View Item 

Show simple item record

Is Duct Excision Still Necessary for All Cases of Suspicious Nipple Discharge?
dc.contributor.authorSabel, Michael S.en_US
dc.contributor.authorHelvie, Mark A.en_US
dc.contributor.authorBreslin, Tara M.en_US
dc.contributor.authorCurry, Alidaen_US
dc.contributor.authorDiehl, Kathleen M.en_US
dc.contributor.authorCimmino, Vincent M.en_US
dc.contributor.authorChang, Alfred E.en_US
dc.contributor.authorNewman, Lisa A.en_US
dc.date.accessioned2012-04-04T18:43:28Z
dc.date.available2013-05-01T17:24:43Zen_US
dc.date.issued2012-03en_US
dc.identifier.citationSabel, Michael S.; Helvie, Mark A.; Breslin, Tara; Curry, Alida; Diehl, Kathleen M.; Cimmino, Vincent M.; Chang, Alfred E.; Newman, Lisa A. (2012). "Is Duct Excision Still Necessary for All Cases of Suspicious Nipple Discharge?." The Breast Journal 18(2). <http://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/90572>en_US
dc.identifier.issn1075-122Xen_US
dc.identifier.issn1524-4741en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/90572
dc.publisherBlackwell Publishing Ltden_US
dc.publisherWiley Periodicals, Inc.en_US
dc.subject.otherBreast Neoplasmen_US
dc.subject.otherGalactographyen_US
dc.subject.otherMammographyen_US
dc.subject.otherNipple Dischargeen_US
dc.subject.otherUltrasonographyen_US
dc.titleIs Duct Excision Still Necessary for All Cases of Suspicious Nipple Discharge?en_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.rights.robotsIndexNoFollowen_US
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevelObstetrics and Gynecologyen_US
dc.subject.hlbtoplevelHealth Sciencesen_US
dc.description.peerreviewedPeer Revieweden_US
dc.contributor.affiliationumDepartments of Surgery (MSS, TB, KD, VC, AE, LAN) and Radiology (MAH), University of Michigan Comprehensive Cancer Center, Ann Arbor, Michiganen_US
dc.identifier.pmid22211878en_US
dc.description.bitstreamurlhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/90572/1/j.1524-4741.2011.01207.x.pdf
dc.identifier.doi10.1111/j.1524-4741.2011.01207.xen_US
dc.identifier.sourceThe Breast Journalen_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceDawes LG, Bowen C, Venta LA, et al. Ductography for nipple discharge: replacement for ductal excision. Surgery 1998; 124: 685 – 91.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSeltzer MH. Breast complaints, biopsies, and cancer correlated with age in 10,000 consecutive new surgical referrals. Breast J 2004; 10: 111 – 7.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceWilliams RS, Brook D, Monypenny IJ, et al. The relevance of reported symptoms in a breast screening programme. Clin Radiol 2002; 57: 725 – 9.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceDixon JM, Mansel RE. ABC of breast diseases symptoms assessment and guidelines for referral. BMJ 1994; 309: 722 – 6.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceKlimberg SV. Nipple discharge: more than pathologic. Ann Surg Oncol 2003; 10: 98 – 9.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceVan Zee KJ, Ortega Perez G, Minnard E, et al. Preoperative galactography increases the diagnostic yield of major duct excision for nipple discharge. Cancer 1998; 28: 1174 – 80.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLau S, Kuchenmeister I, Stachs A, et al. Pathologic nipple discharge: surgery is imperative in postmenopausal women. Ann Surg Oncol 2005; 12: 546 – 51.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMurad TM, Contesso G, Mouriesse H. Nipple discharge from the breast. Ann Surg 1982; 195: 259 – 64.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceKing TA, Carter KM, Bolton JS, et al. A simple approach to nipple discharge. Am Surg 2000; 10: 960 – 5.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceDixon JM. Periductal mastitis/duct ectasia. World J Surg 1989; 13: 715 – 20.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceCabioglu N, Hunt KK, Singletary SE, et al. Surgical decision making and factors determining a diagnosis of breast carcinoma in women presenting with nipple discharge. J Am Coll Surg 2003; 196: 354 – 64.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHou MF, Huang TJ, Liu CG. The diagnostic value of galactography in patients with nipple discharge. Clin Imaging 2001; 25: 75 – 81.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceWong L, Chung YF, Wong CY. Microdocchectomy for single‐duct nipple discharge. Ann Acad Med Singapore 2000; 29: 198 – 200.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceVargas HI, Vargas MP, Eldrageely K, et al. Outcomes of clinical and surgical assessment of women with pathological nipple discharge. Am Surg 2006; 126: 124 – 8.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMorrogh M, Morris EA, Liberman L, et al. The predictive value of ductography and magnetic resonance imaging in the management of nipple discharge. Ann Surg Oncol 2007; 14: 3369 – 77.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLocker AP, Galea MH, Ellis IO, et al. Microdochectomy for single‐duct discharge from the nipple. Br J Surg 1988; 7: 700 – 1.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceAdepoju LJ, Chun J, El‐Tamer M, et al. The value of clinical characteristics and breast‐imaging studies in predicting a histopathologic diagnosis of cancer or high‐risk lesion in patients with spontaneous nipple discharge. Am J Surg 2005; 190: 644 – 6.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLouie LD, Crowe JP, Dawson AE, et al. Identification of breast cancer in patients with pathologic nipple discharge: does ductoscopy predict malignancy? Am J Surg 2006; 192: 530 – 3.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLiu G‐Y, Lu J‐S, Shen K‐W, et al. Fiberoptic ductoscopy combined with cytology testing in the patients of spontaneous nipple discharge. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2007; 108: 271 – 7.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMoncrief RM, Nayar R, Diaz LK, et al. A comparison of ductoscopy‐guided and conventional surgical excisioin in women with spontaneous nipple discharge. Ann Surg 2005; 241: 575 – 81.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceTjalma WAA, Verslegers IOJ. Nipple discharge and the value of MR imaging. Eur J Obstet Gynecol 2004; 115: 234 – 6.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceOrel SG, Dougherty CS, Reynolds C, et al. MR imaging in patietns wtih nipple discharge: initial experience. Radiology 2000; 216: 248 – 54.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceYoshimoto M, Kasumi F, Iwase T, et al. Magnetic resonance galactography for a patient with nipple discharge. Breast Cancer Res Treat 1997; 42: 87 – 90.en_US
dc.owningcollnameInterdisciplinary and Peer-Reviewed


Files in this item

Name:
j.1524-4741.2011.01207.x.pdf
Size:
68.91KB
Format:
PDF
View/Open

Show simple item record

Remediation of Harmful Language

The University of Michigan Library aims to describe library materials in a way that respects the people and communities who create, use, and are represented in our collections. Report harmful or offensive language in catalog records, finding aids, or elsewhere in our collections anonymously through our metadata feedback form. More information at Remediation of Harmful Language.

Accessibility

If you are unable to use this file in its current format, please select the Contact Us link and we can modify it to make it more accessible to you.