Surgery
Volume 145, Issue 5 , Pages 495-499, May 2009

Intramammary lymph nodes: Patterns of discovery and clinical significance

  • Sandeep S. Vijan, MBBS

      Affiliations

    • Department of Surgery, Mayo Clinic and Mayo Foundation, Rochester, MN
  • ,
  • Steven Hamilton

      Affiliations

    • Department of Surgery, Mayo Clinic and Mayo Foundation, Rochester, MN
  • ,
  • Beiyun Chen, MD, PhD

      Affiliations

    • Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology, Mayo Clinic and Mayo Foundation, Rochester, MN
  • ,
  • Carol Reynolds, MD

      Affiliations

    • Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology, Mayo Clinic and Mayo Foundation, Rochester, MN
  • ,
  • Judy C. Boughey, MD

      Affiliations

    • Department of Surgery, Mayo Clinic and Mayo Foundation, Rochester, MN
  • ,
  • Amy C. Degnim, MD

      Affiliations

    • Department of Surgery, Mayo Clinic and Mayo Foundation, Rochester, MN
    • Corresponding Author InformationReprint requests: Amy C. Degnim, MD, Mayo Clinic, Department of Surgery, 200 1st Street SW, Rochester, MN 55901.

Accepted 27 January 2009. published online 31 March 2009.

Background

We sought to determine how often axillary node metastases were present in patients with intramammary lymph node (IMLN) metastasis and if the method of IMLN discovery impacts likelihood of axillary node metastasis.

Methods

A retrospective review of our breast cancer database was conducted to identify patients in whom an IMLN was found. IMLNs were classified into 2 groups: those found “preoperatively” (evident on mammography, ultrasonography, magnetic resonance imaging or lymphogram), and those found “incidentally” (found by the surgeon intraoperatively or on pathologic review). Patterns of discovery and their correlation with axillary disease were evaluated using Fisher's exact test.

Results

Between March 1994 and October 2007, IMLNs were identified in 93 breast specimens. Twenty-three IMLNs were found preoperatively, while 70 were identified incidentally. Thirty-two patients (34%) harbored cancer in IMLNs with additional axillary node involvement present in 22 (69%). Metastasis was more frequent in the IMLNs detected by imaging (10/23, 43%) than in IMLNs detected incidentally (22/70, 31%, P = NS). Patients with positive IMLNs were more likely to have axillary disease than patients with negative IMLNs (69% versus 18%, P < .0001).

Conclusion

The majority of identified IMLNs are histologically negative. If breast cancer is identified in an IMLN, additional axillary lymph node disease is common, regardless of the method of detection of the IMLN.

To access this article, please choose from the options below

Login to an existing account or Register a new account.

  • Purchase this article for 31.50 USD (You must login/register to purchase this article)

    Online access for 24 hours. The PDF version can be downloaded as your permanent record.

  • Subscribe to this title

    Get unlimited online access to this article and all other articles in this title 24/7 for one year.

  • Claim access now

    For current subscribers with Society Membership or Account Number.

  • Visit SciVerse ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
 

PII: S0039-6060(09)00074-9

doi:10.1016/j.surg.2009.01.015

Surgery
Volume 145, Issue 5 , Pages 495-499, May 2009