ISSN 2490-3329 (Print)
ISSN 2303-7954 (Online)

Volume 49, Issue 2, Article 9

(Scr Med 2018:49:132-136)

Open Surgical Biopsy in Diagnosis of Mammographically Detected Suspicious Microcalcifications

Aleksandar Guzijan1, Dragana Roganović2, Danijela Soprenić1

1 University clinical center of the Republic of Srpska, Banja Luka, Republic of Srpska, Bosnia and Herzegovina
2 Primary healthcare centre Banja Luka, Republic of Srpska, Bosnia and Herzegovina
3 Faculty of Medicine, University of Banja Luka, Banja Luka, Republic of Srpska, Bosnia and Herzegovina


DOI 10.7251/SCMED1802132R
UDC 618.19-006-073
COBISS.RS-ID 7839000



Background: One of the earliest signs of breast cancer may be the presence of mammographically detected suspicious microcalcifications in the breast. The aim of the study was to present an open surgical biopsy of the mammographically detected suspicious microcalcifications in a breast, with preoperative wire marking of the lesions and intraoperative specimen radiography, as a reliable and valid procedure.

Material and Methods: The study included 80 female patients underwent surgery because of mammographically detected suspicious microcalcifications. The method of preoperative ultrasound-guided wire marking of a zone of microcalcification was performed in all patients.After wire marking, the control native mammography in ML and CC projections was performed, in order to locate the microcalcifications relative to the wire. In all patients, the extirpation of the suspicious microcalcifications was verified by the specimen radiography.

Results: In the definitive histopathological finding in situ component of ductal carcinoma of the breast was verified in nine (11,25%) examinees. High grade in situ component was verified in eight (10%) examinees and low grade in situ component in one examinee (1,25%). In 11 (13,75%) examinees, the invasive breast cancer with an extensive in situ component up to 50% was verified. In 46 (57,5%) of the examinees, benign, non-proliferative changes were verified, while proliferative changes characterized as premalignant condition (sclerosing adenosis, radial scar and atypical ductal hyperplasia) were verified in 14 (17,5%) examinees. Microcalcifications verified by specimen radiography are completely removed.

Conclusion: Presence of mammographically detected suspicious microcalcifications has a significant predictive value in the early detection of breast cancer. The method of an open surgical biopsy, as an alternative to stereotactic biopsy, is valid in diagnostic of the mammographically suspicious microcalcifications.

Key words: microcalcifications, US guide wire marking, open surgical biopsy, cancer, breast


Pdf version of article




1. GLOBOCAN 2012, Cancer incidence and mortality worldwide [Internet]. Lyon, France: International Agency for research on cancer: [cited 2018 May 31]. Available from:
2. Lee CI, Elmore JG. Breast cancer screening. In: Harris JR, Lippman ME, Morrow M, Osborne CK. Disease of the breast. 5th edition. Philadephia: Wolters Kluwer Health; 2014. p 90-91.
3. Oeffinger KC, Fontham ETH, Etzioni R, Herzig A, Michćlson JS, Shih YT, et al. Breast cancer screening for women at average risk: 2015 Guideline update from the American Cancer Society. JAMA 2015;314(15):1599-614.
4. Stomper PC, Geradts J, Edge SB, Levine EG. Mammographic predictors of the presence and size of invasive carcinomas associated with malignant microcalcification lesions without a mass. Am J Roentgenol 2003;181:1679-84.
5. Baker R, Rogers KD, Shepherd N, Stone N. New relationships between breast microcalcifications and cancer. Br J Cancer 2010;103:1034-9.
6. Breast imaging lexicon: Calcifications. In: D’Orsi CJ, editor. 2013 ACR BI-RADS Atlas: Breast imaging reporting and data system. 5th edition. ACR 2014, p 37-78.
7. Dershaw DD, Liberman L. Stereotactic breast biopsy: indications and results. Oncology 1998;12(6):907-16.
8. Parker SH, Lovin JD, Jobe WE, Luethke JM, Hopper KD, Yakes WF, et al. Stereotactic breast biopsy with a biopsy gun. Radiology 1990;176:741-7.
9. Dodd GD, Fry K, Delany W. Pre-operative localization of occult carcinoma of the breast. In: Nealon TF, editor. Management of the patient with breast cancer. Philadelphia: Saunders; 1965, p 88-113.
10. Rahusen FD, Bremers AJA, Fabry HFJ, van Amerongen AH, Boom RP, Meijer S. Ultrasound-guided lumpectomy of nonpalpable breast cancer versus wire-guided resection: a randomized clinical trial. Ann Surg Oncol 2002;9:994-8.
11. Hunt KK, Robertson JFR, Bland KI. The Breast. In: Brunicardi FC, editor. Schwartz’s Principles of Surgery. New York: Mc Graw Hill; 2015. p 545.
12. Querci G, Benson JR, Morgan M, Warren R, Patel A. Localization of impalpable breast lesions – a surgical approach. Eur J Surg Oncology 1996;22:478-82.
13. Gold R, Bassett L, Widoff B. Radiologic History Exhibit. RadioGraphics 1990;10(6): 1111-31.
14. Hall FM, Kopans DB, Sadowsky NL, Homer MJ. Development of wire localization for occult breast lesions: Boston Remembrances. Radiology 2013;268:622-7.
15. Karellas A, Vedantham S. Breast cancer imaging: A perspective for the next decade. Medical Physics 2008;35(11):4878-97.
16. Domingo L, Romero A, Belvis F, Sanchez M, Ferrer J, Salas D, et al. Differences in radiological patterns, tumour characteristics and diagnostic precision between digital mammography and screen-film mammography in four breast cancer screening programmes in Spain. Eur Radiol 2011;21(9):2020-8.
17. Hunt KK, Robertson JFR, Bland KI. The Breast. In: Brunicardi FC, editor. Schwartz’s Principles of Surgery. New York: Mc Graw Hill; 2015. p 529.
18. Szynglarewicz B, Kasprzak P, Biecek P, Halon A, Matkowski R. Screen – detected ductal carcinoma in situ found on stereotactic vacuum – assisted biopsy of suspicious microcalcifications without mass: radiological – histological correlation. Radiol Oncol 2016;50(2):145-52.


Corresponding author:
Aleksandar Guzijan
e-mail: This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it

Manuscript received: October 8th, 2018
Manuscript accepted: November 14th, 2018