Development, standardization, and testing of a lexicon for reporting contrast-enhanced breast magnetic resonance imaging studies

Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging

Volumn 13, Issue 6, 2001, Pages 889-895

  Ikeda, Debra M ^a,j   Hylton, Nola M ^b   Kinkel, Karen ^b   Hochman, Mary G ^c   Kuhl, Christiane K ^d   Kaiser, Werner A ^e   Weinreb, Jeffrey C ^f   Smazal, Stanley F ^g   Degani, Hadassah ^k   Viehweg, Petra ^h   Barclay, John ^b   Schnall, Mitchell D ⁱ  

^a STANFORD UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^c BETH ISRAEL DEACONESS MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^d UNIVERSITY OF BONN   (Germany)

^e FRIEDRICH SCHILLER UNIVERSITY JENA   (Germany)

^f NEW YORK UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^g Radiology Imaging Associates   (United States)

^h MARTIN LUTHER UNIVERSITY HALLE WITTENBERG   (Germany)

ⁱ UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA   (United States)

^j STANFORD UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^k NONE

more..

Author keywords

Breast; Breast neoplasm diagnosis; Breast neoplasms; Kappa; Magnetic resonance; Observer performance

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BREAST; BREAST LESION; CONTRAST ENHANCEMENT; HUMAN; NOMENCLATURE; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REPRODUCIBILITY; STANDARDIZATION;

BREAST; BREAST NEOPLASMS; CONTRAST MEDIA; DOCUMENTATION; FEMALE; HUMANS; IMAGE ENHANCEMENT; MEDICAL RECORDS SYSTEMS, COMPUTERIZED; TERMINOLOGY;

EID: 0035008656     PISSN: 10531807     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/jmri.1127     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. Orel SG, Schnall MD, LiVolsi VA, Troupin RH. Suspicious breast lesions: MR imaging with radiologic-pathologic correlation. Radiology 1994;190:485-493.
2. Orel SG. High-resolution MR imaging of the breast. Semin Ultrasound CT MRI 1996;17:476-493.
3. Orel SG. Differentiating benign from malignant enhancing lesions identified at MR imaging of the breast: are time-signal intensity curves an accurate predictor? Radiology 1999;211:5-7.
4. Hochman MG, Orel SG, Powell CM, Schnall MD, Reynolds CA, et al. Fibroadenomas: MR imaging appearances with radiologic-histologic correlation. Radiology 1997;204:123-129.
5. Nunes L, Schnall MD, Siegelman ES, Langlotz CP, Orel SG, et al. Diagnostic performance characteristics of architectural features revealed by high spatial-resolution MR imaging of the breast. Am J Reson 1997;169:409-415.
6. Kelcz F, Santyr GE, Cron GO, Mongin SJ. Application of a quantitative model to differentiate benign from malignant breast lesions detected by dynamic, gadolinium-enhanced MRI. J Magn Reson Imaging 1996;6:743-752.
7. Kuhl CK, Mielcareck P, Klaschik S, Leutner C, Wardelmann E, Gieseke J, et al. Dynamic breast MR imaging: are signal intensity time course data useful for differential diagnosis of enhancing lesions? Radiology 1999;211:101-110.
8. Boetes C, Barentsz JO, Mus RD. MR characterization of suspicious lesions with a gadolinium-enhanced turbo flash subtraction technique. Radiology 1994;193:777-781.
9. Degani H, Gusis V, Weinstien D, Fields S, Strano S. Mapping pathophysiological features of breast tumors by MRI at high spatial resolution. Nat Med 1997;3:780-782.
10. D'Orsi CJ. The American College of Radiology mammography lexicon: an initial attempt to standardize terminology. Am J Reson 1996;166:779-780.
11. Breast imaging reporting and data system (BI-RADS). Reston, VA: American College of Radiology 1993.
12. Baker JA, Kornguth PJ, Floyd CE, Jr. Breast imaging reporting and data system standardized mammography lexicon: observer variability in lesion description. Am J Reson 1996;166:773-778.
13. Baker JA, Kornguth PJ, Lo JY, Floyd CE, Jr. Artificial neural network: improving the quality of breast biopsy recommendations. Radiology 1996;198:131-135.
14. Schnall MD, Ikeda DM. Lesion Diagnosis Working Group on Breast MR. J Magn Reson Imaging 1999;10:982-990.
15. Landis J, Koch G. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 1977;33:159-174.
16. Mussurakis S, Buckley DL, Coady AM, Turnbull LW, Horsman A. Observer variability in the interpretation of contrast enhanced MRI of the breast. Br J Radiol 1996;69:1009-1016.
17. Shile PE, Pilgram TK. Variability in the interpretation of screening mammograms by US radiologists. Acad Radiol 1996;3:879-881.
18. Kerlikowske K, Grady D, Barclay J, Frankel SD, Ominsky SH, Sickles EA, et al. Variability and accuracy in mammographic interpretation using the American College of Radiology Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System. J Natl Cancer Inst 1998;90:1801-1809.
19. Liberman L, Abramson AF, Squires FB, Glassman JR, Morris EA, Dershaw DD. The breast imaging reporting and data system: positive predictive value of mammographie features and final assessment categories. Am J Reson 1998;171:35-40.
20. Sickles EA. Periodic mammographic follow-up of probably benign lesions: results in 3,184 consecutive cases. Radiology 1991;179: 463-468.
21. Sickles EA. Management of probably benign breast lesions. Radiol Clin North Am 1995;33:1123-1130.