Search

Patients with pathological nipple discharge (PND) often undergo local surgical procedures because standard radiologic imaging fails to identify the underlying cause. MicroRNA (MiRNA) expression analysis of nipple fluid holds potential for distinguishing between breast diseases. This study aimed to compare miRNA expression levels between nipple fluids from patients with PND to identify possible relevant miRNAs that could differentiate between intraductal papillomas and no abnormalities in the breast tissue. Nipple fluid samples from patients with PND without radiological and pathological suspicion for malignancy who underwent a ductoscopy procedure were analyzed. We used univariate and multivariate regression analyses to identify nipple fluid miRNAs differing between pathologically confirmed papillomas and breast tissue without abnormalities. A total of 27 nipple fluid samples from patients with PND were included for miRNA expression analysis. Out of the 22 miRNAs examined, only miR-145-5p was significantly differentially expressed (upregulated) in nipple fluid from patients with an intraductal papilloma compared to patients showing no breast abnormalities (OR 4.76, p = 0.046), with a diagnostic accuracy of 92%. miR-145-5p expression in nipple fluid differs for intraductal papillomas and breast tissue without abnormalities and, therefore, has potential as a diagnostic marker to signal presence of papillomas in PND patients. However, further refinement and validation in clinical trials are necessary to establish its clinical applicability.

Background: Most patients suffering from pathological nipple discharge (PND) undergo local surgical procedures because standard radiological imaging often fails to reveal the cause. Ductoscopy is a minimally invasive endoscopic technique that enables direct intraductal visualization and can avoid unnecessary diagnostic surgical procedures. Hence, patients with recurrent or persistent PND after an unsuccessful ductoscopy procedure still undergo unnecessary surgery. This study describes the experience of a second ductoscopy procedure in patients with recurrent or persistent PND without suspicious radiological findings. Methods: Patients with recurrent or persistent PND who underwent two ductoscopy procedures between 2010 and 2017 were retrospectively analyzed. The second ductoscopy was performed when the first ductoscopic attempt was unsuccessful due to technical problems. The primary outcome was the number of preventable surgical procedures. Results: A total of 17 patients underwent two ductoscopy procedures. The first ductoscopy showed a polypoid lesion in 10 patients (58.8%), no abnormalities in 3 patients (17.6%), and in 4 patients (23.5%), it was not possible to visualize the ductal tree. Post-procedure, all patients suffered from PND. After two ductoscopic attempts, PND stopped in 10 patients (58.8%), and 7 patients (41.2%) still suffered from PND and were operated on. Pathology of the resection specimens showed no abnormalities in 1 patient, a papilloma in 5 patients, and ductal carcinoma in situ in 1 patient. Conclusion: A second ductoscopy procedure can be considered in the diagnostic work-up of patients suffering from persistent or recurrent PND after an unsuccessful first ductoscopic attempt to avoid unnecessary surgery in about 59% of the cases. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]