Vacuum-assisted breast biopsies. Experience at the Antoine Lacassagne Cancer Center (Nice, France)

The positive predictive value of vacuum assisted biopsy (VAB) in predicting final histological diagnosis for breast lesions of uncertain malignancy (B3 lesions): A systematic review & meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

High-risk or B3 breast lesions are considered lesions of uncertain malignant potential and comprise between 5 and 12% of initial biopsy results. We sought to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies published within the last twenty years to determine the pooled Positive Predictive Value (PPV) of VAB in selected B3 lesions.

METHODS

The study report is based on the guidelines of PRISMA and Meta-Analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology.

OUTCOMES

The primary outcome of this study was to determine the PPV of VAB in determining final histological diagnosis in B3 breast lesions using pooled estimates. The secondary outcomes were to determine if needle gauge or the re-classification of Lobular Carcinoma in Situ(LCIS) introduced in 2012 influenced pooled estimates.

RESULTS

78 studies incorporating 6,377 B3 lesions were included in this review, 1214 of which were upgraded to DCIS or invasive malignancy following surgical excision(19%). The pooled PPV of VAB in Atypical Ductal Hyperplasia(ADH) and Lobular Neoplasia(LN) were 0.79(CI 0.76-0.83) and 0.84(CI 0.8-0.88). VAB of Flat Epithelial Atypia(FEA), radial scar and papillary lesions with/without atypia all had a pooled PPV >90% (underestimation rates 7%, 1%, 5% and 3% respectively). Needle gauge size and the change in LCIS classification did not appear to influence underestimation rates on subgroup analysis.

CONCLUSION

Results from this meta-analysis suggests it is reasonable to perform VAB as definitive treatment for certain B3 lesions, specifically LN, FEA, radial scar, and papillary lesions when specific criteria are fulfilled. Surgical excision should continue as the mainstay of treatment for ADH.

Randomized controlled trial of stereotactic 11-G vacuum-assisted core biopsy for the diagnosis and management of mammographic microcalcification

OBJECTIVE

To compare the accuracy of 11-G vacuum-assisted biopsy (VAB) with 14-G core needle biopsy (CNB) to diagnose mammographic microcalcification (MM) and effect on surgical outcomes.

METHODS

Following ethical approval, VAB and CNB (control) were compared in a randomized prospective study for first-line diagnosis of MM and subsequent surgical outcomes in two breast-screening units. Participants gave written informed consent. Exclusions included comorbidity precluding surgery, prior ipsilateral breast cancer and lesions >40 mm requiring mastectomy as first surgical procedure. The final pathological diagnosis was compared with the initial biopsy result. Quality-of-life (QOL) questionnaires were administered at baseline, 2, 6 and 12 months. 110 participants were required to show a 25% improvement in diagnosis with VAB compared with CNB (90% power).

RESULTS

Eligibility was assessed for 787 cases; 129 females recalled from the National Health Service breast screening programme were randomized. Diagnostic accuracy of VAB was 86% and that of CNB was 84%. Using VAB, 2/14 (14.3%) cases upgraded from ductal carcinoma in situ to invasion at surgery and 3/19 (15.8%) using CNB. Following VAB 7/16 (44%) cases required repeat surgery vs 7/24 (29%) after CNB. Both groups recorded significant worsening of functional QOL measures and increased breast pain at follow-up.

CONCLUSION

VAB and CNB were equally accurate at diagnosing MM, and no significant differences in surgical outcomes were observed.

ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE

The first randomized controlled study of VAB for diagnosis of microcalcification using digital mammography showed no difference in diagnostic accuracy of VAB and CNB, or in the proportion of participants needing repeat non-operative biopsy or second therapeutic operation to treat malignancy.

Mammotome(®) and EnCor (®): comparison of two systems for stereotactic vacuum-assisted core biopsy in the characterisation of suspicious mammographic microcalcifications alone

PURPOSE

The authors sought to compare the diagnostic performance of the Mammotome(®) and EnCor(®) vacuum-assisted breast biopsy (VABB) systems in the assessment of suspicious mammographic microcalcifications.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Between January 2011 and July 2012, a total of 169 VABB were performed by stereotactic guidance on a prone table. The Mammotome(®) 11G (S1) or EnCor(®) 10G (S2) probes were used randomly. Sampling time and the number of frustules collected were considered; sensitivity, specificity, diagnostic accuracy, positive and negative predictive value (PPV, NPV) of both procedures were evaluated, considering the final histological examination as reference (B1, B3, B5 lesions underwent surgical excision; B2 lesion were considered confirmed after a negative follow-up of at least 1 year).

RESULTS

There were no statistically significant differences between the two groups of patients according to the number of procedures (S1 82/169; S2 87/169), average age, BIRADS category (4a, b), and average size of the lesions. The two systems did not differ statistically for correlation with the final histology (S1 k = 0.94 ± 0.06; S2 k = 0.92 ± 0.08) and underestimation of B3 lesions or in situ (S1 4.5%; S2 4.3%). Sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV, diagnostic accuracy of S1 and S2 were also not statistically different. The systems differed only in sampling time (S1 80; S2 63 s), but not in total procedure time.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study confirms the effectiveness of VABB in the assessment of microcalcifications and highlights the lack of significant differences between the two systems in terms of diagnostic performance.