TY - JOUR
T1 - Flat epithelial atypia
T2 - Comparison between 9-gauge and 11-gauge devices
AU - Villa, Alessandro
AU - Chiesa, Fabio
AU - Massa, Tiberio
AU - Friedman, Daniele
AU - Canavese, Giuseppe
AU - Baccini, Paola
AU - Calabrese, Massimo
AU - Tagliafico, Alberto
PY - 2013/12
Y1 - 2013/12
N2 - Background This study aimed to establish if women with a diagnosis of flat epithelial atypia (FEA) without residual microcalcifications at stereotactic vacuum-assisted breast biopsy (VABB) could be managed with mammographic follow-up (FU) instead of surgery and to compare 9-gauge and 11-gauge devices. Patients and Methods From October 2003 to January 2011, 2382 VABB procedures were performed (1373 with 11-gauge and 1009 with 9-gauge). We found 121 cases of pure FEA that were surgically treated: 57 with a 9-gauge device (group 1) and 64 with an 11-gauge device (group 2). The underestimation rate (UR) of malignancy for patients without and those with residual microcalcifications for each VABB device was calculated. Differences between groups were analyzed with the Fischer exact test. Results The overall UR of FEA was 4% (2 of 57) with the 9-gauge device and 8% (5 of 64) with the 11-gauge device. With a 9-gauge device, the UR for patients without residual microcalcifications was 0% (0 of 46), and the UR for patients with residual microcalcifications was 18% (2 of 11). With an 11-gauge device, the UR for patients without residual microcalcifications was 0% (0 of 39), the UR for patients with residual microcalcifications at post-biopsy mammograms was 16% (5 of 25). With a 9-gauge device, 80% (46 of 57) of patients did not have residual microcalcifications after VABB. With an 11-gauge device, 60% (39 of 64) of patients had no residual microcalcifications after VABB. Differences between the 9-gauge and 11-gauge devices were statistically significant (P
AB - Background This study aimed to establish if women with a diagnosis of flat epithelial atypia (FEA) without residual microcalcifications at stereotactic vacuum-assisted breast biopsy (VABB) could be managed with mammographic follow-up (FU) instead of surgery and to compare 9-gauge and 11-gauge devices. Patients and Methods From October 2003 to January 2011, 2382 VABB procedures were performed (1373 with 11-gauge and 1009 with 9-gauge). We found 121 cases of pure FEA that were surgically treated: 57 with a 9-gauge device (group 1) and 64 with an 11-gauge device (group 2). The underestimation rate (UR) of malignancy for patients without and those with residual microcalcifications for each VABB device was calculated. Differences between groups were analyzed with the Fischer exact test. Results The overall UR of FEA was 4% (2 of 57) with the 9-gauge device and 8% (5 of 64) with the 11-gauge device. With a 9-gauge device, the UR for patients without residual microcalcifications was 0% (0 of 46), and the UR for patients with residual microcalcifications was 18% (2 of 11). With an 11-gauge device, the UR for patients without residual microcalcifications was 0% (0 of 39), the UR for patients with residual microcalcifications at post-biopsy mammograms was 16% (5 of 25). With a 9-gauge device, 80% (46 of 57) of patients did not have residual microcalcifications after VABB. With an 11-gauge device, 60% (39 of 64) of patients had no residual microcalcifications after VABB. Differences between the 9-gauge and 11-gauge devices were statistically significant (P
KW - Breast cancer
KW - Flat epithelial Atypia
KW - Underestimation rate
KW - vacuum-assisted breast biopsy
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84889092620&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84889092620&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.clbc.2013.08.008
DO - 10.1016/j.clbc.2013.08.008
M3 - Article
C2 - 24094905
AN - SCOPUS:84889092620
VL - 13
SP - 450
EP - 454
JO - Clinical Breast Cancer
JF - Clinical Breast Cancer
SN - 1526-8209
IS - 6
ER -