HER2 Support Group Forums - View Single Post - no evidence of increasd local recurrence or decreased survival assoc w needle biopsy

AlaskaAngel · 05-19-2006, 01:54 PM

This is a more complicated issue... And I really hope that it doesn't confuse people who are looking for simple answers...

There is the FNA (fine needle aspiration), the core needle biopsy (which takes out a thicker sample of tissue than an FNA does), and the excisional biopsy.

FNA is known to sometimes miss the cancer because it is, as it says, just a fine needle and may hit a part of the tissue that has not yet been invaded by the irregular shape of cancers. Seeding of cancer by FNA is not addressed by the article above.

Core biopsy also can have misses but is less likely. The article referred only to core needle biopsy, and only in regard to seeding, which does not address the issue of missing the cancer entirely.

Excisional biopsy is least likely to miss the cancer. See next paragraph regarding the question of seeding by virtue of disturbance of tissues.

There is bound to be some remaining question in regard to possible tracking by needle that is operator-dependent. For example, the goofy surgeon who did my biopsy actually attempted to biopsy from the opposite side of the breast from the side where the cancer was. Yes, sometimes it IS hard to get the tool to punch into a dense object in dense tissues, but results in terms of tracking would be different depending on the skill of the surgeon. And I believe that question has been raised in terms of "seeding" through various kinds of biopsies (as well as the question of "seeding" through less skillful lumpectomy, mastectomy, prosthesis surgery, and plastic surgery).

AlaskaAngel

P.S. Punch biopsy is used for skin cancers.

05-19-2006, 01:54 PM	#3
AlaskaAngel Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: Alaska Posts: 2,018	Hold everything here... This is a more complicated issue... And I really hope that it doesn't confuse people who are looking for simple answers... There is the FNA (fine needle aspiration), the core needle biopsy (which takes out a thicker sample of tissue than an FNA does), and the excisional biopsy. FNA is known to sometimes miss the cancer because it is, as it says, just a fine needle and may hit a part of the tissue that has not yet been invaded by the irregular shape of cancers. Seeding of cancer by FNA is not addressed by the article above. Core biopsy also can have misses but is less likely. The article referred only to core needle biopsy, and only in regard to seeding, which does not address the issue of missing the cancer entirely. Excisional biopsy is least likely to miss the cancer. See next paragraph regarding the question of seeding by virtue of disturbance of tissues. There is bound to be some remaining question in regard to possible tracking by needle that is operator-dependent. For example, the goofy surgeon who did my biopsy actually attempted to biopsy from the opposite side of the breast from the side where the cancer was. Yes, sometimes it IS hard to get the tool to punch into a dense object in dense tissues, but results in terms of tracking would be different depending on the skill of the surgeon. And I believe that question has been raised in terms of "seeding" through various kinds of biopsies (as well as the question of "seeding" through less skillful lumpectomy, mastectomy, prosthesis surgery, and plastic surgery). AlaskaAngel P.S. Punch biopsy is used for skin cancers.