Journals / Journal of Medicine and Palliative Care / 2026 / Volume: 7 Issue: 3

Clinical triage of mastalgia: a risk score for predicting suspicious breast imaging in a rural population

Duygu Tutan(HİTİT ÜNİVERSİTESİ, TIP FAKÜLTESİ, DAHİLİ TIP BİLİMLERİ BÖLÜMÜ)0000-0003-0440-1146
Osman Nuri Koyun(Alaca State Hospital, Department of Internal Medicine)0000-0002-0583-3656
Pages
—
Publication Date
2026-06-25
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

External validation is required before routine clinical use.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Aims: This study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic yield of breast ultrasonography in women aged 18-40 years presenting with mastalgia, to identify clinical predictors of suspicious imaging findings, and to develop a simple clinical risk score to support triage in a rural healthcare setting.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Methods: This retrospective observational study included 418 women aged 18-40 years who underwent breast ultrasonography for mastalgia between 2020 and 2025 at a rural secondary-care hospital.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:External validation is required before routine clinical use.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2020 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Mastalgia · breast pain · ultrasonography

Abstract

Aims: This study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic yield of breast ultrasonography in women aged 18-40 years presenting with mastalgia, to identify clinical predictors of suspicious imaging findings, and to develop a simple clinical risk score to support triage in a rural healthcare setting. Methods: This retrospective observational study included 418 women aged 18-40 years who underwent breast ultrasonography for mastalgia between 2020 and 2025 at a rural secondary-care hospital. Clinical variables, including mastalgia type (cyclic vs non-cyclic), focality, laterality, family history, and physical examination findings, were analyzed. Imaging outcomes were categorized using BIRADS, with BIRADS 4-5 defined as suspicious. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to identify independent predictors. A three-point clinical risk score was constructed based on non-cyclic pain, focal pain, and abnormal physical examination. Results: Ultrasonographic abnormalities were detected in 42.34% of patients, predominantly benign. Suspicious imaging findings (BI-RADS 4-5) were identified in 7.9% of cases. Non-cyclic mastalgia (81.8% vs. 23.4%, p<0.001), focal pain (72.7% vs. 20.8%, p<0.001), and abnormal physical examination (60.6% vs. 11.2%, p<0.001) were independently associated with suspicious imaging. The clinical risk score demonstrated a stepwise increase in risk, with rates of suspicious imaging rising from 0.8% at score 0 to 37.8% at score 3 (p<0.001). Each one-point increase in score was associated with a 3.72-fold increase in odds of suspicious imaging (OR 3.72, 95% CI 2.56-5.40; p<0.001). Conclusion: Mastalgia in young women was associated with a low prevalence of suspicious ultrasonographic findings; however, clinically meaningful heterogeneity was observed among patients who underwent imaging. A simple risk score incorporating non-cyclic pain, focal symptoms, and abnormal physical examination findings showed apparent risk-stratification performance for BIRADS 4–5 findings in this retrospective, already imaged cohort. External validation is required before routine clinical use.

🔖

Cite This Article

Tutan, M. B., Tutan, D., Koyun, O. N. (2026). Clinical triage of mastalgia: a risk score for predicting suspicious breast imaging in a rural population. Journal of Medicine and Palliative Care, Volume: 7 Issue: 3. https://doi.org/10.47582/jompac.1913175

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (18)

  1. Bui AH, Smith GJ, Dyrstad SW, et al. An image-rich educational review of breast pain. J Breast Imaging. 2024;6(3):311-326. doi:10.1093/jbi/wbae001
  2. Expert Panel on Breast Imaging, Jokich PM, Bailey L, et al. ACR appropriateness criteria((R)) breast pain. J Am Coll Radiol. 2017;14(5S): S25-S33. doi:10.1016/j.jacr.2017.01.028
  3. Ader DN, Browne MW. Prevalence and impact of cyclic mastalgia in a United States clinic-based sample. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1997;177(1):126-132. doi:10.1016/s0002-9378(97)70450-2
  4. Eren T, Aslan A, Ozemir IA, et al. Factors effecting mastalgia. Breast Care (Basel). 2016;11(3):188-193. doi:10.1159/000444359
  5. Mohallem Fonseca M, Lamb LR, Verma R, Ogunkinle O, Seely JM. Breast pain and cancer: should we continue to work-up isolated breast pain? Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2019;177(3):619-627. doi:10.1007/s10549-019-05354-1
  6. Martin-Diaz M, Maes-Carballo M, Khan KS, Bueno-Cavanillas A. To image or not in noncyclic breast pain? A systematic review. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol. 2017;29(6):404-412. doi:10.1097/GCO.0000000000000407
  7. Olcucuoglu E, Yilmaz G. Mastodynia: is imaging necessary in young patients? Ulus Cerrahi Derg. 2013;29(1):17-19. doi:10.5152/UCD.2013.04
  8. Mackender E, Dave R, Tudor D, Harvey J. A retrospective audit of the triage process introduced for breast referrals received during the COVID-19 pandemic. Clin Breast Cancer. 2024;24(4):e219-e225. doi:10.1016/j.clbc.2024.01.010
  9. Geoghegan C, Horan M, Crilly E, et al. A multicentre review of the direct-access mammography programme in Ireland for women with breast pain. Clin Radiol. 2024;79(2):e227-e231. doi:10.1016/j.crad.2023.10.030
  10. Ahmed A, Marginan A, Sweeney K, Malone C, McLaughlin R, Kerin M. Medicolegal implications of accuracy of GP referral letters to specialist breast clinic. Ir J Med Sci. 2016;185(1):69-73. doi:10.1007/s11845-014-1223-z
  11. Ezeofor SN, Iloanusi NI, Okere PC. Concerns about breast pain: how useful is imaging? Health Scope. 2022;11(3):10. e121702. doi:10.5812/jhealthscope-121702
  12. Chetlen AL, Kapoor MM, Watts MR. Mastalgia: imaging work-up appropriateness. Acad Radiol. 2017;24(3):345-349. doi:10.1016/j.acra.2016.10.004
  13. Rotbart N, Kaminsky O, Aranovich D, Shochat T, Atar E, Grubstein A. Revisiting the need for breast imaging in young women with clinically significant breast pain and a normal physical breast examination. Breast Care (Basel). 2025;20(1):8-15. doi:10.1159/000543437
  14. Mema E, Cho E, Ryu YK, et al. In the setting of negative mammogram, is additional breast ultrasound necessary for evaluation of breast pain? Curr Probl Diagn Radiol. 2019;48(2):117-120. doi:10.1067/j.cpradiol.2017.12.007
  15. Capiro N, Sayre J, Fischer C, Sadigh G. Imaging for breast pain: a useful paradigm to promote breast cancer screening and reduce unnecessary breast imaging. Clin Imaging. 2024;114:110253. 110253. doi:10.1016/j.clinimag.2024.110253
  16. Laws S, Spiller K, Glew C. Evaluation of a pilot of a community virtual triage for breast symptoms outside of usual primary or secondary care pathways. Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 2024;106(7):596-600. doi:10.1308/rcsann.2023.0094
  17. Bonilla Sepúlveda OA. BIRADS ecográfico en mujeres con o sin mastalgia. Rev Peru Ginecol Obstet. 2021;67(2):5. doi:10.31403/rpgo.v67i2318
  18. Sivarajah R, Welkie J, Mack J, Casas RS, Paulishak M, Chetlen AL. A review of breast pain: causes, imaging recommendations, and treatment. J Breast Imaging. 2020;2(2):101-111. doi:10.1093/jbi/wbz082