Is Surgical Excision Necessary in Pseudoangiomatous Stromal Hyperplasia?
Daniel R. Layon,Caroline J Wang,S. Roth,A. Brooks
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/tbj.12643
2016-09-01
The Breast Journal
Abstract:To the Editor: The authors performed a systematic review of the literature on pseudoangiomatous stromal hyperplasia, a benign breast lesion of mesenchymal origin for which the optimal treatment strategy is unclear, to determine the prevalence of occult malignancies discovered by excision of pseudoangiomatous stromal hyperplasia lesions. Keyword searches for “pseudoangiomatous stromal hyperplasia” and “pseudoangiomatous hyperplasia of the mammary stroma” were queried in PubMed. Eligible articles were reviewed for patient demographics and study characteristics. We identified malignant or premalignant lesions which were discovered at the time of diagnosis or treatment of pseudoangiomatous stromal hyperplasia lesions and determined whether they were incidentally or directly related to the pseudoangiomatous stromal hyperplasia lesion. Data were collected from 108 articles. The study population was 1,490 individuals; 105 were male, 1,383 were female and two were not reported. There were 60 total cases of malignant or premalignant lesions reported. There were only five malignant or premalignant lesions which arose directly from, or were obscured by, a pseudoangiomatous stromal hyperplasia lesion. These five cases included four patients with myofibroblastic sarcomas arising from pseudoangiomatous stromal hyperplasia tumors and one patient with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), only discovered after removal of a pseudoangiomatous stromal hyperplasia tumor. Sixty-seven percent of cases of PASH were diagnosed by surgical excision alone, 20.3% of cases were diagnosed by core needle biopsy (CNB), 12.3% cases did not have a reported method of diagnosis, and 0.4% of cases were diagnosed by other methods, such as incisional biopsy. Most (77%) PASH cases were managed via excision or mastectomy, 10% by observation, and 1% by other methods (incisional biopsy, mammoplasty, or removal via core needle or vacuumassisted biopsy); 12% of cases had no reported management. In 36% of the articles reviewed, excision was recommended as the optimal treatment; 7% recommended observation, 14% recommended either excision or observation depending on patient characteristics and clinical-pathologic-radiologic concordance, while 43% gave no recommendation. Presently, the majority recommendation in the published literature on PASH is excision, despite evidence that the presence of PASH suggests a decreased risk of breast malignancy when compared to other benign breast lesions (1). The malignant potential of PASH has also been controversial. In Rosen’s Breast Pathology, Lerwill and Koerner reported “several” cases of myofibroblastic sarcoma arising from PASH lesions (2), yet only one unequivocal report of a myofibroblastic sarcoma arising from a PASH lesion has been published since the characterization of this lesion (3). The scant evidence of malignant transformation of PASH, as well as the low overall prevalence of malignancies discovered after removal of PASH tumors—only one case of DCIS was discovered directly due to the removal of a PASH tumor; all other cases of malignant or premalignant lesions associated with PASH were either identified independently or spatially separate—suggests that routine removal of PASH lesions is not indicated. The optimal management of PASH has been controversial. The initial article characterizing PASH recommended excision as the definitive management (4). However, no rationale for this recommendation was given. Interestingly, of the three articles most commonly cited in support of excision (5–7) only one (5) gave a rationale for its recommendation. Gresik et al. (5) recommended that if CNB confirmed a clinically or radiographically benign lesion such as PASH, it should be managed expectantly. In addition, the authors recommended that inconclusive biopsy findings or lesion progression should prompt excision to Address correspondence and reprint requests to: Daniel Layon, MS, Drexel University College of Medicine, 2900 West Queen Lane, Philadelphia, PA 19129, USA, or e-mail: drl73@drexel.edu