat biopsy, and the false-negative rate were compared between the two groups.

Results

The overall false-negative rate of US-VAB was 7.4% (13/175). The final number of malignant pathologic diagnoses was 175 (18%), including 13 false-negative lesions and 6 upgraded high-risk lesions. The false-negative rate for MRI-detected lesions (26%; 8/31) was significantly higher than that for US-detected lesions (3.5%; 5/144) (P = 0.0002). The causes of a false-negative result in the case of US-detected lesions were considered to be technical error in two cases and difficulty in histologic interpretation in three cases. The average size, as measured by US, average number of core samples, and repeat biopsy rate of US-detected lesions and MRI-detected lesions were 11 vs 9.7 mm (P = 0.0005), 13 vs 13 (P = NS), and 7.0% (43/611) vs 9.4% (18/191) (P = NS), respectively.

Conclusion

The high false-negative result for MRI-detected lesions might arise from the difficulties in MRI–US correlation, which indicates the need for MRI-guided biopsy.
Literature
1.
Parker SH, Jobe WE, Dennis MA, Stavros AT, Johnson KK, Yakes WF. US-guided automated large-core breast biopsy. Radiology. 1993;187:507–11.PubMed
2.
Liberman L, Feng TL, Dershaw DD, Morris EA, Abramson AF. Ultrasound-guided core breast biopsy: utility and cost-effectiveness. Radiology. 1998;208:717–23.PubMed
3.
Simon JR, Kalbhen CL, Cooper RA, Flisak ME. Accuracy and complication rates of US-guided vacuum-assisted core breast biopsy: initial results. Radiology. 2000;215:694–7.PubMed
4.
5.
Harvey JA, Moran RE, DeAngelis GA. Technique and pitfalls of ultrasound-guided core-needle biopsy of the breast. Semin Ultrasound CT MR. 2000;21:337–403.CrossRefPubMed
6.
Burbank F, Parker SH, Fogarty TJ. Stereotactic breast biopsy: improved tissue harvesting with the Mammotome. Am Surg. 1996;62:738–44.PubMed
7.
Berg WA, Krebs TL, Campassi C, Magder LS, Sun CC. 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
8.
Parker SH, Klaus AJ, McWey PJ, Schilling KJ, Cupples TE, Duchesne N, et al. Sonographically guided directional vacuum-assisted breast biopsy using a handheld device. Am J Roentgenol. 2001;177:405–8.
9.
Philpotts LE, Hooley RJ, Lee CH. Comparison of automated versus vacuum-assisted biopsy methods for sonographically guided core biopsy of the breast. Am J Roentgenol. 2003;180:347–51.
10.
Perez-Fuentes JA, Longobardi IR, Acosta VF, Marin CE, Liberman L. Sonographically guided directional vacuum-assisted breast biopsy: preliminary experience in Venezuela. Am J Roentgenol. 2001;177:1459–63.
11.
Cassano E, Urban LA, Pizzamiglio M, Abbate F, Maisonneuve P, Renne G, et al. Ultrasound-guided vacuum-assisted core breast biopsy: experience with 406 cases. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2007;102:103–10.CrossRefPubMed
12.
American College of Radiology. Breast imaging reporting and data system (BI-RADS), 4th ed. Reston, Virginia: American College of Radiology; 2003.
13.
Fischer U, Kopka L, Grabbe E. Breast carcinoma: effect of preoperative contrast-enhanced MR imaging on the therapeutic approach. Radiology. 1999;213:881–8.PubMed
14.
Morakkabati-Spitz N, Leutner C, Schild H, Traeber F, Kuhl C. Diagnostic usefulness of segmental and linear enhancement in dynamic breast MRI. Eur Radiol. 2005;15:2010–7.CrossRefPubMed
15.
Tozaki M, Igarashi T, Fukuda K. Breast MRI using the VIBE sequence: clustered ring enhancement in the differential diagnosis of lesions showing non-masslike enhancement. Am J Roentgenol. 2006;187:313–21.CrossRef
16.
Sakamoto N, Tozaki M, Higa K, Tsunoda Y, Ogawa T, Abe S, et al. Categorization of non-mass-like breast lesions detected by MRI. Breast Cancer. 2008;15:241–6.CrossRefPubMed
17.
Kuhl CK, Morakkabati N, Leutner CC, Schmiedel A, Wardelmann E, Schild HH. MR imaging-guided large-core (14-gauge) needle biopsy of small lesions visible at breast MR imaging alone. Radiology. 2001;220:31–9.PubMed
18.
Perlet C, Heywang-Kobrunner SH, Heinig A, Sittek H, Casselman J, Anderson I, et al. Magnetic resonance-guided, vacuum-assisted breast biopsy: results from a European multicenter study of 538 lesions. Cancer. 2006;106:982–90.CrossRefPubMed
19.
Tozaki M, Yamashiro N, Suzuki T, Kawano N, Ozaki S, Sakamoto N, Abe S, Ogawa T, Katayama N, Tsunoda Y, Fukuma E. MR-guided vacuum-assisted breast biopsy: is it an essential technique? Breast Cancer. 2008 Sep 20.
20.
Gobbi H, Simpson JF, Borowsky A, Jensen RA, Page DL. Metaplastic breast tumors with a dominant fibromatosis-like phenotype have a high risk of local recurrence. Cancer. 1999;85:2170–82.CrossRefPubMed
21.
Sneige N, Yaziji H, Mandavilli SR, Perez ER, Ordonez NG, Gown AM, et al. Low-grade (fibromatosis-like) spindle cell carcinoma of the breast. Am J Surg Pathol. 2001;25:1009–16.CrossRefPubMed
22.
Ivan D, Selinko V, Sahin AA, Sneige N, Middleton LP. Accuracy of core needle biopsy diagnosis in assessing papillary breast lesions: histologic predictors of malignancy. Mod Pathol. 2004;17:165–71.CrossRefPubMed
23.
Rosen EL, Bentley RC, Baker JA. Imaging-guided core needle biopsy of papillary lesions of the breast. Am J Roentgenol. 2002;179:1185–92.
24.
Sydnor MK, Wilson JD, Hijaz TA, Massey HD, Shaw de Paredes ES. Underestimation of the presence of breast carcinoma in papillary lesions initially diagnosed at core-needle biopsy. Radiology. 2007;242:58–62.CrossRefPubMed
25.
Renshaw AA, Derhagopian RP, Tizol-Blanco DM, Gould EW. Papillomas and atypical papillomas in breast core needle biopsy specimens: risk of carcinoma in subsequent excision. Am J Clin Pathol. 2004;122:217–21.CrossRefPubMed
26.
Liberman L, Tornos C, Huzjan R, Bartella L, Morris EA, Dershaw DD. Is surgical excision warranted after benign, concordant diagnosis of papilloma at percutaneous breast biopsy? Am J Roentgenol. 2006;186:1328–34.CrossRef
27.
Mercado CL, Hamele-Bena D, Oken SM, Singer CI, Cangiarella J. Papillary lesions of the breast at percutaneous core-needle biopsy. Radiology. 2006;238:801–8.CrossRefPubMed
28.
Jacobs TW, Connolly JL, Schnitt SJ. Nonmalignant lesions in breast core needle biopsies: to excise or not to excise? Am J Surg Pathol. 2002;26:1095–110.CrossRefPubMed
29.
Fenoglio C, Lattes R. Sclerosing papillary proliferations in the female breast: a benign lesion often mistaken for carcinoma. Cancer. 1974;33:691–700.CrossRefPubMed
30.
Carter D. Intraductal papillary tumors of the breast: a study of 78 cases. Cancer. 1977;39:1689–92.CrossRefPubMed
31.
Tavassoli FA. Papillary lesions. In: Tavassoli FA, editor. Pathology of the breast. Norwalk: Appleton & Lange; 1992. p. 193–227.
32.
Shin HJ, Kim HH, Kim SM, Yang HR, Sohn JH, Kwon GY, et al. Papillary lesions of the breast diagnosed at percutaneous sonographically guided biopsy: comparison of sonographic features and biopsy methods. Am J Roentgenol. 2008;190:630–6.CrossRef
33.
Shah VI, Raju U, Chitale D, Deshpande V, Gregory N, Strand V. False-negative core needle biopsies of the breast: an analysis of clinical, radiologic, and pathologic findings in 27 consecutive cases of missed breast cancer. Cancer. 2003;97:1824–31.CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
False-negative ultrasound-guided vacuum-assisted biopsy of the breast: difference with US-detected and MRI-detected lesions
Authors
Naomi Sakamoto
Mitsuhiro Tozaki
Kuniki Higa
Satoko Abe
Shinji Ozaki
Eisuke Fukuma
Publication date
01-04-2010
Publisher
Springer Japan
Published in
Breast Cancer / Issue 2/2010
Print ISSN: 1340-6868
Electronic ISSN: 1880-4233
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12282-009-0112-1

Other articles of this Issue 2/2010

Breast Cancer 2/2010 Go to the issue

Special Feature

Breast cancer stem cells

Case Report

Malignant neoplasm in the axilla of a male: suspected primary carcinoma of an accessory mammary gland

Original Article

Clinicopathological analyses of triple negative breast cancer using surveillance data from the Registration Committee of the Japanese Breast Cancer Society

Review Article

Predictive factors for anthracycline-based chemotherapy for human breast cancer

Case Report

A case of a giant phyllodes tumor of the breast with hypoglycemia caused by high-molecular-weight insulin-like growth factor II

Special Feature

Prediction of hormone sensitivity for breast cancers
Webinar | 19-02-2024 | 17:30 (CET)

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on antibody–drug conjugates in cancer

Watch now

Antibody–drug conjugates (ADCs) are novel agents that have shown promise across multiple tumor types. Explore the current landscape of ADCs in breast and lung cancer with our experts, and gain insights into the mechanism of action, key clinical trials data, existing challenges, and future directions.

Dr. Véronique Diéras
Prof. Fabrice Barlesi
Developed by: Springer Medicine
Image Credits