Utility of targeted sonography in the evaluation of focal breast pain

Imaging for breast pain: A useful paradigm to promote breast cancer screening and reduce unnecessary breast imaging

OBJECTIVE

Identify the proportion of patients presenting for diagnostic breast imaging with clinically insignificant breast pain who are eligible for screening mammography and analyze the impact of routing these patients to screening on resource utilization, healthcare spending and cancer detection.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed 100 consecutive women ≥40 years old without a history of breast cancer who underwent diagnostic mammogram and breast ultrasound for clinically insignificant breast pain from 1/2022 to 4/2022. Patients were screen-eligible if their last bilateral mammogram was over 12 months prior to presentation. Patients with only screening views during diagnostic mammography were assumed to have a negative/benign screening mammogram. Costs were calculated using the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Physician Fee Schedule.

RESULTS

68 of 100 patients with breast pain were screen-eligible at time of diagnostic imaging. With a screen first approach, 47/68 would have had negative/benign screening mammograms, allowing for the availability of 47 diagnostic breast imaging appointments. The current workflow led to 100 diagnostic mammograms and ultrasounds, 29 follow-up ultrasounds, and 10 image-guided biopsies, with a total cost of $42,872.41. With a screen first approach, there would have been 68 screening mammograms, 53 diagnostic mammograms and ultrasounds, 10 follow-up ultrasounds, and 9 image-guided biopsies, with a total cost of $34,231.60. Two cancers were identified, both associated with suspicious mammographic findings. None would have been missed in a screen-first approach.

DISCUSSION

Identifying screen-eligible patients with clinically insignificant breast pain and routing them to screening mammogram improves radiology resource allocation and decreases healthcare spending without missing any cancers.

ESR Essentials: diagnostic work-up in patients with symptomatic breast disease-practice recommendations by the European Society of Breast Imaging

Breast complaints are frequent reasons for consultations in primary care or breast clinics. Breast pain, breast lumps, and nipple discharge are the most common complaints. Less common symptoms such as skin changes and axillary abnormalities also require specific diagnostic approaches. Imaging the symptomatic breast should be performed by appropriately trained breast radiologists following the best practice guidelines and quality standards. Full-field digital mammography (FFDM), digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT), and breast ultrasound (US) are the main modalities used in this primary setting. The choice depends on the patient's age and symptoms. Women younger than 30-years-old are first imaged by US, whereas women over 40-years-old usually require both FFDM or DBT and US. For women between 30-years-old and 40-years-old, the US is the modality of choice, whereas FFDM or DBT might also be performed if needed. Pregnant or lactating women with palpable lesions or nipple discharge are imaged with US as the first method; FFDM or DBT can also be performed depending on the degree of suspicion as the dose to the fetus is minimal, and shielding may even further reduce the dose. More advanced techniques such as breast magnetic resonance imaging or contrast-enhanced mammography are not indicated in this first diagnostic setting and are reserved for cases of established malignancy (local staging) or rare cases of equivocal findings not otherwise resolved or inflammatory breast cancer. Last, but not least, male breast symptoms should also be addressed with US and/or FFDM. CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT: It is equally important to correctly diagnose an underlying malignancy and to avoid false positives that would lead to unnecessary biopsies, increased costs, and anxiety for the patient. Proper use of imaging modalities ensures optimal diagnostic approach and minimizes false negatives. KEY POINTS: Ultrasound, full-field digital mammography, or digital breast tomosynthesis are the main imaging modalities in the diagnostic setting, while MRI or contrast-enhanced mammography should be reserved to selected cases. Initial imaging modality includes ultrasound combined with mammography or digital breast tomosynthesis depending on women's age and the presence (or not) of inconclusive findings. A negative imaging evaluation should not deter biopsy when a highly suspicious finding is found on physical examination.

An Image-Rich Educational Review of Breast Pain

Breast pain is extremely common, occurring in 70% to 80% of women. Most cases of breast pain are from physiologic or benign causes, and patients should be reassured and offered treatment strategies to alleviate symptoms, often without diagnostic imaging. A complete clinical history and physical examination is key for distinguishing intrinsic breast pain from extramammary pain. Breast pain without other suspicious symptoms and with a negative history and physical examination result is rarely associated with malignancy, although it is a common reason for women to undergo diagnostic imaging. When breast imaging is indicated, guidelines according to the American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria should be followed as to whether mammography, US, or both are recommended. This review article summarizes the initial clinical evaluation of breast pain and evidence-based guidelines for imaging. Additionally, the article reviews cyclical and noncyclical breast pain and provides an image-rich discussion of the imaging presentation and management of benign and malignant breast pain etiologies.

Patient-centered Care: Value Added by Breast Radiologists in the Management of Breast Pain

With the shift of the healthcare system toward patient-centered, value-based care, the role of the breast radiologist is essential and increasingly multifaceted. Beyond sole image interpreters, breast radiologists serve as subject matter experts within multidisciplinary care teams, acting as advocates and initiators into the healthcare system and providing patient-centered care through effective communication and patient education. These vital roles are well demonstrated through the imaging evaluation and management of the most common breast symptom that affects the majority of the patient population-mastalgia. By leveraging the opportunities provided during the evaluation of the symptomatic breast to optimize patient communication and education, as well as integration of care delivery, breast radiologists add significant value to patient care and ultimately improve patient outcomes.

Transforming the 2-week wait (2WW) pathway: management of breast pain in primary care

Breast pain has no association with breast cancer yet is a frequent reason for referral from Primary to Secondary Care, often on an urgent (2-week wait) referral. The referral often causes significant patient anxiety, further heightened by screening mammograms and/or ultrasound scans in the absence of an associated red flag symptom or finding by the patient or general practitioner. This paper reports the pilot implementation of a specialist Primary Care Breast Pain Clinic in Mid-Nottinghamshire where patients were seen, examined without any imaging and assessed for their risk of familial breast cancer: numerous studies have reported 15%–>30% of patients with breast pain only have a family history of breast cancer.

177 patients with breast pain only were seen in this clinic between March, 2020 and April, 2021 with a 6-month interim suspension due to COVID-19. The mean age of patients was 48.4 years (range: 16–86). 172/177 (97.2%) patients required no imaging although there were three (1.7%) inappropriate referrals and two additional abnormalities (1.1%—hamartoma, thickening/tethering) that were referred onward. There were no cancers. 21 (12.4%) patients were identified to have an increased familial risk of breast cancer and were referred to the specialist familial cancer service. 170/177 patients completed an anonymous questionnaire on leaving the clinic. 167/169 (99%) were reassured regarding their breast pain, 155/156 (99%) were reassured of the Familial Risk Assessment, 162/168 (96%) were reassured regarding their personal risk assessment while 169/170 (99%) were ‘extremely likely/likely to recommend the service’.

This specialist Primary Care Breast Pain Clinic provides service improvement across all levels of care (Primary, Secondary and Tertiary). Patients were successfully managed in the community with high levels of patient satisfaction and together this obviated referral to secondary care. The familial breast cancer risk assessment also helped identify unmet need in the community.

Role of digital breast tomosynthesis in the evaluation of focal breast pain

RATIONAL AND OBJECTIVE

To investigate the utility of digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) in the evaluation of focal breast pain, considering breast density and breast cancer risk.

METHODS

Ninety-one cases of focal breast pain evaluated with DBT and ultrasound (US) from 12/30/2014 to 11/9/2017 with 2-year follow-up were identified. Exclusion criteria were non-focal, axillary, or radiating pain; palpable or skin changes; pregnancy or lactation; and history of ipsilateral cancer, trauma, or infection. Demographic data, Tyrer-Cuzick Score (TCS), medical history, breast density, imaging results, and pathology were recorded. Descriptive statistics were reported.

RESULTS

Eighteen percent (16/91) of cases demonstrated findings, all benign. Of these, 6% (1/16) were detected by DBT only, 88% (14/16) by US only, and 6% (1/16) by DBT and US. US resulted in 3 benign biopsies. Ninety-nine percent (75/76) of cases with no findings at the site of pain on US also had no findings on DBT. Ninety-eight percent (89/91) of cases with no cancer detected at the site of pain on US also did not have cancer on DBT. DBT detected 2 incidental cancers not associated with pain. DBT and US agreed that there was no finding at the site of pain in 82% (75/91) of cases. A high degree of agreement between DBT and US was seen when stratified by breast density and TCS.

CONCLUSION

DBT may be appropriate for the evaluation of focal pain. Low breast cancer incidence was observed at the site of focal pain across all mammographic breast densities and breast cancer risks.

[The HRT follow-up consultation. What to do in case of breast pain. Postmenopausal women management: CNGOF and GEMVi clinical practice guidelines]

Breast pain is a concern in perimenopausal and postmenopausal women, quantifiable using validated tools, and may pre-exist or appear after initiation of a HRT.

OBJECTIVES

A review of the literature was conducted to evaluate the frequency of breast pain, its evolution with age, its changes under HRT, its link with a possible risk of subsequent breast cancer, and the diagnostic (breast imaging) or therapeutic management modalities (pharmacological or other) in women taking HRT.

METHOD

A review of the literature was carried out by consulting Medline, Cochrane Library data and international recommendations in French and English up to the end of 2019.

RESULTS

Published data confirm the importance of breast pain in relation to breast cancer risk. Women with breast pain prior to or related to the use of HRT have a significantly increased risk of breast cancer compared to women without breast pain. The risk is increased in cases of moderate to severe breast pain. In the presence of diffuse breast pain without abnormalities on clinical examination, it is not recommended to change the usual indications for screening, whether organized or individual. For focal breast pain, breast imaging (mammography and possibly ultrasound) is recommended. In the absence of abnormalities on breast imaging, a reassuring dialogue has to take place. With regard to HRT, doses of estrogens should be reduced until the breast pain decreases, or even stop the HRT if this symptom persists despite the use of low doses. Wearing a bra brassiere-type can also reduce breast pain.

A Review of Breast Pain: Causes, Imaging Recommendations, and Treatment

Over two-thirds of women will experience breast pain in their lifetime. As one of the leading breast symptoms for which women seek medical attention, breast pain is suspected to be underreported and under-studied. Cyclical breast pain is related to hormonal changes. Noncyclical breast pain is independent of the menstrual cycle and can be idiopathic and related to chronic pain syndromes, infections, ill-fitting bras, musculoskeletal abnormalities, pregnancy, perimenopause, and postsurgical causes. Breast pain can also present in transgender patients and may require additional considerations as to the underlying cause. Imaging of mastalgia depends upon the suspected etiology. Inappropriate imaging for breast pain is associated with significant utilization of health care resources. Cyclical breast pain does not require an imaging work-up. The work-up of focal, noncyclical breast pain includes ultrasound for women aged younger than 40 years, and mammography and ultrasound for women aged 40 years and older. Management of breast pain is often supportive, as most breast pain resolves spontaneously. If pain persists, imaging and management should follow a step-wise approach. If conservative measures fail, second-line therapy is topical nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. If breast pain is severe and resistant to conservative methods, additional third-line therapies can be added by breast care specialists with specific knowledge of the potential deleterious side effects of these medications. While the causes of mastalgia are overwhelmingly benign, breast pain can significantly impact quality of life, and the breast radiologist should be familiar with causes, management, and treatment recommendations from a multidisciplinary approach.

Current Management and Treatment Options for Breast Pain

Breast pain is a commonly experienced symptom in women of all ages and can significantly impact quality of life. Fear of cancer prompts many patients to report their pain, although risk for malignancy is low in the absence of a palpable mass or other abnormal finding on breast examination. All patients with breast pain should have a thorough history and physical examination to determine if diagnostic imaging is indicated. Management of breast pain without anatomic or radiographic abnormalities depends on pain type and severity. Often, no intervention is required. However, for women with pain that adversely impacts daily living, short-term therapies may be considered. For mild to moderate pain, a trial of conservative, nonpharmacologic strategies should be tried first. For those with severe symptoms impacting quality of life, a trial of pharmacologic therapy can be considered after appropriate counseling for medication-related adverse effects. Herein, we have provided a concise summary of a generalized approach to classification, assessment, and management of breast pain.

The Association of Breast Pain with Malignancy

OBJECTIVE

Breast pain is a common reason for imaging evaluation; however, the limited literature available suggests a low incidence of malignancy with isolated pain. The goal of this study is to calculate the risk of cancer in patients with breast pain, and to compare to the screening mammography cancer detection rates.

METHODS

This retrospective, institutional review board-approved study included all patients for whom a breast pain history sheet was filled out between November 3, 2013, and July 28, 2016. Those without at least two years of follow-up were excluded. From the medical record, any malignancy found at the site of pain at presentation or within two years was noted. Screening cancer detection rate was calculated from the mammography tracking software, and the Chi-square test was used to evaluate the significance of the difference between the cancer detection rates in patients with pain versus that detected by screening.

RESULTS

Of 421 patients who met the inclusion criteria, 4 (1.0%) had cancer at the site of pain, with a rate of malignancy of 9.5/1000 (95% CI: 3.5/1000 to 25.2/1000). The screening cancer detection rate was 7.3/1000 (P = 0.403), which was not significantly different. All cancers occurred in patients with coexisting palpable abnormalities; none was found when pain was the only symptom.

CONCLUSION

The rate of malignancy in patients with breast pain did not differ significantly from that detected by screening mammography. In patients with isolated breast pain without a palpable abnormality, there were no cases of malignancy. Imaging patients for the sole purpose of evaluating breast pain may not be necessary.

Breast pain and cancer: should we continue to work-up isolated breast pain?

PURPOSE

To assess the cancer detection rate (CDR) in patients presenting with isolated breast pain.

METHODS

A retrospective review was performed of consecutive patients presenting to a large tertiary care academic center or an affiliated hospital with isolated breast pain from October 1, 2013 to September 30, 2015. Medical records were reviewed for patient demographics, pain characteristics, imaging findings, and outcome.

RESULTS

The study cohort was comprised of 971 exams in 953 patients, with a median age of 50 years. A total of 62.5% (607/971) of the cases were assessed by mammography and ultrasound, 24.4% (237/971) by ultrasound only, and 13.1% (127/971) by mammography only. Including the abnormalities detected in the asymptomatic breast, 88.7% (861/971) of the cases were negative or had benign findings (BI-RADS 1 and 2), 6.8% (66/971) were probably benign (BI-RADS 3), 3.9% (38/971) were suspicious (BI-RADS 4), and 0.6% (6/971) were highly suggestive of malignancy (BI-RADS 5). CDR on initial work-up was 0.8% (8/953), of which 0.6% (4/690) was in average-risk patients while 1.5% (4/263) was in higher-than-average risk patients.

CONCLUSIONS

CDR in patients presenting with isolated breast pain overall was low, comparable to the expected incidence of breast cancer in asymptomatic women. Work-up for isolated breast pain may therefore be unnecessary and lead to overutilization of healthcare resources. Routine screening mammography should be encouraged and higher-than-average risk patients may benefit from additional tests.

ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Breast Pain

Breast pain is a common complaint. However, in the absence any accompanying suspicious clinical finding (eg, lump or nipple discharge), the association with malignancy is very low (0%-3.0%). When malignancy-related, breast pain tends to be focal (less than one quadrant) and persistent. Pain that is clinically insignificant (nonfocal [greater than one quadrant], diffuse, or cyclical) requires no imaging beyond what is recommended for screening. In cases of pain that is clinically significant (focal and noncyclical), imaging with mammography, digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT), and ultrasound are appropriate, depending on the patient's age. The American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed annually by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and revision include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer reviewed journals and the application of well-established methodologies (RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation or GRADE) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures for specific clinical scenarios. In those instances where evidence is lacking or equivocal, expert opinion may supplement the available evidence to recommend imaging or treatment.

Focal breast pain: imaging evaluation and outcomes

OBJECTIVES

To determine the number and characteristics of cancers detected and the optimal imaging evaluation in women presenting with focal breast pain (FBP).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We performed a retrospective review of 4720 women who underwent imaging for FBP from 2001 to 2013. Women 18 and over with one or two foci of breast pain and no concurrent breast symptoms were included. 944 patients met criteria. We recorded the imaging work-up, presence and type of finding at the site of pain, BI-RADS® assessment, and pathological outcomes. Subsequent imaging and clinical follow up was recorded.

RESULTS

Imaging evaluation consisted of sonogram alone in 286 women, mammogram alone in 231 women, and both in 427 women. 113 women had an imaging finding at the site of pain; 103 were designated benign or probably benign. 12 biopsies of corresponding findings were performed: 9 benign, 1 invasive lobular carcinoma, 1 invasive ductal carcinoma, 1 ductal carcinoma in situ. All three malignancies were seen mammographically; 2 had an ultrasound correlate. At initial evaluation, 4 incidental breast cancers were diagnosed remote from the site of FBP. All were seen on mammogram and 2 of 4 had an ultrasound correlate. On follow up evaluation, 9 cancers were diagnosed at the site of pain and 13 incidental cancers were diagnosed.

CONCLUSION

FBP is rarely associated with malignancy. Targeted ultrasound may be deferred in women 40 and older with FBP, no other clinical findings, and a negative mammogram.

Evaluation of 1294 Female Patients with Breast Pain: A Retrospective Study

INTRODUCTION

Mastalgia, or breast pain, is one of the most important complaints referred to outpatient clinics. The objective of this study was to evaluate the factors causing mastalgia. All patients who presented to our clinic with complaints of mastalgia were assessed along with their type of mastalgia symptoms, menopausal status, and radiology results.

METHODS

A total of 3157 patients with mastalgia complaints visited our clinic between January 2015 and February 2018. Only 1294 of them were retrospectively screened. Age, sex, menopausal (premenopausal, postmenopausal) status, mastalgia type (cyclic, non-cyclic), and imaging findings of the patients were examined.

RESULTS

The mean age was 43.8 ± 11.8 (13-86) years, with 453 (35%) patients younger than 40 years and 841 (65%) older than 40. Cyclic mastalgia was found in 207 (16%) patients, and non-cyclic mastalgia was seen in 1087 (84%) patients. A total of 786 (60.7%) patients were premenopausal, and 508 (39.3%) were postmenopausal. Mammography was used in 545 (42.1%) patients; 1190 (92.0%) women had breast ultrasonography.

CONCLUSION

Although breast pain is a common symptom in women who are referred to breast outpatient clinics, we concluded that patients who complain of mastalgia should not be afraid of cancer. Despite this and for reassurance, clinical imaging may be necessary to alleviate these patients' suspicions.

Problem-Solving MR Imaging for Equivocal Imaging Findings and Indeterminate Clinical Symptoms of the Breast

Breast MR imaging is commonly used for high-risk screening and for assessing the extent of disease in patients with newly diagnosed breast cancer, but its utility for assessing suspicious symptoms and equivocal imaging findings is less widely accepted. The authors review current literature and guidelines regarding the use of breast MR imaging for these indications. Overall, problem-solving breast MR imaging is best reserved for pathologic nipple discharge and sonographically occult architectural distortion with limited biopsy options. Further study is necessary to define the role of problem-solving MR imaging for calcifications, mammographic asymmetries, and surgical scarring.

To image or not in noncyclic breast pain? A systematic review

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Investigation of noncyclic mastalgia in women without signs or risk factors for cancer is controversial. An initial imaging strategy can diagnose breast cancer early, potentially leading to better treatment and survival. However, cancer diagnosis is very uncommon in these cases, and this approach can be harmful, as false positives or suspicion results will lead to unneeded interventions and follow-up. The purpose of this review is to analyse the trade-offs between desirable and undesirable consequences of initial imaging tests against clinical follow-up.

RECENT FINDINGS

We found seven relevant studies, all observational, with some methodological limitations and very low-quality evidence. They showed low breast cancer prevalence (around 1-2%, increasing with age), high sensitivity to rule out disease but moderate specificity to rule it in using mammography and echography, and lacked evidence on follow-up and final outcomes.

SUMMARY

There is a low prevalence of breast cancer in patients with painful breast with negative physical examination, and very little research to inform about the effect of performing or avoiding initial imaging test on outcomes of interest. With such limited evidence, only a weak recommendation to reinforce shared decision making about what should be done in the primary care setting can be made, with the backup of a specialized breast unit.

Mastalgia: Imaging Work-up Appropriateness

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES

Radiologists frequently image women with the sole complaint of mastalgia (breast pain). We hypothesized that whereas the vast majority of women ultimately have no imaging explanation for their breast pain, a small percentage of patients may have a correlative imaging finding and confirm the current American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria recommendations.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA)-compliant, institutional review board-approved retrospective review, we evaluated 236 women between the ages of 18 and 83 years who presented to our Breast Care Center in 2013 with the sole complaint of breast pain or tenderness. Patients' clinical presentation, diagnostic imaging work-up, and clinical and radiographic follow-up were documented. Outcomes of the diagnostic work-up were compared with the American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria recommendations.

RESULTS

Of the 236 patients, 10 women had cyclical breast pain, 116 had noncyclical, nonfocal breast pain, and 110 had noncyclical, focal breast pain. No imaging correlates were discovered to explain the etiology of cyclical pain, supporting the American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria rating values. A definitive imaging correlate for breast pain was identified in seven women (3%) with noncyclical, focal pain, one of which was a cancer diagnosis (0.4%), which correlates with the American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria ratings. No imaging correlates were found in women with noncyclical, nonfocal pain, supporting the American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria ratings.

CONCLUSION

There was no radiological imaging finding to explain the etiology of mastalgia in most women. Diagnostic imaging may be an appropriate diagnostic evaluation in patients with noncyclical, focal breast pain, supporting the American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria recommendations.

Focal Breast Pain: Does Breast Density Affect the Need for Ultrasound?

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to determine the utility of directed ultrasound and digital mammogram for evaluating focal breast pain in women with different mammographic breast densities.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This institutional review board-approved and Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act-compliant retrospective study included 413 cases of focal breast pain in 369 women (mean age 53 years). All cases were evaluated with both mammogram and ultrasound and had at least 2 years of imaging follow-up. Exclusion criteria were non-focal, axillary, or radiating pain; palpable or skin changes; pregnancy or lactation; and history of trauma or infection. Breast density, imaging findings, and biopsy results were recorded. Specificity, positive predictive values, and negative predictive values were calculated.

RESULTS

Eighteen percent (76 of 413) of cases demonstrated an imaging correlate. Of these, 74% (56 of 76) occurred in dense breasts and 26% (20 of 76) in nondense breasts. Seventy percent (14 of 20) of lesions in nondense breasts were seen with mammography and ultrasound, whereas 30% (6 of 20) were detected only with ultrasound. Of lesions detected in dense breasts, 29% (16 of 56) were seen with mammography and ultrasound, whereas 71% (40 of 56) were detected only with ultrasound. Thirty-one percent (24 of 76) of cases were biopsied, 42% (10 of 24) of which were detected by ultrasound only. No cancer was detected in initial workup. At 2-year follow-up, three women, all with dense breasts, developed cancer in the same quadrant as the initial pain.

CONCLUSIONS

Directed ultrasound, when performed in conjunction with digital mammography for the evaluation of focal breast pain in women with nondense breasts, is of low utility and may contribute to unnecessary intervention as a result of incidental findings.

Factors Effecting Mastalgia

BACKGROUND

Breast pain is one of the leading complaints that ends up with referral to breast surgery clinics. The purpose of the present study was to investigate the factors that cause mastalgia, and its relation with benign or malignant breast disease.

METHODS

The study was performed in 700 patients. Data obtained from surveys, and imaging findings were prospectively recorded, and analyzed.

RESULTS

The mean age was 45.20 ± 10.78 years. The mastalgia group included 500 cases; the asymptomatic group comprised 200 individuals. Stressful lifestyle, caffeine consumption, and smoking were associated with mastalgia (p < 0.05). Rates of women who had breast fed 3 times or more were higher in the mastalgia group (p < 0.05). Increased breast density, and breast imaging-reporting and data system (BI-RADS) 2 mammography findings were related with mastalgia (p < 0.05). Cysts and fibroadenomas were more common in the mastalgia group (p < 0.05). The incidence of a past history of malignant breast disease was significantly higher in the mastalgia group (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Stress, caffeine, smoking, lactation frequency, and benign disorders were factors detected to be related with mastalgia. Although a significant relation between mastalgia and malignant breast disease was detected in our study, more controlled studies are still required to investigate this issue further.

[Breast pain: Recommendations]

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the diagnostic value of clinical examination and additional tests in the exploration of breast pain, to evaluate the strategy of their care and to provide recommendations.

METHODS

A literature search in English and French carried out by consulting the databases PubMed, Cochrane Library and international recommendations.

RESULTS

Clinical examination and interrogation, with the use of visual analog scale used to differentiate non-cyclical breast pain from mastodynia (LE2). A calendar can be used to characterize the cyclical breast pain (LE3). Using a questionnaire can help to characterize the pain (LE3). In the absence of palpable abnormality, it is not recommended to modify systematic or individual screening modalities (LE2). MRI is not recommended in case of normal mammography and sonography. Explorations biopsy is guided by imaging. The therapeutic management includes reassurance after a normal clinical evaluation and/or normal radiological findings (LE2), and precise fitting of a brassière. In case of failure of this first approach, NSAIDs gel can be proposed (LE1-2).

Breast ultrasonography: state of the art

Ultrasonography (US) is an indispensable tool in breast imaging and is complementary to both mammography and magnetic resonance (MR) imaging of the breast. Advances in US technology allow confident characterization of not only benign cysts but also benign and malignant solid masses. Knowledge and understanding of current and emerging US technology, along with the application of meticulous scanning technique, is imperative for image optimization and diagnosis. The ability to synthesize breast US findings with multiple imaging modalities and clinical information is also necessary to ensure the best patient care. US is routinely used to guide breast biopsies and is also emerging as a supplemental screening tool in women with dense breasts and a negative mammogram. This review provides a summary of current state-of-the-art US technology, including elastography, and applications of US in clinical practice as an adjuvant technique to mammography, MR imaging, and the clinical breast examination. The use of breast US for screening, preoperative staging for breast cancer, and breast intervention will also be discussed.

MR imaging in the evaluation of equivocal clinical and imaging findings of the breast

Because of its high negative predictive value in excluding breast cancer, magnetic resonance (MR) imaging plays a role in the evaluation of selected clinical and imaging findings of the breast, especially when biopsy is not technically feasible. Case selection is very important in ensuring the efficacy of this use of MR imaging because of potential false-positive and (albeit less likely) false-negative results. This article examines the clinical scenarios and imaging findings in which MR imaging is contributory to patient management after conventional workup with equivocal results.

Negative Predictive Value of Sonography and Mammography in Patients with Focal Breast Pain

The purpose of this study was to determine the negative predictive value of mammography and sonography in a population of patients with focal breast pain referred for imaging evaluation. Eighty-six consecutive patients with focal breast pain in the absence of a breast mass were retrospectively identified from an imaging database. The electronic inpatient and outpatient records for the 86 patients were reviewed. For patients who were diagnosed with breast cancer, pathology reports were reviewed to determine whether the painful area corresponded to the patient's cancer. In addition, patient records were linked to the institution's cancer registry. Of the 86 patients, 26 patients were lost to follow-up and did not appear in the institution's cancer registry. Four patients were diagnosed with breast carcinoma, two of whom had incidental cancers that were detected mammographically by microcalcifications and were separate from and unrelated to the area of pain. Seven patients underwent biopsy at the site of breast pain with benign diagnosis. Imaging and clinical follow-up for the 51 patients with benign or negative imaging at the site of pain showed no abnormality with a mean follow-up of 26.5 months. The negative predictive value of mammography and sonography in patients with breast pain was 100%. The negative predictive value of mammography and sonography for focal breast pain is high. Negative mammography and sonography can be reassuring to the treating clinician if follow-up is planned when physical examination is not suspicious. However, if physical examination is suspicious, biopsy should not be delayed.

Evaluation and management of breast pain

Pain is one of the most common breast symptoms experienced by women. It can be severe enough to interfere with usual daily activities, but the etiology and optimal treatment remain undefined. Breast pain is typically approached according to its classification as cyclic mastalgia, noncyclic mastalgia, and extramammary (nonbreast) pain. Cyclic mastalgia is breast pain that has a clear relationship to the menstrual cycle. Noncyclic mastalgia may be constant or intermittent but is not associated with the menstrual cycle and often occurs after menopause. Extramammary pain arises from the chest wall or other sources and is interpreted as having a cause within the breast. The risk of cancer in a woman presenting with breast pain as her only symptom is extremely low. After appropriate clinical evaluation, most patients with breast pain respond favorably to a combination of reassurance and nonpharmacological measures. The medications danazol, tamoxifen, and bromocriptine are effective; however, the potentially serious adverse effects of these medications limit their use to selected patients with severe, sustained breast pain. The status of other therapeutic strategies and directions for future research are discussed.