Breast ductography: to do or not to do? A pictorial essay

Nipple discharge is a frequent breast disease clinical presentation. Although most cases of nipple discharge are physiologic, pathologic nipple discharge is not uncommon. Eight to 15% of pathological nipple discharge is associated with malignancy, requiring investigation. Some specialists believe that ductography is a challenging procedure that is better to be substituted by other methods, such as MRI. However, an experienced physician can perform ductography quickly and easily and still play an essential role in some clinical scenarios. Conventional imaging, such as mammography and sonography, commonly fails to detect the underlying causes of pathological nipple discharge. MRI has limitations of low specificity, cost, lengthy exam duration, accessibility, and patient factors such as claustrophobia. In addition, we can make a specific diagnosis and appropriate treatment by coupling ductography with other methods, such as ultrasound-guided or stereotactic biopsy. This study aims to present the ductography technique, possible findings, and the clinical settings where ductography is useful.Critical relevance statement Although ductography is currently less used in breast imaging, it still plays an essential role in some clinical scenarios. These clinical scenarios include pathological nipple discharge with negative conventional imaging, contraindicated MRI, unavailable MRI, unremarkable MRI results, and multiple MRI findings.Key points• Conventional imaging commonly fails to detect the underlying causes of pathological nipple discharge.• MRI in the setting of nipple discharge has some limitations.• Ductography still plays an essential role in some clinical scenarios.• Coupling ductography with other methods helps make a specific diagnosis.

Clinicopathological and Imaging Features of Breast Papillary Lesions and Their Association with Pathologic Nipple Discharge

No studies have evaluated whether any clinicopathological or imaging characteristics of breast papillary lesions are associated with pathological nipple discharge (PND). We analyzed 301 surgically confirmed papillary breast lesions diagnosed between January 2012 and June 2022. We evaluated clinical (age of patient, size of lesion, pathologic nipple discharge, palpability, personal/family history of breast cancer or papillary lesion, location, multiplicity, and bilaterality) and imaging characteristics (Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS), sonographic, and mammographic findings) and compared malignant versus non-malignant lesions and papillary lesions with versus without PND. The malignant group was significantly older than the non-malignant group (p < 0.001). Those in the malignant group were more palpable and larger (p < 0.001). Family history of cancer and peripheral location in the malignant group were more frequent than in the non-malignant group (p = 0.022 and p < 0.001). The malignant group showed higher BI-RADS, irregular shape, complex cystic and solid echo pattern, posterior enhancement on ultrasound (US), fatty breasts, visibility, and mass type on mammography (p < 0.001, 0.003, 0.009, <0.001, <0.001, <0.001, and 0.01, respectively). On multivariate logistic regression analysis, peripheral location, palpability, and age of ≥50 years were factors significantly associated with malignancy (OR: 4.125, 3.556, and 3.390, respectively; p = 0.004, 0.034, and 0.011, respectively). Central location, intraductal nature, hyper/isoechoic pattern, and ductal change were more frequent in the PND group (p = 0.003, p < 0.001, p < 0.001, and p < 0.001, respectively). Ductal change was significantly associated with PND on multivariate analysis (OR, 5.083; p = 0.029). Our findings will help clinicians examine patients with PND and breast papillary lesions more effectively.

Diagnostic accuracy of breast MRI for patients with suspicious nipple discharge and negative mammography and ultrasound: a prospective study

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of breast MRI in identifying lesions requiring excision for patients with suspicious nipple discharge but normal mammograms and ultrasounds.

METHODS

Between September 2013 and May 2019, 106 female participants (mean age 57.9 years) were consecutively included in this prospective multicenter study; 102 were retained for analysis. MRI was considered negative in the absence of suspicious enhancement and positive in cases of ipsilateral abnormal enhancement (BI-RADS 3 to 5). Final diagnoses were based on histological findings of surgical or percutaneous biopsies or at 1-year follow-up. We considered all lesions requiring excision found on pathology (papilloma, atypia, nipple adenomatosis, or cancer) as positive results. We considered spontaneous resolution of the discharge at 1 year as a negative result.

RESULTS

MRI showed ipsilateral abnormal enhancement in 54 patients (53%) revealing 46 lesions requiring excision (31 benign papillomas, 5 papillomas with atypia, 2 nipple adenomatosis, and 8 cancers) and 8 benign lesions not requiring excision. No suspicious enhancement was found in the remaining 48 participants (47%). Forty-two were followed up at 1 year with spontaneous resolution of the discharge and six underwent surgery (revealing 2 benign papillomas). MRI diagnostic accuracy for the detection of a lesion requiring excision was as follows: sensitivity 96%, specificity 85%, positive predictive value 85%, and negative predictive value 96%.

CONCLUSION

In patients with suspicious nipple discharge and normal mammogram and ultrasound, MRI demonstrates excellent performance to identify lesions for which excision is required. Normal MRI indicates it is safe to propose follow-up only management, thus avoiding unnecessary duct excision.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02819362 KEY POINTS: • Breast MRI can be useful for the management of patients with suspicious nipple discharge and negative mammogram and ultrasound. • MRI detected a lesion requiring excision in 46 participants (45%) with unexplained discharge. • If breast MRI is negative, follow-up is a safe alternative for these patients.

Meta-analysis and cost-effectiveness of ductoscopy, duct excision surgery and MRI for the diagnosis and treatment of patients with pathological nipple discharge

INTRODUCTION

Pathological nipple discharge (PND) is a common breast-related complaint for referral to a surgical breast clinic because of its association with breast cancer. The aim of this meta-analysis was to compare the diagnostic efficacy of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and ductoscopy in patients with PND. Additionally, we determined the most cost-efficient strategy for the treatment of PND and the detection of breast cancer in PND patient without radiological suspicion for malignancy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

PubMed and EMBASE were searched to collect the relevant literature from the inception of both diagnostic methods until January 27th 2020. The search yielded 815 original citations, of which 10 studies with 894 patients were finally included for analysis. Costs of ductoscopy, MRI and duct excision surgery were obtained from the UMC Utrecht as established in the year 2019. These costs included: medical personnel, overhead costs, material costs and sterilisation costs.

RESULTS

The meta-analysis showed no significant difference in sensitivity between ductoscopy (44%) and MRI (76%) for the detection of malignancy in patients with PND. However, ductoscopy (98%) had a statistically significantly higher specificity than MRI (84%). Individual costs were €1401.33, €822.13 and €6494.27 for ductoscopy, MRI and duct excision surgery, respectively. Full diagnostic strategy involving ductoscopy was on average €1670.97, while with MRI it was €2070.27.

CONCLUSION

Patients undergoing MRI are more often (false) positive which more often leads to duct excision surgery referrals compared to ductoscopy. This makes ductoscopy significantly more cost-effective compared MRI in patients with PND without radiological suspicion for malignancy.

Nipple Discharge: Current Clinical and Imaging Evaluation

OBJECTIVE. Nipple discharge is a common complaint that is first evaluated with clinical assessment. Physiologic discharge does not require imaging other than routine screening mammography. Initial evaluation of pathologic nipple discharge involves mammography and ultrasound. evaluation of pathologic nipple discharge involves mammography and ultrasound. Because of its high sensitivity in detecting breast malignancy and its biopsy capability, MRI is increasingly used in lieu of ductography. CONCLUSION. The problem-solving algorithm for evaluating suspicious nipple discharge is evolving. When diagnostic imaging for evaluation of pathologic nipple discharge is negative, management is based on clinical suspicion. If additional imaging is warranted, MRI is preferred because of its increased sensitivity, specificity, and patient comfort. Although central duct excision is the current standard for evaluation of malignancy in patients with pathologic nipple discharge, studies suggest that, given the high negative predictive value of MRI, surveillance may be a reasonable alternative to surgery.

Is Ductography Still Warranted in the 21st century?

OBJECTIVE

To determine the utility of ductography in conjunction with mammography and ultrasound in patients with pathologic nipple discharge, and the incremental role of MRI after triple-modality evaluation.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of patients who had presented with pathologic nipple discharge and had undergone mammography and/or ultrasound and ductography between January 1, 2005, and October 31, 2010. We tested the diagnostic sensitivity, specificity and accuracy of combined triple-modality evaluation as well as of MRI performed in addition to these imaging techniques. We used the gold standard of image-guided biopsies, surgical excision, or long-term clinical and imaging follow-up.

RESULTS

Among 94 study patients, benign papillomas were identified in 42 (44.7%), abscess in one (1%), duct ectasia in four (4.3%), and malignancy (invasive ductal carcinoma or ductal carcinoma in situ) or high-risk lesion (atypical ductal hyperplasia) in 10 (10.6%). Forty-six patients (49%) underwent surgical excision; 89.1% of which had presurgical planning with ductography. In 35 (37.2%) with negative imaging, resolution of nipple discharge was confirmed on median clinical and imaging follow-up of 36 months. Two patients with negative imaging were lost to follow-up. Sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV for accurately demonstrating the etiology of pathologic nipple discharge were 13%, 97%, 89%, and 37% respectively for mammography; 73%, 97%, 98%, and 64% respectively for ultrasound; 76%, 72%, 84%, and 61% respectively for ductography; 86%, 70%, 85%, and 72% respectively for combined ultrasound and ductography; and 75%, 100%, 100% and 67% respectively for DCE-MRI.

CONCLUSION

The combination of mammography, ultrasound and ductography is highly accurate for identifying the etiology of pathologic nipple discharge. DCE-MRI can be used as an alternate to ductography if necessary.

Retrospective statistical analysis on the diagnostic value of ductography based on lesion pathology in patients presenting with nipple discharge

PURPOSE

To compare sensitivities and specificities of ductography to noninvasive imaging studies in determining the cause of nipple discharge and assess the value of ductography on the basis of pathologic results.

METHODS

In this retrospective review of women with nipple discharge who underwent ductography between January 1, 2005 and October 30, 2015, at our institution, we compared ductography with noninvasive imaging results (mammography, ultrasound, MRI) to determine its relative diagnostic sensitivity, specificity, and relative accuracy. Diagnosis was defined from pathology results, clinical notes, and minimum of 1-year follow-up monitoring. The primary endpoints include accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value. The analyses were carried out in different configurations to compare results by the following pathologic categories: cancer, high-risk lesion, intraductal papilloma (IP) without atypia, and benign pathology and/or normal imaging results.

RESULTS

In patients with breast cancer, ductography and noninvasive breast imaging had similar sensitivities. In patients with a high-risk lesion, ductography was significantly more sensitive than noninvasive imaging modalities. In patients with intraductal papilloma without atypia, ductography was more sensitive than noninvasive imaging, but the difference was of only borderline significance. For women with benign pathology and/or normal imaging, noninvasive imaging showed a significantly higher specificity than ductography.

CONCLUSION

In the absence of standard diagnostic algorithm for patients presenting with nipple discharge, the clinician has numerous options to choose a diagnostic approach that will yield the most accurate information with the least disruption to the patient. Our results indicate the value of ductography compared to value of noninvasive imaging modalities when cancer is suspected and when high risk lesion is suspected. While we show the sensitivity of ductography is similar to noninvasive imaging modalities in the setting of cancer, the sensitivity of ductography is statistically valuable for diagnosing high-risk lesions. Our hope is that this study will emphasize more research and more understanding in clinical utility and management of high-risk lesions, leading to patient-focused algorithm for diagnosing the etiology of abnormal nipple discharge.

Nipple discharge: The state of the art

Over 80% of females experience nipple discharge during their life. Differently from lactational (milk production) and physiological (white, green, or yellow), which are usually bilateral and involving multiple ducts, pathologic nipple discharge (PND) is a spontaneous commonly single-duct and unilateral, clear, serous, or bloody secretion. Mostly caused by intraductal papilloma(s) or ductal ectasia, in 5-33% of cases is due to an underlying malignancy. After clinical history and physical examination, mammography is the first step after 39, but its sensitivity is low (7-26%). Ultrasound shows higher sensitivity (63-100%). Nipple discharge cytology is limited by a false negative rate over 50%. Galactography is an invasive technique that may cause discomfort and pain; it can be performed only when the duct discharge is demonstrated at the time of the study, with incomplete/failed examination rate up to 15% and a difficult differentiation between malignant and benign lesions. Ductoscopy, performed under local anesthesia in outpatients, provides a direct visualization of intraductal lesions, allowing for directed excision and facilitating a targeted surgery. Its sensitivity reaches 94%; however, it is available in only few centers and most clinicians are unfamiliar with its use. PND has recently emerged as a new indication for contrast-enhanced breast MRI, showing sensitivity superior to galactography, with an overall sensitivity up to 96%, also allowing tailored surgery. Surgery no longer can be considered the standard approach to PND. We propose a state-of-the art flowchart for the management of nipple discharge, including ductoscopy and breast MRI as best options.

INTEND II randomized clinical trial of intraoperative duct endoscopy in pathological nipple discharge

BACKGROUND

The majority of lesions resulting in pathological nipple discharge are benign. Conventional surgery is undirected and targeting the causative lesion by duct endoscopy may enable more accurate surgery with fewer complications.

METHODS

Patients requiring microdochectomy and/or major duct excision were randomized to duct endoscopy or no duct endoscopy before surgery. Primary endpoints were successful visualization of the pathological lesion in patients randomized to duct endoscopy, and a comparison of the causative pathology between the two groups. The secondary endpoint was to compare the specimen size between groups.

RESULTS

A total of 68 breasts were studied in 66 patients; there were 31 breasts in the duct endoscopy group and 37 in the no-endoscopy group. Median age was 49 (range 19-81) years. Follow-up was 5·4 (i.q.r. 3·3-8·9) years in the duct endoscopy group and 5·7 (3·1-9·0) years in no-endoscopy group. Duct endoscopy had a sensitivity of 80 (95 per cent c.i. 52 to 96) per cent, specificity of 71 (44 to 90) per cent, positive predictive value of 71 (44 to 90) per cent and negative predictive value of 80 (52 to 96) per cent in identifying any lesion. There was no difference in causative pathology between the groups. Median volume of the surgical resection specimen did not differ between groups.

CONCLUSION

Diagnostic duct endoscopy is useful for identifying causative lesions of nipple discharge. Duct endoscopy did not influence the pathological yield of benign or malignant diagnoses nor surgical resection volumes. Registered as INTEND II in CancerHelp UK clinical trials database (https://www.cancerresearchuk.org/about-cancer/find-a-clinical-trial/a-study-looking-at-changes-inside-the-breast-ducts-of-women-who-have-nipple-discharge).

Galactogram for Investigation of Pathological Nipple Discharge: A Forgotten Arrow in the Radiologists’ Quiver?

Conventional X-ray galactogram (CG) is an underutilized procedure in modern breast imaging despite offering the highest spatial resolution among all modalities available for imaging of the breast ducts. The superior diagnostic performance of CG as compared to that of both conventional mammogram and high-resolution ultrasonography makes it a valuable imaging modality for the evaluation of pathological nipple discharge (PND). In addition, CG should always be considered in women with bloody nipple discharge but normal ultrasound and mammogram. CG also has an important role in the preoperative localization of intraductal lesions. CG may be especially useful in resource-restricted settings where breast magnetic resonance imaging is not readily available as it can be easily performed at any mammography facility without the need for additional equipment. In this article, we describe two cases of PND, one of benign and the other of malignant etiology, to demonstrate the value of CG in these cases. We also review the current literature and compare CG with other modalities used for imaging of ductal system of the breast.

JOURNAL CLUB: Diagnostic Utility of MRI After Negative or Inconclusive Mammography for the Evaluation of Pathologic Nipple Discharge

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study is to determine the diagnostic utility of MRI after negative or inconclusive mammography for the evaluation of pathologic nipple discharge.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We conducted a retrospective review of breast MRI examinations from January 1, 2006, through December 31, 2015, that were performed after negative or inconclusive mammography for the evaluation of nipple discharge. Clinical notes, imaging findings, and pathology outcomes were reviewed.

RESULTS

One hundred eighteen women (mean age, 49 years; range, 23-82 years) underwent MRI for evaluation of nipple discharge, 105 (89.0%) of whom had surgical excision or at least 2-year imaging follow-up. A total of six patients (6/105; 5.7%) were diagnosed with malignancy (ductal carcinoma in situ [DCIS] or invasive malignancy). Of 27 patients with positive MRI findings (final assessment of BI-RADS category 4), three (11.1%) were diagnosed with malignancy: DCIS grade 2-3, DCIS with focus of microinvasive ductal carcinoma, and invasive papillary carcinoma. An additional three patients (without suspicious findings at MRI) were diagnosed with malignancy at surgical excision, all of which were grade 1 DCIS. For patients with negative MRI findings (BI-RADS category 1, 2, or 3), the negative predictive value of MRI for malignancy was 96.2% (75/78).

CONCLUSION

In women with nipple discharge and negative or inconclusive mammography findings, the risk of malignancy is low, at 5.7%. With negative MRI findings (BI-RADS category 1, 2, or 3), the risk of malignancy is less than 4%. Surveillance rather than surgical excision may be a reasonable option for patients without suspicious findings at MRI.

Diagnostic Performance of MRI Versus Galactography in Women With Pathologic Nipple Discharge: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVE

The objective of our study was to perform a systematic review of the literature of the diagnostic accuracy of MRI compared with galactography in women with pathologic nipple discharge.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed (MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science) for articles evaluating the diagnostic performance of MRI and galactography in patients with pathologic nipple discharge and with histologic verification or clinical follow-up. Distinction between any abnormality and cancer was made. Two independent readers selected eligible articles published until December 2015. The quality of the studies was assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2 (QUADAS-2) tool. Data analyses were performed using the bivariate model.

RESULTS

Ten articles were analyzed for a total of 921 patients. The study quality was high, with a low risk of bias and low concerns regarding applicability. The pooled sensitivity for any abnormality was significantly higher for MRI, with 92% (95% CI, 85-96%), than for galactography, with 69% (95% CI, 59-78%) (p < 0.001). The pooled specificity was 76% (95% CI, 49-92%) for MRI versus 39% (95% CI, 16-69%) for galactography (p < 0.001). The pooled sensitivity and specificity for cancer detection were calculated for MRI only and were 92% (95% CI, 74-98%) and 97% (95% CI, 80-100%), respectively.

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis shows a higher diagnostic performance of MRI compared with that of galactography in the detection of any kind of lesion in patients with pathologic nipple discharge. Moreover, high sensitivity and very high specificity for cancer by MRI could be confirmed in this clinical setting. If mammography and ultrasound are negative, MRI should be preferred over galactography for further evaluation.

MRI ductography of contrast agent distribution and leakage in normal mouse mammary ducts and ducts with in situ cancer

High resolution 3D MRI was used to study contrast agent distribution and leakage in normal mouse mammary glands and glands containing in situ cancer after intra-ductal injection. Five female FVB/N mice (~19weeks old) with no detectable mammary cancer and eight C3(1) SV40 Tag virgin female mice (~15weeks old) with extensive in situ cancer were studied. A 34G, 45° tip Hamilton needle with a 25μL Hamilton syringe was inserted into the tip of the nipple and approximately 15μL of a Gadodiamide was injected slowly over 1min into the nipple and throughout the duct on one side of the inguinal gland. Following injection, the mouse was placed in a 9.4T MRI scanner, and a series of high resolution 3D T1-weighted images was acquired with a temporal resolution of 9.1min to follow contrast agent leakage from the ducts. The first image was acquired at about 12min after injection. Ductal enhancement regions detected in images acquired between 12 and 21min after contrast agent injection was five times smaller in SV40 mouse mammary ducts (p<0.001) than in non-cancerous FVB/N mouse mammary ducts, perhaps due to rapid washout of contrast agent from the SV40 ducts. The contrast agent washout rate measured between 12min and 90min after injection was ~20% faster (p<0.004) in SV40 mammary ducts than in FVB/N mammary ducts. These results may be due to higher permeability of the SV40 ducts, likely due to the presence of in situ cancers. Therefore, increased permeability of ducts may indicate early stage breast cancers.