Frequency of malignancy in lesions classified as probably benign after dynamic contrast-enhanced breast MRI examination

Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging

Volumn 21, Issue 5, 2005, Pages 556-564

  Sadowski, Elizabeth A ^a   Kelcz, Frederick ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN MADISON   (United States)

^b NONE

Author keywords

BI RADS 3; Breast MRI; Breast neoplasm; Follow up mammography; Probably benign breast lesions

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; BIOPSY TECHNIQUE; BREAST CANCER; CALCIFICATION; CANCER CLASSIFICATION; CANCER RISK; CONTRAST ENHANCEMENT; CONTROLLED STUDY; EVALUATION; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; HUMAN; HUMAN CELL; HUMAN TISSUE; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MAMMOGRAPHY; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; POPULATION RESEARCH; PRIORITY JOURNAL;

ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; BREAST DISEASES; BREAST NEOPLASMS; CONTRAST MEDIA; DIAGNOSIS, DIFFERENTIAL; FEMALE; HUMANS; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MIDDLE AGED; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; RISK ASSESSMENT; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY;

EID: 17844364255     PISSN: 10531807     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/jmri.20312     Document Type: Article

References (15)

1. Lee CH, Smith RC, Levine JA, et al. Clinical usefulness of MR imaging of the breast in the evaluation of the problematic mammogram. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1999;173:1323-1329.
2. Sardanelli F, Melani E, Ottonello C, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging of the breast in characterizing positive or uncertain mammographic findings. Cancer Detect Prev 1998;22:39-42.
3. Kuhl KC, Schild HH. Dynamic image interpretation of MRI of the breast. J Magn Reson Imaging 2000;12:956-974.
4. Nunes LW, Schnall MD, Orel SG, et al. Breast MR imaging: interpretation model. Radiology 1997;202:833-851.
5. Boetes C, Strijk SP, Holland R, et al. False-negative MR imaging of malignant breast tumors. Eur Radiol 1997;7:1231-1234.
6. Orel SG, Kay N, Reynolds C. et al. BI-RADS categorization as a predictor of malignancy. Radiology 1999;211:845-850.
7. American College of Radiology (ACR). BI-RADS Breast Imaging and Reporting System. Breast Imaging Atlas, First edition for MRI. Reston, VA: American College of Radiology; 2003.
8. Kuhl KC, Mielcareck P, Klaschik S, et al. Dynamic breast MR imaging: are signal intensity time course data useful for differential diagnosis of enhancing lesions. Radiology 1999;211:101-110.
9. Ikeda DM, Baker DR, Daniel BL. Magnetic resonance imaging of breast cancer: clinical indications and breast MRI reporting system. J Magn Reson Imaging 2000;12:975-983.
10. Kuhl KC, Klaschik S, Mielcarek P, et al. Do T2-weighted pulse sequences help with the differential diagnosis of enhancing lesion in dynamic breast MRI? J Magn Reson Imaging 1999;9:187-196.
11. Brown J, Smith RC, Lee CH. Incidental enhancing lesions found of MR imaging of the breast. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2001;176:1249-1254.
12. Kelcz FX, Furman-Haran E, Grobgeld D. et al. Clinical testing high-spatial resolution parametric contrast-enhanced MR imaging of the breast. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2002;179:1485-1492.
13. Liberman L, Morris EA, Benton CL, et al. Probably benign lesions at breast magnetic resonance imaging. Cancer 2003;98:377-388.
14. Brenner RJ, Sickles EA. Surveillance mammography and stereotactic core breast biopsy for probably benign lesions: a cost comparison analysis. Acad Radiol 1997;4:419-425.
15. Lawrence WF, Liang W, Madelblatt JS, et al. Serendipity in diagnostic imaging: magnetic resonance imaging of the breast. J Natl Cancer Inst 1998;90:1792-1800.