ArticleDiagnostic pathology2025
The diagnostic dilemma of idiopathic granulomatous mastitis with an emphasis on histopathologic findings.
Article in Diagnostic pathology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIdiopathic granulomatous mastitis (IGM) is a rare benign inflammatory breast condition with diverse clinical and radiologic features, often misdiagnosed as malignancy prior to sampling. Therefore, histological findings are one of the most essential bases of diagnosis.
methodsWe retrospectively searched the histopathologic database of the Cancer Institute of Imam Hospital for IGM cases and collected clinical and radiological data. After ruling out other causes of granulomatous mastitis, the histopathologic features of each case were evaluated. The pattern of inflammation was classed as lobulocentric, lobular spared, or confluent. The presence of granulomas was evaluated based on descriptive features, including well-formed or poorly defined granulomas, as well as the presence or absence of multinucleated giant cells. Granulation tissue, empty space, fat necrosis, and necrosis were also assessed.
resultsOverall, 40 cases of IGM were reviewed. All patients were female, within the age range of 22 to 64, with the majority falling into the 30-39 category. The most common clinical manifestation was a palpable mass. 30% of patients had a history of breastfeeding over the past 5 years, and one patient had a history of prolactinoma. BI-RADS 4a was the most reported radiologic score. In histopathologic assessment, lobulocentric inflammation was reported as a predominant finding (45% of cases). Granuloma was present in 39 cases (97.5%), but was only well-defined in 33 cases (82.5%). Neutrophilic aggregates were present in 37 cases (92.5%).
conclusionThe diagnosis of IGM depends on assessing the clinical and radiologic findings along with pathologic features. IGM is microscopically defined by a non-caseating lobulocentric granulomatous inflammation, composed of tight aggregates of epithelioid histiocytes. One of the variants, cystic neutrophilic granulomatous mastitis (CNGM), is characterized by the presence of cystic empty vacuoles lined by neutrophils.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.