Histological changes secondary to wire coil placement in breast tissue and lymph nodes.

We describe the histological and immunohistochemical features of the changes produced by spiral coil localization wires in the breast parenchyma and lymph nodes of a total of 100 patients undergoing surgery for different breast lesions. Coil wires produced cystic lesions containing a hyaline, mucous-like, PAS-negative fluid. Cavities were lined by cells of variable morphology ranging from synovial-like cells (with a conspicuous epithelial appearance) to mononuclear or multinucleate histiocytic cells that expressed CD68, but were negative for keratins. CD3-positive/CD8-positive T lymphocytes predominated in the inflammatory reaction. Pathologists should be aware of these changes in order to differentiate coil-related lesions from other granulomatous or epithelial lesions, including mucocele-like and ductal carcinoma in situ lesions.

Sentinel lymph node biopsy in selected cases of ductal carcinoma in situ.

INTRODUCTION: Axillary lymphadenectomy is nowadays not recommended to treat ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), but there is controversy surrounding the indication for sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A prospective study of a selected group of patients diagnosed preoperatively with DCIS was performed between 2004 and 2009. Indications for SLNB were histologically determined high-grade tumours, tumour size >2 cm and patients scheduled to undergo a mastectomy. RESULTS: Sixty-five patients were analysed. Surgical technique was mastectomy in 39 patients (60%) and conservative breast surgery in 26 (40%). Definitive histological study of the resected breast tumour revealed 43 cases (66.2%) of DCIS, 15 (23.1%) of ductal invasive carcinoma and seven (10.7%) microinvasive tumours. In confirmed DCIS, only 6.9% of sentinel lymph nodes were positive, in microinvasive carcinoma 28.5% and in invasive carcinoma 40% were positive. Total number of patients with positive sentinel lymph nodes was 11 (16.9%). Of 39 mastectomies, 12 corresponded to microinvasive or invasive carcinoma and six (50%) showed a positive SLNB. CONCLUSIONS: Performing SLNB avoids an unnecessary second surgery to study axillary lymph nodes in invasive carcinoma diagnosed after definitive histological study. In patients undergoing a mastectomy, this study requires an axillary lymphadenectomy that is not useful in up to 50% of cases. We think that in a selected group of patients with DCIS, SLNB improves tumour staging, adapts the treatment and avoids second surgery in this group of patients.

Infiltrating ductal carcinoma and ductal carcinoma in situ associated with mammary hamartoma.

Mammary hamartoma is a rare nonmalignant lesion. Only 11 cases of carcinoma associated with hamartoma have been previously described in the literature. We describe a case of infiltrating ductal carcinoma (IDC) and ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) associated with hamartoma in a 35-year-old woman. Mammography showed the features of a typical hamartoma with suspicious microcalcifications arising in it. The patient underwent a radical modified mastectomy. It is likely that hamartoma is a coincidental finding. The identification of suspicious microcalcifications in a typical mammographic image of a hamartoma should prompt continued examination to exclude an underlying tumor.