A prospective comparison of stereotaxic fine‐needle aspiration versus stereotaxic core needle biopsy for the diagnosis of mammographic abnormalities

Abstract

SFNA identified benign lesions more reliably for follow-up, particularly microcalcifications. Based on these results, the authors suggest 1) added SCBX if on-site SFNA assessment is nondiagnostic, atypical, or positive (and needs preoperative confirmation of invasion); 2) either SCBX or SFNA for masses, architectural distortions, and ill-defined densities; 3) SFNA for microcalcifications, with SCBX added for moderately and highly suspicious lesions; and 4) surgical excision for all highly suspicious microcalcifications.

Management of Nonpalpable Breast Lesions in a Modern Functional Breast Unit

“…There are few comparative studies between these two techniques and the results are often ambiguous [27][28][29][30][31][32][33], because the population is not homogenous and the studies are mainly retrospective.…”

A decade of breast cancer screening in The Netherlands: trends in the preoperative diagnosis of breast cancer

“…At the start of our study, percutaneous diagnosis of malignancy was solely obtained by means of FNAC. Some authors indicate that FNAC offers a reliable and simple alternative to open biopsy of nonpalpable breast lesions [23][24][25]. On the other hand, a large multicenter trial demonstrated that FNAC of nonpalpable breast abnormalities had limited value given the high insufficient sample rate and greater diagnostic accuracy of other interventions such as core-needle biopsy and needle-localized open surgical biopsy [26,27].…”

Cell blocks of breast FNAs frequently allow diagnosis of invasion or histological classification of proliferative changes

“…17,18 Atypia is a more frequent diagnosis in FNAs than matched CNBs from the same lesion. 4,5 About 1/3 to 1/2 of ''atypical'' FNA's are found to be cancer, 3,4,6 confirming the importance of the NCI recommendation that biopsy is generally warranted for atypical FNAs. 8 The inability to specifically recognize lobular neoplasia 12,19 and the difficulty in diagnosing papillary neoplasms 20 are other well-recognized problems for FNA.…”

“…Many studies have shown that fine needle aspiration (FNA) is comparable or even superior to core needle biopsy (CNB) in clinical performance when expert cytopathology interpretative skills are available. [1][2][3][4][5][6] There are many advantages of FNA compared with CNB, including decreased morbidity, such as hematoma, risk of infection, pain, scarring, and risk of seeding the biopsy track. 7 The most serious risk of FNA is pneumothorax, occurring in about 1:7,000 FNA, 8 which appears lower than for CNB (1 in 1,600 in Ref.…”