Evaluation of palpable breast masses

American Family Physician

Volumn 71, Issue 9, 2005, Pages 1731-1738

  Klein, Susan ^a  

^a SOUTHERN ILLINOIS UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANAMNESIS; ASPIRATION BIOPSY; BREAST BIOPSY; BREAST EXAMINATION; BREAST TUMOR; DIGITAL COMPUTER; ECHOMAMMOGRAPHY; HUMAN; MAMMOGRAPHY; NEEDLE BIOPSY; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; PHYSICAL EXAMINATION; REVIEW;

BIOPSY; BREAST NEOPLASMS; FEMALE; HUMANS; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MAMMOGRAPHY; PALPATION; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; ULTRASONOGRAPHY, MAMMARY;

EID: 18344373377     PISSN: 0002838X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Review

References (49)

1. Schoonjans JM, Brem RF. Fourteen-gauge ultrasonographically guided large-core needle biopsy of breast masses. J Ultrasound Med 2001;20:967-72.
2. American Cancer Society. Cancer facts and figures 2003. Accessed online October 14, 2004, at: http://www.cancer.org/downloads/STT/CAFF2003PWSecured.pdf.
3. National Cancer Institute. SEER 1973-2001 public-use data. Accessed online October 14, 2004, at: http://seer.cancer.gov/publicdata/.
4. Madigan MP, Ziegler RG, Benichou J, Byrne C, Hoover RN. Proportion of breast cancer cases in the United States explained by well-established risk factors. J Natl Cancer Inst 1995;87:1681-5.
5. National Cancer Institute. Breast cancer (PDQ): prevention. Accessed online October 14, 2004, at: http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/pdq/prevention/ breast/healthprofessional.
6. Newcomb PA, Titus-Ernstoff L, Egan KM, Trentham-Dietz A, Baron JA, Storer BE, et al. Postmenopausal estrogen and progestin use in relation to breast cancer risk. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2002;11:593-600.
7. Weiss LK, Burkman RT, Cushing-Haugen KL, Voigt LF, Simon MS, Daling JR, et al. Hormone replacement therapy regimens and breast cancer risk (1). Obstet Gynecol 2002;100:1148-58.
8. Key TJ, Appleby PN, Reeves GK, Roddam A, Dorgan JF, Longcope C, et al. Body mass index, serum sex hormones, and breast cancer risk in postmenopausal women. J Natl Cancer Inst 2003;95:1218-26.
9. Boyd NF, Jensen HM, Cooke G, Han HL, Lockwood GA, Miller AB. Mammographic densities and the prevalence and incidence of histological types of benign breast disease. Reference Pathologists of the Canadian National Breast Screening Study. Eur J Cancer Prev 2000;9:15-24.
10. Byrne C, Connolly JL, Colditz GA, Schnitt SJ. Biopsy confirmed benign breast disease, postmenopausal use of exogenous female hormones, and breast carcinoma risk. Cancer 2000;89:2046-52.
11. Kumle M, Weiderpass E, Braaten T, Persson I, Adami HO, Lund E. Use of oral contraceptives and breast cancer risk: the Norwegian-Swedish Women's Lifestyle and Health Cohort Study. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2002;11:1375-81.
12. Breast cancer and hormonal contraceptives: collaborative reanalysis of individual data on 53 297 women with breast cancer and 100 239 women without breast cancer from 54 epidemiological studies. Collaborative Group on Hormonal Factors in Breast Cancer. Lancet 1996;347:1713-27.
13. Rossouw JE, Anderson GL, Prentice RL, LaCroix AZ, Kooperberg C, Stefanick ML, et al. Risks and benefits of estrogen plus progestin in healthy postmenopausal women: principal results from the Women's Health Initiative randomized controlled trial. JAMA 2002;288:321-33.
14. Budai B, Szamel I, Sulyok Z, Nemet M, Bak M, Otto S, et al. Characteristics of cystic breast disease with special regard to breast cancer development. Anticancer Res 2001;21:749-52.
15. Barton MB, Harris R, Fletcher SW. The rational clinical examination. Does this patient have breast cancer? The screening clinical breast examination: should it be done? How? JAMA 1999;282:1270-80.
16. Campbell HS, Fletcher SW, Pilgrim CA, Morgan TM, Lin S. Improving physicians' and nurses' clinical breast examination: a randomized controlled trial. Am J Prev Med 1991;7:1-8.
17. Baines CJ, Miller AB. Mammography versus clinical examination of the breasts. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr 1997;(22):125-9.
18. Moss HA, Britton PD, Flower CD, Freeman AH, Lomas DJ, Warren RM. How reliable is modern breast imaging in differentiating benign from malignant breast lesions in the symptomatic population? Clin Radiol 1999;54:676-82.
19. Berg WA, Campassi CI, Ioffe OB. Cystic lesions of the breast: sonographic-pathologic correlation. Radiology 2003;227:183-91.
20. Kolb TM, Lichy J, Newhouse JH. Comparison of the performance of screening mammography, physical examination, and breast US and evaluation of factors that influence them: an analysis of 27,825 patient evaluations. Radiology 2002;225:165-75.
21. Lister D, Evans AJ, Burrell HC, Blamey RW, Wilson AR, Pinder SE, et al. The accuracy of breast ultrasound in the evaluation of clinically benign discrete, symptomatic breast lumps. Clin Radiol 1998;53:490-2.
22. Barlow WE, Lehman CD, Zheng Y, Ballard-Barbash R, Yankaskas BC, Cutter GR, et al. Performance of diagnostic mammography for women with signs or symptoms of breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 2002;94:1151-9.
23. Leichter I, Buchbinder S, Bamberger P, Novak B, Fields S, Lederman R. Quantitative characterization of mass lesions on digitized mammograms for computer-assisted diagnosis. Invest Radiol 2000;35:366-72.
24. Obenauer S, Luftner-Nagel S, von Heyden D, Munzel U, Baum F, Grabbe E. Screen film vs full-field digital mammography: image quality, detectability and characterization of lesions [published correction appears in Eur Radiol 2002;12:2388]. Eur Radiol 2002;12:1697-702.
25. Lewin JM, Hendrick RE, D'Orsi CJ, Isaacs PK, Moss LJ, Karellas A, et al. Comparison of full-field digital mammography with screen-film mammography for cancer detection: results of 4,945 paired examinations. Radiology 2001;218:873-80.
26. Fischer U, Baum F, Obenauer S, Luftner-Nagel S, von Heyden D, Vosshenrich R, et al. Comparative study in patients with microcalcifications: full-field digital mammography vs screen-film mammography. Eur Radiol 2002;12:2679-83.
27. Hrung JM, Sonnad SS, Schwartz JS, Langlotz CP. Accuracy of MR imaging in the work-up of suspicious breast lesions: a diagnostic meta-analysis. Acad Radiol 1999;6:387-97.
28. Kristoffersen Wiberg M, Aspelin P, Perbeck L, Bone B, Value of MR imaging in clinical evaluation of breast lesions. Acta Radiol 2002;43:275-81.
29. Herborn CU, Marincek B, Erfmann D, Meuli-Simmen C, Wedler V, Bode-Lesniewska B, et al. Breast augmentation and reconstructive surgery: MR imaging of implant rupture and malignancy. Eur Radiol 2002;12:2198-206.
30. Liberman L, Morris EA, Dershaw DD, Abramson AF, Tan LK. MR imaging of the ipsilateral breast in women with percutaneously proven breast cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2003;180:901-10.
31. Obdeijn IM, Brouwers-Kuyper EM, Tilanus-Linthorst MM, Wiggers T, Oudkerk M. MR imaging-guided sonography followed by fine-needle aspiration cytology in occult carcinoma of the breast. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2000;174:1079-84.
32. Liberman L, Morris EA, Kim CM, Kaplan JB, Abramson AF, Menell JH, et al. MR imaging findings in the contralateral breast of women with recently diagnosed breast cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2003;180:333-41.
33. Kriege M, Brekelmans CT, Boetes C, Besnard PE, Zonderland HM, Obdeijn IM, et al. Efficacy of MRI and mammography for breast-cancer screening in women with a familial or genetic predisposition. N Engl J Med 2004;351:427-37.
34. Hindle WH, Chen EC. Accuracy of mammographic appearances after breast fine-needle aspiration. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1997;176:1286-90.
35. Ariga R, Bloom K, Reddy VB, Kluskens L, Francescatti D, Dowlat K, et al. Fine-needle aspiration of clinically suspicious palpable breast masses with histopathologic correlation. Am J Surg 2002;184:410-3.
36. Saxe A, Phillips E, Orfanou P, Husain M. Role of sample adequacy in fine needle aspiration biopsy of palpable breast lesions. Am J Surg 2001;182:369-71.
37. Fishman JE, Milikowski C, Ramsinghani R, Velasquez MV, Aviram G. US-guided core-needle biopsy of the breast: how many specimens are necessary? Radiology 2003;226:779-82.
38. Westenend PJ, Sever AR, Beekman-De Voider HJ, Liem SJ. A comparison of aspiration cytology and core needle biopsy in the evaluation of breast lesions. Cancer 2001;93:146-50.
39. Chuo CB, Corder AP. Core biopsy vs fine needle aspiration cytology in a symptomatic breast clinic. Eur J Surg Oncol 2003;29:374-8.
40. Smith BL. The breast. In: Ryan KJ, Kistner RW. Kistner's Gynecology and women's health. 7th ed. St. Louis: Mosby, 1999:197-202.
41. Morris KT, Vetto JT, Petty JK, Lum SS, Schmidt WA, Toth-Fejel S, et al. A new score for the evaluation of palpable breast masses in women under age 40. Am J Surg 2002;184:346-7.
42. Morris KT, Pommier RF, Morris A, Schmidt WA, Beagle G, Alexander PW, et al. Usefulness of the triple test score for palpable breast masses. Arch Surg 2001;136:1008-12.
43. Osuch JR, Reeves MJ, Pathak DR, Kinchelow T. BREAST-AID: clinical results from early development of a clinical decision rule for palpable solid breast masses. Ann Surg 2003;238:728-37.
44. Crowe JP Jr, Rim A, Patrick R, Rybicki L, Grundfest S, Kim J, et al. A prospective review of the decline of excisional breast biopsy. Am J Surg 2002;184:353-5.
45. Steinberg JL, Trudeau ME, Ryder DE, Fishell E, Chapman JA, McCready DR, et al. Combined fine-needle aspiration, physical examination and mammography in the diagnosis of palpable breast masses: their relation to outcome for women with primary breast cancer [published correction appears in Can J Surg 1997;40:9]. Can J Surg 1996;39:302-11.
46. Kamphausen BH, Toellner T, Ruschenburg I. The value of ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration cytology of the breast: 354 cases with cytohistological correlation. Anticancer Res 2003;23:3009-13.
47. Clarke D, Sudhakaran N, Gateley CA. Replace fine needle aspiration cytology with automated core biopsy in the triple assessment of breast cancer. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 2001;83:110-2.
48. Kerlikowske K, Smith-Bindman R, Ljung BM, Grady D. Evaluation of abnormal mammography results and palpable breast abnormalities. Ann Intern Med 2003;139:274-84.
49. Shetty MK, Shah YP, Sharman RS. Prospective evaluation of the value of combined mammographic and sonographic assessment in patients with palpable abnormalities of the breast. J Ultrasound Med 2003;22:263-8.