Breast imaging and biopsy procedures in the diagnosis of breast cancer;Imagerie mammaire et procédures biopsiques pour le diagnostic de cancer du sein

Presse Medicale

Volumn 32, Issue 3, 2003, Pages 125-133

  De Gery, Sabine ^a   Perret, Francine ^b   Espié, Marc ^b   Frija, Jacques ^b  

^a SAINT LOUIS HOSPITAL   (France)

^b NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BREAST BIOPSY; BREAST CALCIFICATION; BREAST CANCER; CANCER DIAGNOSIS; CANCER SURGERY; CYTOLOGY; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; ECHOMAMMOGRAPHY; HUMAN; MAMMOGRAPHY; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; STEREOTAXIC SURGERY;

ADULT; AGED; BIOPSY, NEEDLE; BREAST; BREAST NEOPLASMS; DIAGNOSIS, DIFFERENTIAL; FEMALE; HUMANS; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MAMMOGRAPHY; MIDDLE AGED; PALPATION; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; ULTRASONOGRAPHY, MAMMARY;

EID: 0037464744     PISSN: 07554982     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (90)

1. Cottu PH, Cojean-Zelek I, Bourstyn E et al. Analyse retrospective multivariée de la corrélation radio-anatomo-pathologique de lésions infracliniques du sein. Expérience de l'hôpital Saint Louis. Rev Med Interne 2000; 21: 337-43.
2. Tabar I, Fagerberg G, Chen HH, Phil M, Duffy SW, Smart CR. Efficacity of breast cancer screening by age. Cancer 1995; 75: 2507-17.
3. Smart CR, Hendrick RE, Rutledge JH, Smith RA. Benefit of mammography screening in women ages 40 to 49 years. Cancer 1995; 75: 1619-26.
4. Zonderland H, Coerkamp E, Hermans J, van de Vivjer M, van Voorthuisen A. Diagnosis of breast cancer: contribution of US as an adjunct to mammography. Radiology 1999; 213: 413-22.
5. Rosenberg R, Hunt W, Williamson M. et al. Effects of age, breast density, ethnicity, and estrogen replacement therapy on screening mammographic sensitivity and cancer stage at diagnosis: review of 183, 134 screening mammograms in albuquerque, New Mexico. Radiology 1998; 209: 511-18.
6. Kerlikowske K, Grady D, Barclay J, Sickles E, Ernest V. Effect of age, breast density, and family history on the sensitivity of first screening mammography. JAMA 1996; 276: 33-8.
7. Espié M, Gorins A. Le sein. ESKA ed. Paris; 1995.
8. Grumbach Y, editor. Imagerie du sein. Paris; 1996.
9. Stines J. Le groupe d'étude de sénologie interventionnelle (GESI). J. Le sein 1999; 1: 4.
10. Meeson S, Young K, Ramsdale M, Wallis M, Cooke J. Analysis of optical density and contrast in mammograms. Br J Radiol 1999; 72: 670-7.
11. Kimmer-Smith C, Sayre J, McCombs M, DeBruhl N, Basset L. Breast calcification and mass detectionn with mammographic anode-filter combinations of molybdenum, tungsten, and rhodium. Radiology 1997; 203; 679-83.
12. Kelly K. accuracy in breast imaging requires multiple views and an integrated approach. Radiographics 1999; 19: 280-1.
13. Nodine C, Kundel H, Mello-Thoms C et al. How experience and training influence mammography expertise. Acad Radiol 1999; 6: 575-85.
14. Beam C, Hendrick R, Schapira D et al. Proposition: all mammograms should be double-read. Med Phys 1999; 26: 115-18.
15. Thurfjell M, Vitak B, Azavedo E, Svane G, Thurfjell E. Effect on sensitivity and specificity of mammography screening with or without comparison of old mammograms. Acta Radiol 2000; 41: 52-6.
16. Martin J, Moskowitz M, Milbrath J. Breast cancer missed by mammography. AJR 1979; 132: 737-7
17. Bird R, Wallace T, Yankaskas B. Analysis of cancers missed at screening mammography. Radiology 1992; 184: 613-17.
18. Wilson A, Evans A, Robertson J. The missing mammographic abnormality. Br J Surg 2000; 87: 374-5.
19. Zammit C, Yiangou C, Sinnet H. The missing mammographic abnormality. Br J Surg 2000; 87: 374-5.
20. Goergen S, Evans J, Cohen G, MacMillan J. Characteristics of breast carcinomas missed by screening radiologists. Radiology 1997; 204: 131-5.
21. Lehman C, White E, Peacock S, Drucker M, Urban N. Effect of age and breast density on screening mammograms with false-positive findings. AJR 1999; 173: 1651-5.
22. Van Gils C, Otten J, Hendriks J, Holland R, Straatman H, Verbeek A. High mammography breast density and its implications for the early detection of breast cancer. J Med Screen 1999; 6: 200-4.
23. Greendale G, Reboussin B, Sie A, Singh H, Olson L, Gatewood O, et al. Effects of estrogen and estrogen-progestin om mammographic parenchymal density. Postmenopausal estrogen/progestin interventions (PEPI) investigators. Ann Intern Med 1999; 16: 262-9.
24. Kavanagh A, Mitchell H, Giles G. Hormone replacement therapy and accuracy of mammography screening. Lancet 2000; 355: 270-4.
25. Litherland J, Stallard S, Hole D, Cordiner C. The effect of hormone replacement therapy on the sensitivity of screening mammograms. Clin Radiol 1999; 54: 285-8.
26. D'Orsi C, Getty D, Swets J, Pickett R, Seltzer S, McNeil B. Reading and decision aids for improved accuracy and standardization of mammography diagnosis. Radiology 1992; 184: 619-22.
27. Baker J, Kornugth P, Lo J, Williford M, Floyd C. Breast cancer: prediction with artificial neural network based on BI-RAD5 standardized lexicon. Radiology 1995; 96: 817-22.
28. Stavros A, Thickman D, Rapp C, Dennis M, Parker S, Sisney G. Solid breast nodules: use of sonography to distinguish between benign and malignant lesions. Radiology 1995; 196: 123-34.
29. Orel S, Kay N, Reynolds C, Sullivan D. BI-RAD5 categorization as a predictor of malignancy. Radiology 1999; 211: 845-50.
30. FNCLCC, INSERM, editors. Risques héréditaires de cancers du sein et de l'ovaire: Quelle prise en charge? FNCLCC et INSERM ed. Paris; 1998
31. Basset L, Cardenosa G, D'Orsi C et al. Risk of risk-based mammography screening, ages 40 to 49. American college of Radiology task force on breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 1999; 17: 735-8.
32. S, D'Orsi C, Hendrick R et al. Recommandations de l'American College of Radiology pour le dépistage du cancer du sein American College of Radiology guidelines for breast cancer screeninig. J Le Sein 1999; 2: 102-7.
33. Mattsson A, Leitz W, Rutqvist L. Radiation risk and mammographic screening of women from 40 to 49 years of age: effect on breast cancer rates and years of life. Br J Cancer 2000; 82: 220-6.
34. Kopans D. Screening mammography for women younger than 50 years. JAMA 1999; 282: 1225-6.
35. Feig S. Age-related accuracy of screening mammography: how should it be measured? Radiology 2000; 214: 633-40.
36. Kopans D. The breast cancer screening controversy and the national institutes of health consensus development conference on breast cancer screening for women ages 40-49. Radiology 1999; 210: 4-9.
37. Baum M. Screening mammography re-evaluated. Lancet 2000; 355: 751.
38. Rajkumar S, Hartmann L. Screening mammography in women aged 40-49 years. Medicine 1999; 78: 410-16.
39. Gail M, Rimer B. Risk-based recommendations for mammographic screening for women in their forties. Journal of Clincal Oncology 1998; 16: 3105-14.
40. Teh W, Wilson A. The role of ultrasound in breast cancer screening. A consensus stetement by the european group for breast cancer screening. Eur J Cancer 1998; 34: 449-50.
41. Skaane P. Ultrasonography as adjunct to mammography in the evaluation of breast tumors. Acta Radiol 1999; 420: 1-47.
42. Kolb T, Lichy J, JH N. Occult cancer in women with dense breasts: detection with screening US-diagnostic yield and tumor characteristics. Radiology 1998; 207: 191-9.
43. Berg W, Gilbreath P. Multicentric and multifocal cancer: whole-breast US in preoperative evaluation. Radiology 2000; 214: 59-66.
44. SFR. Les cancers infra-cliniques du sein. In: radiologie Sfd, editor.; 1999; 1999, p. 170.
45. Feder J, de Paredes E, Hogge J, Wilken J. Unusual breast lesions: radiologic-pathologic correlation. Radiographics 1999; 19: 11-26.
46. Tristant H, Benmoussa M, Bokobsa J. Mammographie et échographie mammaire: de l'image au diagnostic. Médecines-Sciences Flammarion ed; 1988.
47. Lee C, Philpotts L, Horvath L, Tocino I. Follow-up of breast lesions diagnosed as benign with stereotactic core-needle biospy: frequency of mammographic change and false-negative rate. Radiology 1999; 212: 189-94.
48. Harvey J, Fechner R, Moore M. Apparent ipsilateral decrease in breast size at mammography: a sign of infiltrating lobular carcinoma. Radiology 2000; 214: 883-9.
49. Piccoli C, Feig S, Palazzo J. Developing asymetric breast tissue. Radiology 1999; 211: 111-17.
50. Elson B, Helvie M, Frank T, Wilson T, Adler D. Tubular carcinoma of the breast: mode of presentation, mammographic appearance, and frequency of nodal metastases. AJR 1993; 161: 1173-6.
51. Huguenin CR. DUPM. In: Huguenin CR, editor.; 1997-1998; 1997-1998.
52. Lamb P, Perry N, Vinnicombe S, Wells C. Correlation between ultrasound characteristics, mammographic findings and histological grade in patients with invasive ductal carcinoma of the breast. Clin Radiol 2000; 55: 40-4.
53. Skaane P, Sauer T. Ultrasonography of malignant breast neoplasms. Analysis of carcinomas missed as tumor. Acta Radiol 1999; 40: 376-82.
54. Egan R, Mc Sweeney M, Sewell C. Intramammary calcifications without an associated mass in benign and malignant diseases. Radiology 1980; 137: 1-7.
55. Hall N, Evans A, Kollias J et al. Bilateral breast carcinomas: do they have similar mammographic features? Clin Radiol 1999; 54: 434-7.
56. Hussain H, Ng Y, Wells C et al. The significance of new densisties and microcalcification in the second round of breast screening. Clin Radiol 1999; 54: 243-7.
57. Evans A, Wilson A, Burrel H, Ellis I, Pinder S. Mammographic features of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) present on previous mammography. Clin Radiol 1999; 54: 644-6.
58. Park J, Choi H, Bae S, Lee M, Ahn S, Gong G. Clustering of breast microcalcifications: revisited. Clin Radiol 2000; 55: 114-18.
59. Seymour H, Given-Wilson R, Wilkinson L, Cooke J. Resolving breast microcalcifications. Radiographics 2000; 20: 307-8.
60. Ikeda D, Andersson I. Ductal carcinoma in situ: atypical mammographic appearances. Radiology 1989; 172: 661-6.
61. Helvie M, Hessler C, Frank T, Ikeda D. Atypical hyperplasia of the breast: mammography appearance and histologic correlation. Radiology 1991; 179: 759-64.
62. Kushwaha A, Whitman G, Stelling C, Cristofanilli M, Buzdar A. Primary inflammatory carcinoma of the breast: retrospective review of mammographic findings. AJR 2000; 174: 535-8.
63. Giess C, Keating D, Osborne M, Ng Y, Rosenblatt R. Retroareolar breast carcinoma: clinical, imaging, and histopathologic features. Radiology 1998; 207: 669-73.
64. Dawson L, Chow E, Goss P. Evolving perspectives in contralateral breast cancer. Eur J Cancer 1998; 34: 2000-9.
65. Rebner M, Pennes D, Adler D, Helvie M, Lichter A. Breast micro-calcifications after lumpectomy an irradiation therapy. Radiology 1989; 170: 691-3.
66. Roubidoux M, Helvie M, Wilson T, Lai N, Paramagul C. Women with breast cancer: histologic findings in the contralateral breast. Radiology 1997; 203: 691-4.
67. Bertrand A, Dauver N, Mayras C, Mancel F. Comment surveiller le sein controlatéral, chez une patiente ayant été traitée pour un cancer du sein? J Le Sein 1999; 3: 189-93.
68. Mendelson E. Evaluation of the post-operative breast. Radiol Clin North Am 1992; 30: 107-38.
69. Dale G, Bellocq J P, Chenard M. P, Vaneenoge E, Gairard B, Renaud R. Criteres de fiabilite d'un prélèvement à l'aiguille. Actualités en sénologie. XVè journée de la Société Française de Sénologie et Pathologie mammaire. Sauramps médical Ed. 1993: 77-88.
70. Dowlatshahi K, Yaremko M. L, Klutskens L. F, Jokich P.M. Non palpable breast lesions: findings of stereotactic needle- core biopsy and fine - needle aspiration cytology. Radiology 1991; 181: 745-50.
71. Ciatto S, Catarzi S, Morrone D, Rosselli Del Turco M. Echoguidage des cytoponctions à l'aiguille fine des lésions infracliniques. Gynécologie internationale 1994; 8: 237-41.
72. Gordon P. B, Goldenberg S. L, Chan N.H.L, Solid breast lesions: diagnosis with U. S-guided fine needle aspiration biopsy. Radiology 1993; 189: 573-80.
73. Lofgren M, Anderson I, Lindholm F. Stereotatic fine-needle aspiration for cytologic diagnosis of non palpable breast lesions. AJR 1990; 154: 1191-5.
74. Parker S. H, Lovin J. D, Hobe W.E. Non palpable breast lesion: stereotactic automated large core biopsy. Radiology 1991; 180: 403-7.
75. Hagay C, Cherel P, Becette V, Garbay J.-R. Evaluation des biopsies stéréotaxiques des lésions mammaires non palpables-Premiers résultats sur table dédiée numérisée avec des aiguilles de 14 g. Gynecol Obstet 1999; 6: 217-27.
76. Moore M. M, Hargett C W, Hanks J B et al. Association of breast cancer with the finding of atypical ductal hyperplasia at core breast biopsy. Ann Surg 1997; 225: 726-33.
77. Jackman RJ, Nowels KW, Shepard MJ, Finkelstein SI, Marzoni FA. Stereotaxic large core needle biopsy of 450 non-palpable breast lesions with surgical correlation in lesions with cancer or atypical hyperplasia. Radiology 1994; 193: 91-5.
78. Liberman L, Dershaw D, Rosen PP, Abramson AF, Deutch BM, Hann LE. Stereotaxic 14 gauge breast-biopsy: how many core biopsy specimens are needed? Radiology 1994; 192: 793-5.
79. Dahlstrom J. E, Sutton S, Jain S. Histological precision of stereotactic core biopsy in diagnosis of malignant and premalignant breast lesions. Histopathology, 1996; 28: 537-41.
80. Dupont WW, Page DL. Risk factors for breast cancer in women with proliferative breast desease. N Engl J Med 1985; 312: 146-51.
81. London SJ, Connolly JL, Schnitt SJ, Colditz GA. A prospective study of benign breast desease and the risk of breast cancer. Jama 1992; 267: 941-4.
82. Espie M, De Roquancourt A, Perret F, Gorins A. Les dilemmes des lésions frontières. Reprod Hum et horm 1999; XII: 439-50.
83. N'guyen M, Mc Combs MM, Ghandehari S. An update on core-needle biopsy for radiologically detected breast lesions. Cancer 1996; 78: 2340-5.
84. Seror JY, Scetbon F, Sananes S, Antoine M, Chopier J, Uzan S. Le mammotome: place dans la prise en charge des lésions infracliniques du sein. Réalités en Gynécologie Obstétrique 1999; 46: 21-30.
85. Adrales G, Turk P, Wallace J, Bird R, Norton H. J, Greene F. Is surgical exision necessary for atypical ductal hyperplasia of the breast diagnosed by mammotome? Am J Surg 2000; 184: 313-15.
86. Jackman RJ, Nowels KW, Rodriguez Soto J, Marzoni FA, Finkelstein SI, Shepard MJ. Stereotactic, automated, large core needle biopsy of non palpable breast lesions: false negative and histologic underestimation rates after long term follow up. Radiology 1999; 210 (3): 799-805.
87. Jacobs TW, Byrne C, Colditz W, Connolly JL, Schnitt SJ. Radial scars in benign breast biopsy specimens and the risk of breast cancer. N Engl J Med 1999; 340: 430-6.
88. Dennis MA, Parker S, Kaske TI, Stavros AT, Camp J. Incidental treatment of nipple discharge caused by benign intaductal papilloma through diagnostic mammotome biopsy. AJR 2000; 174: 1263-8.
89. Le Bouedec G, Dauplat J, Feillel V. Système A8BI: nouvelle instrumentation pour l'exérèse de lésions infracliniques du sein. La lettre du gynécologue: 1998; 231: 35-7.
90. Barton MB, Harris R, Fletcher SW. Does this patient have breast cancer? The screening clinical breast examination: should it be done? How? JAMA 1999; 282: 1270-80.