Clinicopathological Assessment of Breast Lump Biopsies in Patients Presenting to General Surgery Outpatient Services: A Cross-Sectional Observational Study.
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.51168/rqww3008Keywords:
Breast lump, Biopsy, Fibroadenoma, Histopathology, Invasive ductal carcinoma, General surgeryAbstract
Background:
A breast lump is one of the most common reasons for surgical outpatient consultation. Although most palpable breast lesions are benign, histopathological confirmation remains essential because clinical features overlap between benign, inflammatory, and malignant conditions.
Objectives:
To assess the clinicopathological profile of breast lump biopsies among patients presenting to general surgery outpatient services and to determine the distribution of benign, inflammatory, and malignant lesions.
Methods:
This hospital-based cross-sectional observational study included 50 patients with clinically evident breast lumps who underwent biopsy. Demographic details, clinical presentation, lump characteristics, biopsy procedure, and histopathological diagnosis were recorded and analyzed using descriptive statistics.
Results:
The mean age was 39.8 ± 13.6 years. Most patients were aged 31–40 years, and females constituted 96% of cases. The upper outer quadrant was the commonest site. Most lumps measured 2–5 cm. Core needle biopsy was the most frequently performed procedure. Benign lesions were observed in 68%, inflammatory lesions in 4%, and malignant lesions in 28%. Fibroadenoma was the leading diagnosis, followed by invasive ductal carcinoma and fibrocystic change. Malignancy was more frequent after 40 years of age.
Conclusion:
Benign breast lesions formed the major clinicopathological category, with fibroadenoma as the predominant diagnosis. Nevertheless, a substantial malignant fraction highlights the need for systematic clinical assessment and tissue diagnosis in all breast lump cases.
Recommendations:
Early outpatient evaluation, appropriate imaging, timely biopsy, and structured histopathology reporting should be strengthened to improve diagnostic accuracy and clinical decision-making.
References
1. Bray F, Laversanne M, Sung H, Ferlay J, Siegel RL, Soerjomataram I, et al. Global cancer statistics 2022: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin. 2024;74(3):229-263. doi:10.3322/caac.21834. PMID:38572751.
2. Mehrotra R, Yadav K. Breast cancer in India: Present scenario and the challenges ahead. World J Clin Oncol. 2022;13(3):209-218. doi:10.5306/wjco.v13.i3.209. PMID:35433294.
3. Stachs A, Stubert J, Reimer T, Hartmann S. Benign Breast Disease in Women. Dtsch Arztebl Int. 2019;116(33-34):565-574. doi:10.3238/arztebl.2019.0565. PMID:31554551.
4. Sangma MBM, Panda K, Dasiah S. A clinico-pathological study on benign breast diseases. J Clin Diagn Res. 2013;7(3):503-506. doi:10.7860/JCDR/2013/5355.2807. PMID:23634406.
5. Wai CJ, Al-Mubarak G, Homer MJ, Goldkamp A, Samenfeld-Specht M, Lee Y, et al. A modified triple test for palpable breast masses: the value of ultrasound and core needle biopsy. Ann Surg Oncol. 2013;20(3):850-855. doi:10.1245/s10434-012-2710-y. PMID:23104707.
6. Agarwal T, Patel B, Rajan P, Cunningham DA, Darzi A, Hadjiminas DJ. Core biopsy versus FNAC for palpable breast cancers. Is image guidance necessary? Eur J Cancer. 2003;39(1):52-56. doi:10.1016/S0959-8049(02)00459-8. PMID:12504658.
7. Kerlikowske K, Smith-Bindman R, Ljung BM, Grady D. Evaluation of abnormal mammography results and palpable breast abnormalities. Ann Intern Med. 2003;139(4):274-284. doi:10.7326/0003-4819-139-4-200308190-00010. PMID:12965983.
8. Kocjan G, Bourgain C, Fassina A, Hagmar B, Herbert A, Kapila K, et al. The role of breast FNAC in diagnosis and clinical management: a survey of current practice. Cytopathology. 2008;19(5):271-278. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2303.2008.00610.x. PMID:18821945.
9. Tan BY, Acs G, Apple SK, Badve S, Bleiweiss IJ, Brogi E, et al. Phyllodes tumours of the breast: a consensus review. Histopathology. 2016;68(1):5-21. doi:10.1111/his.12876. PMID:26768026.
10. Makki J. Diversity of Breast Carcinoma: Histological Subtypes and Clinical Relevance. Clin Med Insights Pathol. 2015;8:23-31. doi:10.4137/CPath.S31563. PMID:26740749.
11. Wolfrum A, Kümmel S, Theuerkauf I, Pelz E, Reinisch M. Granulomatous Mastitis: A Therapeutic and Diagnostic Challenge. Breast Care (Basel). 2018;13(6):413-418. doi:10.1159/000495146. PMID:30800035.
12. Razik MA, Alsubaie AM, Alsetri HM, Albassam KA, Alkhurayyif AO, Altamimi MM, et al. Clinical and histopathological features of breast tumors in women: a cross-sectional study at three hospitals in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Pan Afr Med J. 2021;39:267. doi:10.11604/pamj.2021.39.267.30341. PMID:34707768.
13. Ibrahim EH, Ali TA, Sharbatti S, Ismail MK, Rahamathullah N, Dahy A, et al. Histopathological Profile of Different Breast Lesions: A Single-Center Observational Study. Cureus. 2024;16(5):e60408. doi:10.7759/cureus.60408. PMID:38883142.
14. Njeze GE. Breast lumps: a 21-year single-center clinical and histological analysis. Niger J Surg. 2014;20(1):38-41. doi:10.4103/1117-6806.127111. PMID:24665202.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Dr. Thirupathi Thorram, Dr. Banothu Prudhvi Raj

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.














