There were 13165 females and 78 males in the 13243 cases. Their ages ranged from 12 to 75 years old (median, 50 years). Clinical diagnosis could not be made in 1269 cases; benign tumor was diagnosed before operation in 3282 cases, and malignant tumor in 8692 cases.
Informed consent was obtained from the patients before this investigation, which was approved by the ethics committee of the institute.
Frozen section diagnosis of every case was registered chronologically and put into the clinical document of the patient immediately. The diagnostic result was unchanged once input into the document. A data bank was set up in January 2002 (named Breast Lesion Frozen Diagnosis, BLFD), which had such functions as searching, ordering, exporting and statistical analysis, and preparation of 17 items, for example, document number, age, frozen section diagnosis. The records of the 13243 cases were then stored in the data bank with the data consistent with these mentioned in the document. For each lesion, the data- bank was queried separately for analysis in this study.
As acknowledged, routine paraffin section diagnosis is the “gold standard” and the results of frozen section cannot be regarded as the final diagnosis of the patient. The results of frozen section were compared with those of routine paraffin section diagnosis postoperatively and the definite diagnosis rate for benign or malignant nature of frozen section was assessed in this study.15 The causes of false positive and negative diagnoses as well as delayed diagnoses were analyzed.
Diagnostic errors or diagnostic delay
False positive conditions might attribute to false invasion, papillomatosis, adenoma of the nipple duct, florid adenosis, sclerosis adenosising and granulose cell tumor. While, false negative diagnosis might be due to morphological changes after chemotherapy, well differentiated papillary carcinoma, invasive lobular carcinoma and tubular carcinoma. Inconsistent conditions between microscopic and gross examinations were radial scar, florid adenosis and so on and those between microscopic and clinical findings were granulomatous mastitis mammary, ductal ectasia and fat necrosis. Diagnostic delay was closely relates to abundant fat or sclerotic tissue in samples, borderline lesions and morphologic changes after chemotherapy.
Morphologic features and differentiations
In our series an adenoma of the nipple (Fig. A) was recognized as to invasive ductal carcinoma (Fig. B). The other benign diseases which were hard differentiated from the malignancy in our work included granulose cell tumor (Fig. C) with the invasive carcinoma (Fig. D), the eosinophilic secretions in the moderate florid papillomatosis with the central necrosis of ecomedo intraductal carcinoma, and florid adenosis, sclerosing adenosis, intraductal papilloma with pseudo invasion (Fig. E) with the invasive ductal carcinoma (Fig. F).
Some malignancies leading to frequent false negative diagnoses included the pathologic changes of post- therapy, chronic inflammation, well-differentiated papillary carcinoma and papilloma, diffused pattern of invasive lobular carcinoma and chronic inflammation, tubular carcinoma and adenosis.
Invasive micropapillary carcinoma and non-specific invasive ductal carcinoma, breast lymphoma and invasive lobular carcinoma were difficult to classify in some cases.
Four cases of radical scar in our series showed inconsistency between gross examination (Fig. G) and frozen section diagnosis (Fig. H).
|view in a new window |
Fig. The morphologic features and the differentiations of some lesions in frozen section. A: The lactiferous ductal hyperplasia in adenoma of the nipple formed various size of glandular-nest with diffuse and spore-like growth along ductal branches to surrounding stroma. The complex glandular-duct-like and irregular structure mimic false invasive image in frozen section (HE, original magnification×40); B: The nonspecial invasive ductal carcinoma in frozen section (HE, original magnification×40); C: The cells of granulose cell tumor showed loose nest like or fascicular pattern and collagenous stroma distributing and surrounding these cells, the eosinophilic cytoplasmic granules of tumor cells are not conspicuous in the frozen section (HE, original magnification×40); D: The non-specific nvasive carcinoma in the frozen section (HE, original magnification×100); E: A confluent growth of adenosis glands and acinous in the florid adenosis don't form distinct lobular structure. The florid epithelial and myoepithelial hyperplasia effaced glandular and mimic invasive carcinoma in frozen section (HE, original magnification×40); F: The nonspecial invasive ductal carcinoma in the frozen section (HE, original magnification×40). G: The gross appearance of radial scar is similar to that of small invasive carcinoma; H: The radial scar in frozen section (HE, original magnification×40). Under a microscope, the radial scar belongs to a benign sclerosing lesion and results from elastotic change. Scale bars=100 µm (A-F, H) or 2.5 mm (G).
After the establishment of criteria for the evaluation of frozen section diagnosis of the breast,16-18 Cserni19 described frozen section in the operation as a “trap” after reviewing 2110 cases of frozen section diagnosis in 13 years. His series contained 22 cases of false negative and 1 of false positive. Cserni explained these errors were due to (1) misinterpretation; (2) poor quality of frozen sections; (3) sampling errors during sectioning; (4) ignorance of macroscopic features; (5) lesions difficult to interpret; (6) ductal carcinoma in situ as the only lesion in the specimen; and (7) sections not deep enough. Some authors12,20 have proposed that frozen section shouldn't be used as the only method because of its limitations, and it may be adopted when other methods failed. In some countries such as China, however, frozen section is still the major rapid diagnostic method at present. Hence, it is necessary to deepen the understanding of various challenges which may be confronted with by pathologists during frozen section examinations.
First, the conditions which may lead to false positive diagnosis should be discussed. The false positive case in our series, adenoma of the nipple21,22 was misdiagnosed as invasive ductal carcinoma. Under a microscope, there were hyperplastic lactiferous ducts of the nipple, forming various papillary and glandular nests with diffuse or spore-like growth along ductal branches to the surrounding stroma. The complex glandular-duct-like, irregular structure and false invasive image in sclerotic stroma led to misdiagnosis. Azzopardi et al23 indicated that when sclerosis and pseudoinfiltrative patterns were prominent, an invasive carcinoma was closely simulated. The background stroma shows loose myxoid features, large collagenous bands or elastosis. The main differentiating method from our experience depends on the lesion only involving the nipple but without Paget disease or myoepithelial cells.
Three cases of granular cell tumor of the breast were not mistakenly diagnosed.24,25 Interestingly the lesion often possessed indistinctive cell borders and collagenous stroma. Tumor cells were arranged in a loose nest-like pattern or in a fascicular pattern, and collagenous stroma surrounded these cells. The tumor cells were large in size, and even its eosinophilic cytoplasmic granules were not conspicuous in a frozen section. Additionally, florid adenosis, sclerosing adenosis or intraductal papilloma with pseudoinvasion sometimes were similar to invasive ductal carcinoma.26-28 The main points of differential diagnosis according to our experience include (1) an all-round observation with a microscope at a low power; (2)the absence of epithelial atypia; (3) the presence of myoepithelial layer; (4) a dense collagen stroma with the polar of the tubular.
Second, the circumstances that frequently lead to false negative diagnosis should be discussed. One of the important circumstances is chemotherapeutic effect.29 Some patients in our series had undergone pre-operative chemotherapy (neoadjuvant chemotherapy) for 1-3 weeks. The histomorphologic regression in paraffin section was reported as the major response.30,31 However, there were difficulties in determining the pathologic changes after therapy in frozen section diagnosis. Especially when cellular deterioration and necrosis prevailed or when the number of malignant cells decreased, and when the tumor tissue was replaced by neocapillaries, histocytes, lymphocytes and fibrosis, the manifestations of the disease might be misdiagnosed as chronic inflammation. The well-differentiated papillary carcinoma, diffused pattern of invasive lobular carcinoma32 and tubular carcinoma33 were frequently misdiagnosed as benign lesions. Of course, the morphology of these lesions was similar to that of some benign lesions. Moreover, the pathologists have knowledge from most of published reports that the benign lesions were sometimes confused with mentioned carcinoma. So they would rather choose a low-diagnosis for these lesions than a high-diagnosis.
Third, it is hard to classify tumors in some cases. In invasive micropapillary carcinoma no clear space in the intervening stroma was observed of the frozen section, in which dehydration was not performed.34 In another case, lymphoma with a nest-like architecture in the frozen section was recongised as an invasive carcinoma.35
Pathologists could be misled by some findings as the first impression in gross examination. The instances were seen in 4 cases with radial scar in our series.36 A sclerosing area without distinctive boundaries in the specimen was seen, and its cutting sections was concave, grey or grey-yellow with coarse radical cords. Under a microscope, the change resulted from elastic fibro-hyperplasia.
It should be emphasized that there are limitations of frozen section diagnosis. Because only a small piece of tissue is selected for a frozen section diagnosis intra-operatively, it can not represent the overall profile of the tumor, especially phyllodes tumor and adenofibroma with abundant cells, atypical hyperplasia and canceration, ductal carcinoma in situ and microinvasive carcinoma.37,38
Sometimes inconsistencies are presented when clinical symptoms and microscopic findings are compared, for example, in granulomatous mastitis.39-41 However, some clinicians overestimated their own experience and radical operations were performed incorrectly for two patients before frozen section diagnosis was made. In other lesions, such as fat necrosis and mammary duct ectasia, clinical symptoms might also be misinterpreted as breast carcinoma. There was a difference in opinions (or disagreements of the views) between the surgeon and pathologist at that moment. Thus communication is extremely important before surgery to reach an agreement. Our data also suggest that the age of the patient is essential to intra-operative diagnosis.
In short, intra-operative frozen section diagnosis of breast lesion is very important. It is still a dominant and effective examination at present, even though there are certain shortcomings.
Acknowledgements: We gratefully acknowledge Prof. P. H. Sinn of Pathologic Institute, Heidelberg University of Germany and Prof. Fan LD of Tianjin People's Hospital for fruitful discussion on the pathology in the study. We sincerely thank Ms. Sherry Hunt of Memorial University of Newfoundland of Canada and Mr. Wang ZH of Tianjin Cancer Institute of China for correcting the English language of the article. We are also grateful to the pathologists (Fan Y and Lang RG) who contributed to our work.
1. Bianchi S, Palli D, Ciatto S, Galli M, Giorgi D, Vezzosi V, et al. Accuracy and reliability of frozen section diagnosis in a series of 672 nonpalpable breast lesions. Am J Clin Pathol 1995; 103:199-205.
2. Florell SR, Layfield LJ, Gerwels JW. A comparison of touch imprint cytology and Mohs frozen-section histology in the evaluation of Mohs micrographic surgical margins. J Am Acad Dermatol 2001; 44:660-664.
3. Wen MC, Chan LP, Kwan PC, Ho WL. Frozen-section diagnosis in surgical pathology: a quality assurance study. Kaohsiung J Med Sci 1997; 13:534-539.
4. Fu XL. Histopathologic biopsy and frozen section examination of the breast tumor. In: Li SL, eds. Oncology of the Breast (Chin), 1st edition. Beijing: Scientific and Technical Documents Publishing House; 2000: 60-63.
5. Hao XS, Chen KX, Liu H. Analysis of female breast cancer description epidemiology in Tianjin China. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev 2002; 3: 143-148.
6. Ng KK, Fung SY, Chow LW. Practice of breast self-examination among high risk Chinese women in Hong Kong. Chin Med J 2000; 113: 1100-1103.
7. Ferreiro JA, Gisvold JJ, Bostwick DG. Accuracy of frozen-section diagnosis of mammographically directed breast biopsies. Results of 1,490 consecutive cases. Am J Surg Pathol 1995; 19: 1267-1271.
8. Balch GC, Mithani SK, Simpson JF, Kelley MC. Accuracy of intraoperative gross examination of surgical margin status in women undergoing partial mastectomy for breast malignancy. Am Surg 2005; 71: 22-27.
9. Guski H, Winzer KJ, Aldinger HU, Frohberg HD, Bick U. Possibilities and limits of diagnostic frozen section in breast carcinoma. Zentralbl Chir 1998; 123(Suppl 5): s19-s22.
10. Esserman L, Weidner N. Is routine frozen section assessment feasible in the practice environment of the 1990s? Cancer J Sci Am 1997; 3: 266-267.
11. Challis D. Broadsheet number 41: frozen section and intra-operative diagnosis. Pathology 1997; 29: 165-174.
12. Avery JK. Frozen section error?—rare but disastrous. J Tenn Med Assoc 1993; 86: 449.
13. Sultana N, Kayani N. Validity of frozen section in the diagnosis of breast lumps: 5 years experience at the Aga Khan University Hospital. J Pak Med Assoc 2005; 55: 533-536.
14. Barnes CA. False-negative frozen section results. Am J Clin Pathol 2000; 113: 900.
15. Histological typing of breast tumors. 2nd ed. Geneva: World health organization, 1981: 15-25.
16. Hufnagl P, Bayer G, Oberbamscheidt P, Wehrstedt K, Guski H, Hauptmann S, et al. Comparison of different telepathology solutions for primary frozen section diagnostic. Anal Cell Pathol 2000; 21: 161-167.
17. Fechner RE. Frozen section examination of breast biopsies. practice parameter. Am J Clin Pathol 1995; 103: 6-7.
18. Caya JG, Robinson TM. Accuracy and reliability of frozen section diagnosis. Am J Clin Pathol 1995; 104: 358-360.
19. Cserni G. Pitfalls in frozen section interpretation: a retrospective study of palpable breast tumors. Tumori 1999; 85: 15-18.
20. Scheiden R, Sand J, Tanous AM, Knolle U, Capesius C, Wagnon MC, et al. Accuracy of frozen section diagnoses of breast lesions after introduction of a national programme in mammographic screening. Histopathology 2001; 39: 74-84.
21. Interlandi A, Busacca G. Adenomas of the nipple. Minerva Chir 2002; 57: 699-702.
22. Bianchini GP, De Villa F, Vergine M, Pasta V, Monti M. Rare pathology of the breast: adenoma of the nipple. G Chir 2002; 23: 213-215.
23. Azzopardi AG，Ahmed A, Milis RR. Problems in breast pathology. In: Azzopardi AG, eds. London/ Philadelphia: WB Saunders; 1979: 1-466.
24. Adeniran A, Al-Ahmadie H, Mahoney MC, Robinson-Smith TM. Granular cell tumor of the breast: a series of 17 cases and review of the literature. Breast J 2004; 10: 528-531.
25. Montagnese MD, Roshong-Denk S, Zaher A, Mohamed I, Staren ED. Granular cell tumor of the breast. Am Surg 2004; 70: 52-54.
26. Selim AG, El-Ayat G, Wells CA. Expression of c-erbB2, p53, Bcl-2, Bax, c-myc and Ki-67 in apocrine metaplasia and apocrine change within sclerosing adenosis of the breast. Virchows Arch. 2002; 441: 449-455.
27. Harmer V. Benign breast disease. Nurs Times 2001; 97: 32-33.
28. Jones C, Mackay A, Grigoriadis A, Cossu A, Reis-Filho JS, Fulford L. Expression profiling of purified normal human luminal and myoepithelial breast cells: identification of novel prognostic markers for breast cancer. Cancer Res 2004; 64: 3037-3045.
29. Hamaoka T, Furuya Y, Yamamoto K, Kuroda Y. MCF-7 growth inhibition by ultraviolet radiation and 5-fluorouracil: the importance of treatment sequence. Cancer Lett 2000; 154: 183-187.
30. Xi H, Baldus SE,Warnecke-Eberz U, Brabender J, Neiss S, Metzger R, et al. High cyclooxygenase-2 expression following neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy is associated with minor histopathologic response and poor prognosis in esophageal cancer. Clin Cancer Res 2005; 11: 8341-8347.
31. Pusztai L, Gianni L. Technology insight: emerging techniques to predict response to preoperative chemotherapy in breast cancer. Nat Clin Pract Oncol 2004; 1: 44-50.
32. Volchenko NN, Medovyi VS, Slavnova EN, Savostikova MV, Medovyi VS, Sokolinskii BZ, et al. A comparative morphometric analysis of cytograms of invasive ductal and invasive lobular breast cancer. Arkh Patol 2002; 64: 37-39.
33. Volders W, Van Steen A. Tubular carcinoma of the breast. JBR-BTR 2001; 84: 81.
34. Rosen PP. Rosen's breast pathology. 2nd ed. New York: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2001: 87-94.
35. Pereira EM, Maeda SA, Reis-Filho JS. Sarcomatoid variant of anaplastic large cell lymphoma mimicking a primary breast cancer: a challenging diagnosis. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2002; 126: 723-726.
36. Cawson JN. Can sonography be used to help differentiate between radial scars and breast cancers? Breast 2005; 14: 352-359.
37. Tomimaru Y, Komoike Y, Egawa C, Motomura K, Inaji H, Kataoka TR, et al. A case of phyllodes tumor of the breast with a lesion mimicking fibroadenoma. Breast Cancer 2005; 12: 322-326.
38. Chen WH, Cheng SP, Tzen CY, Yang TL, Jeng KS, Liu CL, et al. Surgical treatment of phyllodes tumors of the breast: retrospective review of 172 cases. J Surg Oncol 2005; 91: 185-194.
39. Sakurai T, Oura S, Tanino H, Yoshimasu T, Kokawa Y, Kinoshita T, et al. A case of granulomatous mastitis mimicking breast carcinoma. Breast Cancer 2002; 9: 265-268.
40. Asoglu O, Ozmen V, Karanlik H, Tunaci M, Cabioglu N, Igci A, et al. Feasibility of surgical management in patients with granulomatous mastitis. Breast J 2005; 11: 108-114.
41. Chaney AW, Pollack A, McNeese MD, Zagars GK, Pisters PW, Pollock RE, et al. Primary treatment of cystosarcoma phyllodes of the breast. Cancer 2000; 89: 1502-1511.