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
European Radiology
Published in: European Radiology 6/2019

01-06-2019 | Breast

Role of one-pass breast lesion excision system in complete excision of high-risk breast lesions with atypia expressed as clusters of microcalcifications

Authors: Alexandra Christou, Vassilis Koutoulidis, Dimitra Koulocheri, Evangelia Panourgias, Afrodite Nonni, Constantinos G. Zografos, George C. Zografos

Published in: European Radiology | Issue 6/2019

Login to get access

Abstract

Purpose

To assess the role of the breast lesion excision system (BLES) in complete removal of clusters of microcalcifications found on mammogram proved histologically to be high-risk lesions with cell atypia.

Methods and materials

Three hundred ninety-four consecutive women (mean age 58.5 years, range 39–78 years) with 400 clusters of suspicious microcalcifications underwent stereotactic biopsy using the intact BLES device between January 2014 and January 2016. All cases proved histologically to be high-risk lesions were subsequently assessed for complete removal. The underestimation rate was also assessed.

Results

Thirty-eight out of 400 (9.5%) lesions were high-risk lesions with atypia with mean size 7.63 mm (st. dev. = 4.03 mm) which was within the size that the BLES needle can excise (20 mm). Four (10.5%) papillomas with atypia, 14 (36.8%) cases with flat epithelial atypia (FEA), 10 (26.3%) cases with lobular intraepithelial neoplasia (LIN-LIN 1, LIN 2), 8 (21.2%) with atypical ductal hyperplasia (ADH) and 2 (5.3%) cases with mucocele-like lesions (MLL) with atypia were found. Twenty-nine out of 38 lesions had subsequent surgery. Complete excision was achieved in 23/29 lesions (79.3%). No underestimation was found. Two-year mammographic stability was found in all lesions. Non-parametric statistical analysis showed no other significant predictive factor for complete excision apart from the distance of the lesions from the specimen margins (p = 0.031 Mann-Whitney test).

Conclusion

One-pass BLES intact biopsy technique is a safe method of complete removal of high-risk atypical lesions with high accuracy rates for certain histologies and could be potentially used as an alternative excision method to diagnostic surgery in selected cases.

Key Points

• Breast lesion excision system (BLES) is an image-guided biopsy technique that uses radiofrequency to remove an intact piece of tissue including the target breast neoplasm.
• Breast lesion excision system (BLES) under stereotactic guidance is able to accurately biopsy high-risk breast lesions expressed mammographically as clusters of suspicious microcalcifications.
• BLES under stereotactic guidance is an accurate technique for en bloc excision of selected cases of small clusters of suspicious microcalcifications proved to be high-risk lesions with histopathologically disease-free margins of excision.
Literature
1.
Adams AL (2010) Flat epithelial atypia: a review of current concepts. Open Breast Cancer J 2:90–94
2.
Javitt MC (2012) Diagnosis and management of high-risk breast lesions: Aristotle’s dilemma. AJR Am J Roentgenol 198:246–248CrossRefPubMed
3.
Muttarak M, Lerttumnongtum P, Chaiwun B, Peh WC (2008) Spectrum of papillary lesions of the breast: clinical, imaging, and pathologic correlation. AJR Am J Roentgenol 191:700–707CrossRefPubMed
4.
Leibman AJ, Staeger CN, Charney DA (2006) Mucocelelike lesions of the breast: mammographic findings with pathologic correlation. AJR Am J Roentgenol 186:1356–1360
5.
Burbank F, Parker SH, Fogerty TJ (1996) Stereotactic breast biopsy: improved tissue harvesting with the Mammotome. Am Surg 62:738–744PubMed
6.
Parker SH, Burbank F (1996) A practical approach to minimally invasive breast biopsy. Radiology 200:11–20CrossRefPubMed
7.
Fahrbach K, Sledge I, Cella C, Linz H, Ross SD (2006) A comparison of the accuracy of two minimally invasive breast biopsy methods: a systematic literature review and meta-analysis. Arch Gynecol Obstet 274:63–73CrossRefPubMed
8.
Yu YH, Liang C, Yuan XZ (2010) Diagnostic value of vacuum-assisted breast biopsy for breast carcinoma: a meta-analysis and systematic review. Breast Cancer Res Treat 120(2):469–479CrossRefPubMed
9.
Houssami N, Ciatto S, Ellis I, Ambrogetti D (2006) Underestimation of malignancy of breast core needle biopsy. Cancer 109:487–495CrossRef
10.
Hwang H, Barke LD, Mendelson EB, Susnik B (2008) Atypical lobular hyperplasia and classic lobular carcinoma in situ in core biopsy specimens: routine excision is not necessary. Mod Pathol 21:1208–1216CrossRefPubMed
11.
Forgeard C, Benchaib M, Guerin N et al (2008) Is surgical biopsy mandatory in case of atypical ductal hyperplasia on 11-gauge core needle biopsy? A retrospective study of 300 patients. Am J Surg 196:339–345CrossRefPubMed
12.
Rudin AV, Hoskin TL, Fahy A et al (2017) Flat epithelial atypia on core biopsy and upgrade to cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Surg Oncol 24(12):3549–3558CrossRefPubMed
13.
Wiratkapun C, Keeratitragoon T, Lertsithichai P, Chanplakorn N (2013) Upgrading rate of papillary breast lesions diagnosed by core-needle biopsy. Diagn Interv Radiol 19:371–376PubMed
14.
Seely JM, Verma R, Kielar A et al (2017) Benign papillomas of the breast diagnosed on large-gauge vacuum biopsy compared with 14 gauge core needle biopsy - do they require surgical excision? Breast J 23(2):146–153CrossRefPubMed
15.
Sutton B, Davion S, Feldman M, Siziopikou K, Mendelson E, Sullivan M (2012) Mucocele-like lesions diagnosed on breast core biopsy: assessment of upgrade rate and need for surgical excision. Am J Clin Pathol 138(6):783–788CrossRefPubMed
16.
17.
Rogers LW (2005) Breast biopsy: a pathologist’s perspective on biopsy acquisition techniques and devices with mammographic–pathologic correlation. Semin Breast Dis 8:127–137CrossRef
18.
Sie A, Bryan DC, Gaines V et al (2006) Multicenter evaluation of the breast lesion excision system, a percutaneous, vacuum-assisted, intact-specimen breast biopsy device. Cancer 107(5):945–949CrossRefPubMed
19.
Killebrew LK, Oneson RH (2006) Comparison of the diagnostic accuracy of a vacuum assisted percutaneous intact specimen sampling device to a vacuum-assisted core needle sampling device for breast biopsy: initial experience. Breast J 12(4):302–308CrossRefPubMed
20.
Sklair-Levy M, Rayman S, Yosepovich A, Zbar A, Goitein D, Zippel D (2017) The intact breast lesion excision system as a therapeutic device for selected benign breast lesions. Breast J 24(3):304–308CrossRefPubMed
21.
Allen SD, Osin P, Nerurkar A (2014) The radiological excision of high risk and malignant lesions using the INTACT breast lesion excision system. A case series with an imaging follow up of at least 5 years. Eur J Surg Oncol 40(7):824–829CrossRefPubMed
22.
Milos RI, Bernathova M, Baltzer PA et al (2017) The breast lesion excision system (BLES) under stereotactic guidance cannot be used as a therapeutic tool in the excision of small areas of microcalcifications in the breast. Eur J Radiol 93:252–257CrossRefPubMed
23.
Serora JY, Lesieurb B, Scheuer-Niroa B, Zeratc L, Rouzierb R, Uzanb S (2012) Predictive factors for complete excision and underestimation of one-pass en bloc excision of non-palpable breast lesions with the Intact® breast lesion excision system. Eur J Radiol 81:719–724CrossRef
24.
Medjhoul A, Canale S, Mathieu MC et al (2013) Breast lesion excision sample (BLES biopsy) combining stereotactic biopsy and radiofrequency: is it a safe and accurate procedure in case of BIRADS 4 and 5 breast lesions? Breast J 19(6):590–594CrossRefPubMed
25.
Al-Harethee W, Theodoropoulos G, Filippakis GM et al (2013) Complications of percutaneous stereotactic vacuum assisted breast biopsy system utilizing radio frequency. Eur J Radiol 82(4):623–626CrossRefPubMed
26.
Al-Harethee WA, Kalles V, Papapanagiotou I et al (2015) Thermal damage of the specimen during breast biopsy with the use of the Breast Lesion Excision System: does it affect diagnosis? Breast Cancer 22(1):84–89CrossRefPubMed
27.
Darling ML, Smith DN, Lester SC (2000) Atypical ductal hyperplasia and ductal carcinoma in situ as revealed by large-core needle breast biopsy: results of surgical excision. AJR Am J Roentgenol 175(5):1341CrossRefPubMed
28.
Pandelidis S, Heiland D, Jones D, Stough K, Trapeni J, Suliman Y (2003) Accuracy of 11-gauge vacuum-assisted core biopsy of mammographic breast lesions. Ann Surg Oncol 10(1):43CrossRefPubMed
29.
Page DL, Rogers LW (1992) Combined histologic and cytologic criteria for the diagnosis of mammary atypical ductal hyperplasia. Hum Pathol 23(10):1095–1097CrossRefPubMed
30.
Perry N, Broeders M, de Wolf C, Törnberg S, Holland R, von Karsa L (2008) European guidelines for quality assurance in breast cancer screening and diagnosis. Fourth edition–summary document. Ann Oncol 19:614–622CrossRefPubMed
31.
Rageth CJ, O’Flynn EA, Comstock C et al (2016) First International Consensus Conference on lesions of uncertain malignant potential in the breast (B3 lesions). Breast Cancer Res Treat 159:203–213CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
32.
Page DL, Kidd TE Jr, Dupont WD, Simpson JF, Rogers LW (1991) Lobular neoplasia of the breast: higher risk for subsequent invasive cancer predicted by more extensive disease. Hum Pathol 22:1232–1239CrossRefPubMed
33.
Londero V, Zuiani C, Linda A, Girometti R, Bazzocchi M, Sardanelli F (2012) High-risk breast lesions at imaging-guided needle biopsy: usefulness of MRI for treatment decision. AJR Am J Roentgenol 199:240–W250
Metadata
Title
Role of one-pass breast lesion excision system in complete excision of high-risk breast lesions with atypia expressed as clusters of microcalcifications
Authors
Alexandra Christou
Vassilis Koutoulidis
Dimitra Koulocheri
Evangelia Panourgias
Afrodite Nonni
Constantinos G. Zografos
George C. Zografos
Publication date
01-06-2019
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in
European Radiology / Issue 6/2019
Print ISSN: 0938-7994
Electronic ISSN: 1432-1084
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-018-5925-x

Other articles of this Issue 6/2019

European Radiology 6/2019 Go to the issue

Magnetic Resonance

Risk assessment of copper-containing contraceptives: the impact for women with implanted intrauterine devices during clinical MRI and CT examinations

Correction

Correction to: Effect of training on ultrasonography (US) BI-RADS features for radiology residents: a multicenter study comparing performances after training

Gastrointestinal

Prognostic value of computed tomography radiomics features in patients with gastric cancer following curative resection

Correction

Correction to: Ultrashort time-to-echo quantitative magnetic resonance imaging of the triangular fibrocartilage: differences in position

Computed Tomography

Dual-energy CT for liver iron quantification in patients with haematological disorders

Radiological Education

Simulator training improves ultrasound scanning performance on patients: a randomized controlled trial