Table 1.
Literature review of recent case reports of giant mammary hamartoma (> 10 cm, last 15 years).
| Case | G | Age | C | Investigation | Size (cm) | Lat | Location | Histopathology | Re |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Current Case 2020 Qatar | F | 26 | None | US and Ma: findings typical of H | 13 × 11 × 3.7 | L | Lower quadrant | Clusters of adipocytes with densely fibrotic stroma confirms H | — |
| Ghaedi 2018 UK [11] | F | 45 | — | Ma: encapsulated mass, mixed fat/soft tissue density, lobulated serpiginous areas of opacity centrally | 10 × 6 × 5 | L | Upper outer quadrant | Consistent with H: predominantly mature fat, varying proportions of breast parenchyma, nodular aggregate of lobular breast tissue, occasional stromal fibrosis | — |
| US: complex encapsulated mass, mixed texture, echogenic fatty with tubular hypoechoic structures | |||||||||
| CB: normal breast tissue, mild chronic inflammation | |||||||||
| MRI: complex encapsulated mass, soft tissue and fatty components | |||||||||
| Elhence 2017 India [12] | F | 35 | — | Ma: distorted breast architecture, prominent heterogeneous fibroglandular tissue, scattered hyperdense areas, lobulated hyperlucent areas, internal glandular density, few clustered coarse calcifications | 12 × 10 × 5 | R | Upper outer quadrant | Encapsulated lesion of variable admixture of connective tissue stroma suggesting H | — |
| CB: inconclusive, mature fibroadipose tissue and normal breast parenchyma | |||||||||
| Wang 2015 China [13] | F | 41 | — | US: solid heterogeneous mass | 11 × 9 × 3.5 | R | Upper outer quadrant | Encapsulated soft nodule, smooth margin, fibrotic envelope, adipocytic areas in fibrotic stroma suggesting H | — |
| Ma: well-circumscribed mass lesion, mixed density | |||||||||
| FNAC: refused by patient | |||||||||
| Kuhn-Beck 2014 France [15] | F | 26 | — | US: heterogeneous, characteristics suggest fibroepithelial lesion or H; no other imaging done due to pregnancy | 16 × 13 × 4 | R | — | Homogeneous lesion, no haemorrhagic or necrotic tissue, suggests H | — |
| CB: suspect the diagnosis of H | |||||||||
| Birrell 2012 Australia [16] | F | 58 | — | Ma: failed to identify the subtle capsule surrounding this space-occupying lesion | 18 × 16 × 7 | R | — | Revealed mixed stromal, glandular and fatty tissue, consistent with a H | — |
| Hernanz 2008 Spain [17] | F | 29 | — | Ma: well-circumscribed mass | 15 | L | Centre | Histopathology confirms H | — |
| CB: compatible with H | |||||||||
| Silva 2006 Brazil [14] | F | 33 | SLE | US: compatible with the diagnosis of a voluminous nodule | 10 × 8 × 6 | L | Axillary tail | Proliferated lobules and breast stroma, surrounded by capsule of conjunctive tissue characterizing the H | — |
| Sanal 2006 India [10] | F | 14 | — | MRI: well encapsulated mass, predominantly containing fat, randomly oriented hypointense areas | 13 × 9 | L | Upper quadrant | Lobular ducts surrounded by loose stroma, hyalinized connective tissue, adipose tissue consistent with H | — |
For space consideration, only the first author is cited; * in years; C: Comorbidities; CB: Core biopsy; F: female; FNAC: fine needle aspiration cytology; G: Gender; H: hamartoma; Lat: Laterality L: left; Ma: Mammogram; MRI: magnetic resonance imaging; R: right; Re: Recurrence; SLE: systemic lupus erythematosus; US: ultrasound scan; —: not reported.