10
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Stereotactic breast biopsy: A review & applicability in the Indian context

      review-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Stereotactic biopsy is used for sampling of suspicious non-palpable lesions identified on mammography or digital breast tomosynthesis which are not visible on ultrasound. Stereotactic biopsy is preferable to surgical excision biopsy and helps avoid surgery for benign lesions. Providing tissue diagnosis in patients with early breast cancer may help in formulating a management strategy. Stereotactic biopsy can be carried out using either a dedicated prone table with the patient lying prone or an upright mammographic add-on system with the patient in a sitting or lateral decubitus position. This review focuses on the advantages and disadvantages of both these systems, the indications, contraindications and the complications inherent with this technique. The important pitfalls and their management as well as ways to ensure quality assurance have also been elaborated upon. Data regarding uptake of stereotactic biopsy in other parts of the world have been discussed using evidence from existing registries and databases and attempts made to quantify the need of the technique in the Indian set-up. In the absence of a national breast screening programme and limited resources in India, a hub and spoke model has been proposed as a viable model for healthcare providers for providing stereotactic biopsy.

          Related collections

          Most cited references57

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Percutaneous large-core breast biopsy: a multi-institutional study.

          To assess the reliability and reproducibility of automated large-core breast biopsy. A consortium of 20 institutions reported, in a standardized fashion, their core breast biopsy data. All biopsies were performed with "long-throw" (2.3-cm) automated core biopsy devices fitted with 14-gauge needles. Needle guidance was accomplished by means of either a dedicated, stereotaxic device, in which the patient lies in the prone position, or high-frequency electronically focused ultrasound equipment. The data in 6,152 lesions were gathered. Clinical or surgical follow-up was available in 3,765 lesions; 1,363 of these lesions were subsequently surgically excised, and the core histologic study showed cancer in 910 lesions, mammary intraepithelial neoplasia in 173 lesions, and benign disease in 280 lesions. In these 280 lesions, there were 15 false-negative core biopsies. The data show that percutaneous large-core breast biopsy is a reproducible and reliable alternative to surgical biopsy.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            Image-guided breast biopsy and localisation: recommendations for information to women and referring physicians by the European Society of Breast Imaging

            We summarise here the information to be provided to women and referring physicians about percutaneous breast biopsy and lesion localisation under imaging guidance. After explaining why a preoperative diagnosis with a percutaneous biopsy is preferred to surgical biopsy, we illustrate the criteria used by radiologists for choosing the most appropriate combination of device type for sampling and imaging technique for guidance. Then, we describe the commonly used devices, from fine-needle sampling to tissue biopsy with larger needles, namely core needle biopsy and vacuum-assisted biopsy, and how mammography, digital breast tomosynthesis, ultrasound, or magnetic resonance imaging work for targeting the lesion for sampling or localisation. The differences among the techniques available for localisation (carbon marking, metallic wire, radiotracer injection, radioactive seed, and magnetic seed localisation) are illustrated. Type and rate of possible complications are described and the issue of concomitant antiplatelet or anticoagulant therapy is also addressed. The importance of pathological-radiological correlation is highlighted: when evaluating the results of any needle sampling, the radiologist must check the concordance between the cytology/pathology report of the sample and the radiological appearance of the biopsied lesion. We recommend that special attention is paid to a proper and tactful approach when communicating to the woman the need for tissue sampling as well as the possibility of cancer diagnosis, repeat tissue sampling, and or even surgery when tissue sampling shows a lesion with uncertain malignant potential (also referred to as “high-risk” or B3 lesions). Finally, seven frequently asked questions are answered.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Stereotactic breast biopsy of nonpalpable lesions: determinants of ductal carcinoma in situ underestimation rates.

              To measure the effect of biopsy device, probe size, mammographic lesion type, lesion size, and number of samples obtained per lesion on the ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) underestimation rate. Nonpalpable breast lesions at 16 institutions received a histologic diagnosis of DCIS after 14-gauge automated large-core biopsy in 373 lesions and after 14- or 11-gauge directional vacuum-assisted biopsy in 953 lesions. The presence of histopathologic invasive carcinoma was noted at subsequent surgical biopsy. By performing the chi(2) test, independent significant DCIS underestimation rates by biopsy device were 20.4% (76 of 373) of lesions diagnosed at large-core biopsy and 11.2% (107 of 953) of lesions diagnosed at vacuum-assisted biopsy (P <.001); by lesion type, 24.3% (35 of 144) of masses and 12.5% (148 of 1,182) of microcalcifications (P <.001); and by number of specimens per lesion, 17.5% (88 of 502) with 10 or fewer specimens and 11.5% (92 of 799) with greater than 10 (P <.02). DCIS underestimations increased with lesion size. DCIS underestimations were 1.9 times more frequent with masses than with calcifications, 1.8 times more frequent with large-core biopsy than with vacuum-assisted biopsy, and 1.5 times more frequent with 10 or fewer specimens per lesion than with more than 10 specimens per lesion.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Indian J Med Res
                Indian J Med Res
                IJMR
                Indian J Med Res
                The Indian Journal of Medical Research
                Wolters Kluwer - Medknow (India )
                0971-5916
                0975-9174
                August 2021
                August 2021
                : 154
                : 2
                : 237-247
                Affiliations
                [1] Peerless Hospital & B. K. Roy Research Centre, Kolkata, West Bengal, India
                Author notes
                For correspondence: Dr Suma Chakrabarthi, Peerless Hospital & B.K. Roy Research Centre, 360, Pancha Sayar Road, Kolkata 700 094, West Bengal, India e-mail: sumadoc@ 123456gmail.com
                Article
                IJMR-154-237
                10.4103/ijmr.IJMR_1815_20
                9131754
                35142645
                3ee7cffc-2031-44f0-b020-c90045da3c7e
                Copyright: © 2021 Indian Journal of Medical Research

                This is an open access journal, and articles are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as appropriate credit is given and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms.

                History
                : 05 August 2020
                Categories
                Review Article

                Medicine
                breast cancer,breast screening,core biopsy,mammography,stereotactic biopsy,vacuum-assisted breast biopsy

                Comments

                Comment on this article