Comparison of Radiologic and Pathological Diagnosis in Patients Presenting with   Bloody Nipple Discharge

Sajid Zaman; Maham  Shah; Rifaat Qamar  Naqvi; Muhammad Sheraz  Abbasi; Khurram Khan  Khalil; Asad  Noor

doi:10.51253/pafmj.v76iSUPPL-2.12107

Authors

Sajid Zaman Department of General Surgery, Combined Military Hospital, Rawalpindi/National University of Medical Sciences (NUMS) Pakistan
Maham Shah Department of General Surgery, Combined Military Hospital, Rawalpindi/National University of Medical Sciences (NUMS) Pakistan
Rifaat Qamar Naqvi Department of General Surgery, Combined Military Hospital, Rawalpindi/National University of Medical Sciences (NUMS) Pakistan
Muhammad Sheraz Abbasi Department of General Surgery, Combined Military Hospital, Rawalpindi/National University of Medical Sciences (NUMS) Pakistan
Khurram Khan Khalil Department of General Surgery, Combined Military Hospital, Rawalpindi/National University of Medical Sciences (NUMS) Pakistan
Asad Noor Department of General Surgery, Combined Military Hospital, Rawalpindi/National University of Medical Sciences (NUMS) Pakistan

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.51253/pafmj.v76iSUPPL-2.12107

Keywords:

Bloody Nipple Discharge, Breast cancer, False positive, Histopathology, Ultrasonography

Abstract

Objective: To assess efficacy of ultrasound in detecting breast carcinoma in patients with abnormal nipple discharge, given the limitations of mammography in this context.

Study Design: Prospective observational study.

Place and Duration of Study: Combined Military Hospital, Rawalpindi Pakistan, from Jul 2023 to Mar 2024.

Methodology: The study included 139 female patients with abnormal nipple discharge who underwent traditional breast ultrasound followed by histopathological confirmation through biopsy.

Results: The demographic data revealed a majority in the 46-66 age group (62.59%) and a longer disease duration exceeding 6 months (73.39%). Ultrasonography demonstrated significant diagnostic accuracy, identifying 89 out of 93 positive cases as true positives and correctly identifying 36 out of 46 negative cases as true negatives, with a sensitivity of 95.7%. However, it also showed 10 false positives, leading to an accuracy of 78.3%.

Conclusions: The study highlights the efficacy of ultrasound in differentiating between benign and malignant breast lesions linked to abnormal nipple discharge, demonstrating significant diagnostic accuracy. Despite concerns about false positives, ultrasound remains a valuable non-invasive diagnostic tool, contributing to improved clinical decision-making and patient comfort.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

1. Sung H, Ferlay J, Siegel RL, Laversanne M, Soerjomataram I, Jemal A, et al. Global cancer statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin 2021; 71(3): 209-249.

https://doi.org/10.3322/caac.21660

2. Carpenter A, Adamson A, Royle GT. A prospective study of nipple discharge. Br J Clin Pract Suppl 1989; (68): 54-57.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/2488566/

3. Chen L, Zhou WB, Zhao Y. Bloody nipple discharge is a predictor of breast cancer risk: a meta-analysis. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2012; 132: 9-14.

https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-011-1846-1

4. Leis HP Jr. Management of nipple discharge. World J Surg 1989; 13: 736-742. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01658899

5. Karimova EJ, Slanetz PJ. Charged with discharge: a case-based review of nipple discharge using the american college of radiology’s appropriateness guidelines. J Breast Imag 2020; 2(3): 275-284. https://doi.org/10.1093/jbi/wbaa037

6. Lippa N, Hurtevent-Labrot G, Ferron S. Les écoulements mamelonnaires. J Radiol Diagn Interv 2015; 96: 434-450.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jradio.2015.01.002

7. Freitas-Junior R, Rodrigues DCN, Corrêa RS. Contribution of the Unified Health Care System to mammography screening in Brazil, 2013. Radiol Bras 2016; 49: 305-310.

https://doi.org/10.1590/0100-3984.2014.0169

8. Paixão L, Oliveira BB, Viloria C. Monte Carlo derivation of filtered tungsten anode X-ray spectra for dose computation in digital mammography. Radiol Bras 2015; 48(1): 363-367.

https://doi.org/10.1590/0100-3984.2013.1845

9. Ashfaq A, Senior D, Pockaj BA. Validation study of a modern treatment algorithm for nipple discharge. Am J Surg 2014; 208(2): 222-227.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjsurg.2013.11.015

10. Muñoz Carrasco R, Álvarez Benito M, Rivin del Campo E. Value of mammography and breast ultrasound in male patients with nipple discharge. Eur J Radiol 2013; 82: 478-484.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2012.11.020

11. Seltzer MH. Breast complaints, biopsies, and cancer correlated with age in 10,000 consecutive new surgical referrals. Breast J 2004; 10(1): 111-7.

https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1075-122X.2004.21320.x

12. Gupta D, Mendelson EB, Karst I. Nipple discharge: current clinical and imaging evaluation. Am J Roentgenol 2021; 216(2): 330-339. https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.20.23556

13. Blum KS, Rubbert C, Antoch G, Mohrmann S, Obenauer S. Diagnostic accuracy of abnormal galactographic and sonographic findings in the diagnosis of intraductal pathology in patients with abnormal nipple discharge. Clin Imag 2015; 39: 587-591. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clinimag.2015.03.008

14. Choi Y, Kim SM, Jang M. The value of adding ductography to ultrasonography for the evaluation of pathologic nipple discharge in women with negative mammography. Korean J Radiol 2022; 23(9): 866.

https://doi.org/10.3348/kjr.2022.0207

15. Baydoun S, Gonzalez P, Whitman GJ, Dryden M, Xi Y, Dogan B. Is ductography still warranted in the 21st century? Breast J 2019; 25: 654-662. https://doi.org/10.1111/tbj.13333

16. Lorenzon M, Zuiani C, Linda A. Magnetic resonance imaging in patients with nipple discharge: should we recommend it? Eur Radiol 2011; 21: 899-907.

https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-010-1978-2

17. Ashfaq A, Senior D, Pockaj BA, Wasif N, Pizzitola VJ, Giurescu ME. Validation study of a modern treatment algorithm for nipple discharge. Am J Surg. 2014; 208: 222-227.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjsurg.2013.11.015

18. Park CJ, Kim EK, Moon HJ, Yoon JH, Kim MJ. Reliability of breast ultrasound BI-RADS final assessment in mammographically negative patients with nipple discharge and radiologic predictors of malignancy. J Breast Cancer 2016; 19(1): 308-315.

https://doi.org/10.4048/jbc.2016.19.3.308

19. Yoon H, Yoon JH, Kim EK, Moon HJ, Park BW, Kim MJ et al. Adding ultrasound to the evaluation of patients with pathologic nipple discharge to diagnose additional breast cancers: Preliminary data. Ultrasound Med Biol 2015; 41: 2099-107.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ultrasmedbio.2015.04.020

20. Gray RJ, Pockaj BA, Karstaedt PJ. Navigating murky waters: a modern treatment algorithm for nipple discharge. Am J Surg 2007; 194: 850-854.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjsurg.2007.08.036

21. Srinivasan A, Nia E, Gupta M, Sun J, Leung JW. Retrospective statistical analysis on the diagnostic value of ductography based on lesion pathology in patients presenting with nipple discharge. Breast J 2019; 25(4): 585-589.

https://doi.org/10.1111/tbj.13303