Pseudoangiomatous stromal hyperplasia of the breast: A case report

Abstract

Pseudoangiomatous stromal hyperplasia (PASH) is a rare benign breast entity scarcely reported in the medical literature. Its pathogenesis, etiology, and optimal treatment are still unknown. PASH tumors have a broad spectrum of clinical presentations and might be mistaken for malignancies. The authors present six patients diagnosed with PASH.

Pseudoangiomatous Stromal Hyperplasia of the Breast: A Case Report of a 32-year-old Woman

“…In a study conducted by Degnim et al, PASH patients had a lower rate of malignancy than other benign breast lesions within 18.5 years of their onset [14]. Then, when compared with the general population, PASH tumors do not show an increased risk of breast cancer [7]. In our patient, within 6 months after surgery, and the patient had a follow up examination with no recurrence.…”

“…Radiologic findings have reportedly been found to be nonspecific in identifying PASH on numerous cases [7]. On mammography, usually a clear, dense, homogeneous and non-calcified mass is found.…”

“…Considering the role of hormones as the etiology of PASH, anti-hormonal therapy may be an option for non-invasive therapy such as tamoxifen, but after the diagnosis has been confirmed through a core biopsy and the tumor size is no more than 2 cm [4,7]. Surgical excision of the tumor by minimizing damage to the surrounding breast tissue is the most recommended action in the literature [7]. In our patient, surgical excision of the tumor was performed due to its large size.…”

A rare case of gigantomastia caused by pseudoangiomatous stromal hyperplasia

“…When diffuse PASH causes chronic suffering and pain or requires extensive removal of breast tissue, a mastectomy may be necessary. After excision, the recurrence rate ranges from 0% to 22% [5][6][7].…”

“…Gigantomastia treatments options are still controversial. Ranging from medical conservative hormonal therapy to It was preferred surgery, especially in patients with large tumors and higher risks for breast malignancies while Raza et al treated their patient conservatively [6].…”