Clinical Utility and Limitations of Ultrasound-Guided Axillary Lymph Node Fine-Needle Aspiration Cytology in Breast Cancer Management.

IF 1 4区 医学 Q4 MEDICAL LABORATORY TECHNOLOGY
Aoi Morishita, Tomoyuki Shimada
{"title":"Clinical Utility and Limitations of Ultrasound-Guided Axillary Lymph Node Fine-Needle Aspiration Cytology in Breast Cancer Management.","authors":"Aoi Morishita, Tomoyuki Shimada","doi":"10.1002/dc.70032","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Accurate axillary staging is critical for selecting appropriate treatment strategies in breast cancer. Ultrasound (US) and ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration cytology (US + FNAC) are widely used to evaluate axillary lymph nodes. The study assessed the diagnostic accuracy of US and US + FNAC and examined whether axillary dissection (AD) is necessary in patients with positive US + FNAC findings.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We analyzed 646 axillae from 642 breast cancer patients who underwent surgery at Hiraka General Hospital between 2013 and 2024. All patients underwent axillary US, and US + FNAC was performed on morphologically suspicious nodes. Sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV of US and US + FNAC were determined using postoperative pathology as the reference standard. The number of nodal metastases was compared between patients undergoing primary surgery and those receiving primary systemic therapy (PST).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In the primary surgery group (n = 516), US sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV were 30.9% (38/123), 94.1% (370/393), 62.3% (38/61), and 81.3% (370/455), respectively. Corresponding values for US + FNAC were 80.6% (29/36), 100% (22/22), 100% (29/29), and 75.9% (22/29). US + FNAC showed significantly higher sensitivity and PPV than US alone. Among US + FNAC-positive cases, 55.2% (16/29) had ≥ 3 metastatic nodes, compared with 6.9% (2/29) of negative cases. In the PST group (n = 130), US sensitivity was ≤ 88.1% (37/42), and US + FNAC sensitivity was ≤ 92.6% (25/27). Of the 46 US + FNAC-positive patients, 45.7% (21/46) became node-negative after PST, whereas 26.1% (12/46) had ≥ 3 positive nodes.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>US + FNAC improves diagnostic accuracy for axillary staging; however, standard AD may constitute overtreatment in some FNAC-positive patients. Selective de-escalation of axillary surgery should therefore be considered.</p>","PeriodicalId":11349,"journal":{"name":"Diagnostic Cytopathology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Diagnostic Cytopathology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/dc.70032","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"MEDICAL LABORATORY TECHNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Accurate axillary staging is critical for selecting appropriate treatment strategies in breast cancer. Ultrasound (US) and ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration cytology (US + FNAC) are widely used to evaluate axillary lymph nodes. The study assessed the diagnostic accuracy of US and US + FNAC and examined whether axillary dissection (AD) is necessary in patients with positive US + FNAC findings.

Methods: We analyzed 646 axillae from 642 breast cancer patients who underwent surgery at Hiraka General Hospital between 2013 and 2024. All patients underwent axillary US, and US + FNAC was performed on morphologically suspicious nodes. Sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV of US and US + FNAC were determined using postoperative pathology as the reference standard. The number of nodal metastases was compared between patients undergoing primary surgery and those receiving primary systemic therapy (PST).

Results: In the primary surgery group (n = 516), US sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV were 30.9% (38/123), 94.1% (370/393), 62.3% (38/61), and 81.3% (370/455), respectively. Corresponding values for US + FNAC were 80.6% (29/36), 100% (22/22), 100% (29/29), and 75.9% (22/29). US + FNAC showed significantly higher sensitivity and PPV than US alone. Among US + FNAC-positive cases, 55.2% (16/29) had ≥ 3 metastatic nodes, compared with 6.9% (2/29) of negative cases. In the PST group (n = 130), US sensitivity was ≤ 88.1% (37/42), and US + FNAC sensitivity was ≤ 92.6% (25/27). Of the 46 US + FNAC-positive patients, 45.7% (21/46) became node-negative after PST, whereas 26.1% (12/46) had ≥ 3 positive nodes.

Conclusion: US + FNAC improves diagnostic accuracy for axillary staging; however, standard AD may constitute overtreatment in some FNAC-positive patients. Selective de-escalation of axillary surgery should therefore be considered.

超声引导下腋窝淋巴结细针穿刺细胞学在乳腺癌治疗中的临床应用及局限性。
背景:准确的腋窝分期对于选择合适的乳腺癌治疗策略至关重要。超声(US)和超声引导细针穿刺细胞学(US + FNAC)被广泛用于腋窝淋巴结的评估。该研究评估了US和US + FNAC的诊断准确性,并检查了US + FNAC阳性患者是否需要腋窝清扫(AD)。方法:我们分析了2013年至2024年期间在Hiraka综合医院接受手术的642名乳腺癌患者的646个腋窝。所有患者均行腋窝超声检查,形态学可疑淋巴结行超声+ FNAC检查。以术后病理为参考标准,测定US和US + FNAC的敏感性、特异性、PPV、NPV。比较了接受原发性手术和接受原发性全身治疗(PST)的患者之间淋巴结转移的数量。结果:原发性手术组(n = 516)的US敏感性为30.9%(38/123),特异性为94.1% (370/393),PPV为62.3% (38/61),NPV为81.3%(370/455)。US + FNAC对应值分别为80.6%(29/36)、100%(22/22)、100%(29/29)和75.9%(22/29)。US + FNAC的敏感性和PPV均明显高于US单用。在US + fnac阳性病例中,55.2%(16/29)的转移淋巴结≥3个,而阴性病例的转移淋巴结为6.9%(2/29)。PST组(n = 130) US敏感性≤88.1% (37/42),US + FNAC敏感性≤92.6%(25/27)。46例US + fnac阳性患者中,45.7%(21/46)在PST后变为淋巴结阴性,而26.1%(12/46)有≥3个阳性淋巴结。结论:US + FNAC提高了腋窝分期的诊断准确性;然而,在一些fnac阳性患者中,标准AD可能构成过度治疗。因此,应考虑选择性降低腋窝手术的风险。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Diagnostic Cytopathology
Diagnostic Cytopathology 医学-病理学
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
7.70%
发文量
163
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: Diagnostic Cytopathology is intended to provide a forum for the exchange of information in the field of cytopathology, with special emphasis on the practical, clinical aspects of the discipline. The editors invite original scientific articles, as well as special review articles, feature articles, and letters to the editor, from laboratory professionals engaged in the practice of cytopathology. Manuscripts are accepted for publication on the basis of scientific merit, practical significance, and suitability for publication in a journal dedicated to this discipline. Original articles can be considered only with the understanding that they have never been published before and that they have not been submitted for simultaneous review to another publication.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信