Tubular carcinoma of the breast: sensitivity of diagnostic techniques and correlation with histopathology.

OBJECTIVE: Our objective was to assess our experience in diagnosing pure tubular carcinoma of the breast and to correlate the radiologic and histopathologic features. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective review of 932 consecutive cases of proven breast cancer diagnosed between 1990 and 1997 revealed 78 cases (8.4%) of tubular carcinoma in 69 patients. Clinical, imaging, cytologic, and histologic findings were analyzed. RESULTS: Mammography revealed tubular carcinoma in 68 (87%) of the 78 cases. Sonography showed tubular carcinoma in all 38 cases in which it was used; nine of these lesions were mammographically occult. These nine lesions were slightly, but not significantly (p < .05), smaller than the 29 lesions that had also been detected on mammography. Large core needle biopsy was performed in 22 patients (sensitivity, 91%). At biopsy, diagnoses were malignant (n = 16 [73%]), suspicious (n = 4 [18%]), atypia (n = 1 [4.5%]), and benign (n = 1 [4.5%]). Fine-needle aspiration biopsy was used to evaluate 36 cases of tubular carcinoma (sensitivity, 50%); cytologic diagnoses were malignant (n = 15 [42%]), suspicious (n = 3 [8%]), atypia (n = 10 [28%]), and benign (n = 8 [22%]). Only 15 (19%) of the 78 tubular carcinomas were palpable. Other tumors were detected within the excised tissue in 47 of the patients (68%); of these other types of lesions, ductal carcinoma in situ was found most often. CONCLUSION: Most cases of tubular carcinoma can be revealed by mammography; for mammographically occult tubular carcinoma, sonography can be performed. The rate of accuracy for determining the presence of tubular carcinoma is higher with large core needle biopsy than with fine-needle aspiration biopsy. Finally, when tubular carcinoma is diagnosed, other histologic types of carcinoma often occur in the same breast.

Large-needle core biopsy: nonmalignant breast abnormalities evaluated with surgical excision or repeat core biopsy.

PURPOSE: To classify lesions initially considered nonmalignant at large-needle core biopsy that were subsequently surgically excised or sampled at repeat biopsy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From August 1, 1991, to December 31, 1996, 1,032 breast abnormalities (214 malignant and 818 nonmalignant lesions) were sampled at large-needle core biopsy. Of the nonmalignant lesions, 112 (14%) abnormalities were studied. Twenty-four abnormalities were subsequently excised because of discordant imaging and pathologic findings; 41 may have been missed at biopsy (25 were surgically excised, and 16 were sampled at repeat biopsy); 40 were surgically excised as recommended by the pathologist; and seven were excised for other indications. RESULTS: None of 24 abnormalities excised because of discordant findings was malignant. Among the 41 possibly missed lesions, infiltrating ductal carcinoma was found in one lesion that was removed surgically and in one sampled at repeat biopsy. Among the 40 lesions recommended for excision by the pathologist, 16 malignancies were found (ductal carcinoma in situ, 11; infiltrating ductal carcinoma, three; phyllodes tumor, two). None of the remaining seven lesions was malignant. CONCLUSION: Correlation of the technical quality of the biopsy, imaging features, and pathologic findings resulted in 96 surgical excisions and 16 repeat biopsies of lesions initially considered nonmalignant. Eighteen additional malignancies were identified.

Comparison of dynamic contrast-enhanced gradient-echo and spin-echo sequences in MR of head and neck neoplasms.

PURPOSE: To investigate the utility of dynamic contrast-enhanced gradient-echo MR imaging of head and neck lesions and to compare this technique with the commonly used spin-echo contrast-enhanced fat-saturation technique. METHODS: Twenty-two patients with a total of 23 head and neck neoplasms underwent dynamic gradient-echo and spin-echo MR imaging studies. The spin-echo and dynamic gradient-echo images were compared in each case by consensus of three observers for differences in tumor conspicuity and delineation of margins, particularly with regard to invasion of adjacent structures. When possible, pathologic and/or surgical confirmation of tumor extent was obtained. Relative contrast was also calculated to determine objectively the degree of tumor enhancement with respect to background mucosa. RESULTS: The dynamic gradient-echo images showed better or equal delineation of the tumor margins by subjective observation in all but two cases. Temporally different enhancement patterns were noted for lesions, background mucosa, and adjacent reaction and edema. The dynamic gradient-echo technique provided better relative contrast than the spin-echo technique in 17 (77%) of 22 lesions. CONCLUSION: Dynamic gradient-echo MR imaging is superior to conventional contrast-enhanced spin-echo imaging in delineating the margins and extent of tumor. This technique provided observers with added confidence in their interpretations and suffered from fewer technical limitations.

Stereotactic breast biopsy of clustered microcalcifications with a directional, vacuum-assisted device.

The success rate with the traditional 14-gauge, core-biopsy, multiple-pass technique was compared with that of a directional vacuum-assisted device in sampling calcification clusters in the breast. Of the 130 focal calcification clusters sampled with the multiple-pass technique, 12 clusters (9.2%) had no particles depicted on radiographs of the specimen. Specimens from all 106 (100%) clusters sampled with the directional, vacuum-assisted instrument contained calcifications at radiography. The directional, vacuum-assisted device improved the ability to percutaneously sample breast calcifications.