Follow-up of probably benign lesions (BI-RADS 3 category) in breast MR imaging

Breast Journal

Volumn 16, Issue 3, 2010, Pages 297-304

  Hauth, Elke ^a   Umutlu, Lale ^b   Kü Mmel, Sherko ^b   Rainer Kimmig, ^b   Forsting, Michael ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL MÜNSTER   (Germany)

^b UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL ESSEN   (Germany)

Author keywords

Breast; Follow up; MR imaging

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; BENIGN TUMOR; BREAST EXAMINATION; BREAST IMAGING REPORTING AND DATA SYSTEM 3; BREAST LESION; DISEASE CLASSIFICATION; ECHOMAMMOGRAPHY; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; FREQUENCY ANALYSIS; HISTOPATHOLOGY; HUMAN; IMAGE ANALYSIS; IMAGE ENHANCEMENT; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALIGNANT NEOPLASTIC DISEASE; MAMMOGRAPHY; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; PALPATION; TUMOR CLASSIFICATION; TUMOR VOLUME; ADOLESCENT; BREAST; BREAST NEOPLASMS; MIDDLE AGED; PATHOLOGY; PROCEDURES; VERY ELDERLY; YOUNG ADULT;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; BREAST; BREAST NEOPLASMS; FEMALE; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; HUMANS; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MIDDLE AGED; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 77953569670     PISSN: 1075122X     EISSN: 15244741     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1524-4741.2010.00916.x     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. Sickles EA. Periodic mammographic follow-up of probably benign lesions: results in 3,184 consecutive cases. Radiology 1991;179:463-468
2. Varas X, Leborgne F, Leborgne JH. Nonpalpable probably benign lesions: role of follow-up mammography. Radiology 1992;184:409-414
3. Varas X, Leborgne JH, Leborgne F, Mezzera J, Jaumandreu S, Leborgne F. Revisiting the mammographic follow-up of BI-RADS category 3 lesions. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2001;179:691-695
4. Helvie MA, Pennes DR, Rebner M, Adler DD. Mammographic follow-up of low-suspicion lesions: compliance rate and diagnostic yield. Radiology 1991;178:155-158
5. Vizcaino I, Gadea L, Andreo L, et al. Screening Program Working Group. Short-term follow-up results in 795 nonpalpable probably benign lesions detected at screening mammography. Radiology 2001;219:475-483
6. Taplin SH, Ichikawa LE, Kerlikowske K, et al. Concordance of breast imaging reporting and data system assessments and management recommendations in screening mammography. Radiology 2002;222:529-535
7. Rubin E. Six-months follow-up: a alternative view. Radiology 1999;213:15-18
8. Sickles EA. Management of probably benign lesions of the breast. Radiology 2004;193:582-583
9. Liberman L, Morris EA, Benton CL, Abramson AF, Dershaw DD. Probably benign lesions at breast magnetic resonance imaging: preliminary experience in high-risk women. Cancer 2003;98:377-378
10. Betsch A, Arndt E, Stern W, Wallwiener D, Claussen CD, Muller-Schimpfle M. Can follow-up controls improve the accuracy of MR mammography? A retrospective analysis of MR mammography follow-up studies Fortschr Röntgenstr 2001;173:24-30.
11. Kelcz F, Furman-Haran E, Grobgeld D, Degani H. Clinical testing of high-spatial-resolution parametric contrast-enhanced MR imaging of the breast. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2002;179:485-492
12. Weinstein D, Strano S, Cohen P, et al. Breast fibroadenoma: mapping of pathophysiologic features with three-time-point, contrastenhanced MR imaging - pilot study. Radiology 1999;210:233-240
13. Hauth EA, Stockamp C, Maderwald S, et al. Evaluation of the three-time-point method for diagnosis of breast lesions in contrast- enhanced MR mammography. Clin Imaging 2006;30:160-165
14. Degani H, Gusis V, Weinstein D, Fields S, Strano S. Mapping pathophysiological features of breast tumors by MRI at high spatial resolution. Nat Med 1997;3:780-782 (Pubitemid 27298724)
15. Furman-Haran E, Grobgeld D, Kelcz F, Degani H. Critical role of spatial resolution in dynamic contrast-enhanced breast MRI. J Magn Reson Imaging 2001;13:862-867
16. Morris EA. Breast MR imaging lexicon updated. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 2006;14:293-303.
17. Hauth EA, Jaeger H, Maderwald S, et al. Evaluation of quantitative parametric analysis for characterization of breast lesions in contrast-enhanced MR mammography. Eur Radiol 2006;16:2834-2841
18. Liberman L, Mason G, Morris EA, et al. Does size matter? Positive predictive value of MRI-detected breast lesions as a function of lesion size AJR Am J Roentgenol 2006;186:426-430
19. Siegmann KC, Mü ller-Schimpfle M, Schick F, et al. MR imaging-detected breast lesions: histopathologic correlation of lesion characteristics and signal intensity data. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2002;178:1403-9.
20. Liberman L, Morris EA, Lee MJ, et al. Breast lesions detected on MR imaging: features and positive predictive value. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2002;179:171-178