Comparison of automated versus vacuum-assisted biopsy methods for sonographically guided core biopsy of the breast.
Author(s): Philpotts LE, Hooley RJ, Lee CH
Publication: AJR Am J Roentgenol, 2003, Vol. 180, Page 347-51
PubMed ID: 12540431 PubMed Review Paper? No
Purpose of Paper
This paper compared the diagnostic accuracy and reasons for request of rebiopsy of 14-gauge (G) automated gun and 11-G vacuum-assisted device (VAD) breast biopsies.
Conclusion of Paper
Rebiopsy either immediately or at follow-up were necessary for a comparable number of non-malignant cases obtained with a 14-G automated gun and a 11-G VAD. Importantly, the reasons for rebiopsy and the false negative and underestimation rates were also comparable. Final diagnosis was based on follow-up or histology of the excisional specimen.
Studies
-
Study Purpose
This study compared the diagnostic accuracy and reasons for request of rebiopsy of 14-G automated gun and 11-G VAD breast biopsies. One hundred eighty-one biopsies were obtained from 177 patients with a 14-G automated gun and 100 biopsies from 94 patients with an 11-G VAD. The incidence of each diagnosis was comparable between the two biopsy types, indicating biopsy type was blind.
Summary of Findings:
Rebiopsy was recommended for a comparable number of non-malignant cases biopsied with each device. Further, rebiopsy was most often requested because of discordance between imaging and histology biopsy for both 14-G biopsies and 11-G VAD biopsies (56% and 65%, respectively), followed by identification of a high risk lesion (20% and 18%, respectively). Insufficient sample was obtained with the 14-G biopsy in 3 cases (12%) and with the 11-G VAD in 1 case (6%), but this difference was not significant. Further, rebiopsy revealed only one false-negative for each biopsy method. After excision of 54 suspicious lesions, the underestimation rate of 14-G and 11-G VAD specimens were comparable (0% and 1%, respectively). Further, the rate at which a second biopsy was requested during follow-up because of growth was comparable for the two devices (2.5% for 14-G and 3% for 11-G VAD) and none of these cases were later determined to be false-negatives.
Biospecimens
Preservative Types
- Formalin
Diagnoses:
- Neoplastic - Benign
- Neoplastic - Carcinoma
Platform:
Analyte Technology Platform Morphology Light microscopy Morphology H-and-E microscopy Pre-analytical Factors:
Classification Pre-analytical Factor Value(s) Biospecimen Acquisition Method of tissue acquisition Vacuum assisted biopsy
Core needle biopsy
Biospecimen Acquisition Needle gauge 14-G
11-G