Routine histopathological examination after female‐to‐male gender‐confirming mastectomy. BJS 2018; 105: 885-892.
Published: 5th April 2018
Authors: S. M. J. Van Renterghem, J. Van Dorpe, S. J. Monstrey, J. Defreyne, K. E. Y. Claes, M. Praet et al.
The number of transmen seeking gender‐confirming surgery has risen steadily throughout the last decade. Pathologists are increasingly confronted with transmale mastectomy specimens. It is not clear whether routine histopathological examination is useful. This study explored the possible benefit of routine investigation through detailed description of lesions encountered in mastectomy specimens after female‐to‐male gender‐confirming surgery.
Breast tissue from a cohort of transmen was reviewed. The presence of benign and malignant breast lesions was recorded. The number of terminal duct–lobule units (TDLUs) per ten low‐power fields (LPFs) was quantified. Information on hormone therapy and morphometry was retrieved for selected patients.
The cohort included 344 subjects with a mean age of 25·8 (range 16–61) years at the time of surgery; the age at surgery decreased significantly over time. Older individuals presented with a significantly higher number of breast lesions. The number of TDLUs per LPF was lower in heavier breasts, but did not correlate with age. Breast lesions, either benign or malignant, were present in 166 individuals (48·3 per cent). Invasive breast cancer was found in two (0·6 per cent); one tumour was an unexpected finding. The number of breast lesions encountered on histopathological examination increased significantly when more tissue blocks were taken.
The discovery of an unexpected breast cancer in a 31‐year‐old transman emphasizes the importance of thorough routine histopathological examination of mastectomy specimens. The number of tissue blocks taken should be based on age and breast weight.Full text
You may also be interested in
Meta‐analysis of the cumulative risk of endometrial malignancy and systematic review of endometrial surveillance in extended tamoxifen therapy. BJS 2018; 105: 1098-1106.
Authors: C. A. Fleming, H. M. Heneghan, D. O'Brien, D. P. McCartan, E. W. McDermott, R. S. Prichard et al.
Notes: Counselling of patients important
Meta‐analysis of the diagnostic accuracy of ultrasound‐guided fine‐needle aspiration and core needle biopsy in diagnosing axillary lymph node metastasis.
Authors: I. Balasubramanian, C. A. Fleming, M. A. Corrigan, H. P. Redmond, M. J. Kerin, A. J. Lowery et al.
Notes: CNB better
Breast‐conserving surgery followed by whole‐breast irradiation offers survival benefits over mastectomy without irradiation.
Authors: J. de Boniface, J. Frisell, L. Bergkvist, Y. Andersson
Notes: RT to lower axilla key?
Is axillary ultrasound imaging necessary for all patients with breast cancer?. BJS 2018; 105: 930-932.
Authors: M. Ahmed, M. Douek
Meta‐analysis of the oncological safety of autologous fat transfer after breast cancer. BJS 2018; 105: 1082-1097.
Authors: T. K. Krastev, S. J. Schop, J. Hommes, A. A. Piatkowski, E. M. Heuts, R. R. W. J. van der Hulst et al.
Notes: Lipofilling ok
Omission of surgery in older women with early breast cancer has an adverse impact on breast cancer‐specific survival.
Authors: S. E. Ward, P. D. Richards, J. L. Morgan, G. R. Holmes, J. W. Broggio, K. Collins et al.
Notes: Surgery should be first choice
Risk of recurrence and death in patients with breast cancer after delayed deep inferior epigastric perforator flap reconstruction.
Authors: H. Adam, A. C. Docherty Skogh, Å. Edsander Nord, I. Schultz, J. Gahm, P. Hall et al.
Notes: DIEP is safe
Predictors of complications after direct‐to‐implant breast reconstruction with an acellular dermal matrix from a multicentre randomized clinical trial.
Authors: V. L. Negenborn, R. E. G. Dikmans, M. B. Bouman, H. A. H. Winters, J. W. R. Twisk, P. Q. Ruhé et al.
Notes: Not good for large breast
Population‐based study of the sensitivity of axillary ultrasound imaging in the preoperative staging of node‐positive invasive lobular carcinoma of the breast. BJS 2018; 105: 987-995.
Authors: E. Morrow, A. Lannigan, J. Doughty, J. Litherland, J. Mansell, S. Stallard et al.
Notes: Less sensitive in lobular carcinoma
Meta‐analysis of neoadjuvant therapy and its impact in facilitating breast conservation in operable breast cancer. BJS 2018; 105: 469-481.
Authors: A. Karakatsanis, M. K. Tasoulis, F. Wärnberg, G. Nilsson, F. MacNeill
Notes: Still unnecessary mastectomies
Baseline factors predicting a response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy with implications for non‐surgical management of triple‐negative breast cancer. BJS 2018; 105: 535-543.
Authors: R. F. D. van la Parra, A. B. Tadros, C. M. Checka, G. M. Rauch, A. Lucci, B. D. Smith et al.
Notes: Ductal carcinoma in situ and microcalcification important
Authors: Z. E. Winters, J. R. Benson