4.5 Review

Changes in the Diagnoses of Breast Core Needle Biopsies on Second Review at a Tertiary Care Center Implications for Surgical Management

Journal

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SURGICAL PATHOLOGY
Volume 47, Issue 2, Pages 172-182

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/PAS.0000000000002002

Keywords

breast; consultation; core biopsy; second opinion; quality assurance

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Core needle biopsy of breast lesions is an important procedure for diagnosis and treatment planning. However, discrepancies in diagnosis between different laboratories can occur, leading to changes in treatment management. This study showed that a significant number of breast CNBs had discrepant diagnoses, with 2.5% of cases experiencing a change in diagnostic category that affected surgical management.
Core needle biopsy (CNB) of breast lesions is routine for diagnosis and treatment planning. Despite refinement of diagnostic criteria, the diagnosis of breast lesions on CNB can be challenging. At many centers, including ours, confirmation of diagnoses rendered in other laboratories is required before treatment planning. We identified CNBs first diagnosed elsewhere that were reviewed in our department over the course of 1 year because the patients sought care at our center and in which a change in diagnosis had been recorded. The outside and in-house CNB diagnoses were then classified based on Breast WHO Fifth Edition diagnostic categories. The impact of the change in diagnosis was estimated based on the subsequent surgical management. Findings in follow-up surgical excisions (EXCs) were used for validation. In 2018, 4950 outside cases with CNB were reviewed at our center. A total of 403 CNBs diagnoses were discrepant. Of these, 147 had a change in the WHO diagnostic category: 80 (54%) CNBs had a more severe diagnosis and 44 (30%) a less severe diagnosis. In 23 (16%) CNBs, the change of diagnostic category had no impact on management. Intraductal proliferations (n=54), microinvasive carcinoma (n=18), and papillary lesions (n=35) were the most disputed diagnoses. The in-house CNB diagnosis was confirmed in most cases with available excisions. Following CNB reclassification, 22/147 (15%) lesions were not excised. A change affecting the surgical management at our center occurred in 2.5% of all CNBs. Our results support routine review of outside breast CNB as a clinically significant practice before definitive treatment.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available