The accuracy of BI-RADS classification of breast ultrasound as a first-line imaging method

Ultraschall in der Medizin

Volumn 33, Issue 2, 2012, Pages 160-163

  Hille, H ^a   Vetter, M ^b   Hackeloer B J ^b  

^a Praxis für Frauenheilkunde ^*  (Germany)

^b Asklepios Barmbek   (Germany)

Author keywords

BI RADS; breast carcinoma; breast ultrasound; screening

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGE; ARTICLE; BREAST; BREAST TUMOR; CLASSIFICATION; ECHOGRAPHY; ECHOMAMMOGRAPHY; EQUIPMENT DESIGN; FEMALE; HUMAN; INSTRUMENTATION; LYMPH NODE METASTASIS; METHODOLOGY; MIDDLE AGED; NEEDLE BIOPSY; PATHOLOGY; PREDICTIVE VALUE; PROGNOSIS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY;

ADULT; AGE FACTORS; BIOPSY, NEEDLE; BREAST; BREAST NEOPLASMS; EQUIPMENT DESIGN; FEMALE; HUMANS; LYMPHATIC METASTASIS; MIDDLE AGED; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS; PROGNOSIS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; ULTRASONOGRAPHY, MAMMARY;

EID: 84860216670     PISSN: 01724614     EISSN: 14388782     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1055/s-0031-1281667     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. Madjar H, Ohlinger R, Mundinger A et al. BI-RADS-analogue DEGUM criteria for findings in breast ultrasound - Consensus of the DEGUM committee on breast ultrasound. Ultraschall in Med 2006 27 374-312
2. Buchberger W, Niehoff A, Obrist P et al. Clinically and mammographically occult breast lesions: detection and classification with high-resolution sonography. Semin Utrasound CT MR 2000 21 325-336
3. Kolb T M., Lichy J, Jeffrey H et al. Comparison of the performance of screening mammography, physical examination, and breast US and evaluation of factors that influence them: An analysis of 27825 patient evaluations. Radiology 2002 225 165-175
4. Chrystal P, Strano S D., Shcharanski S et al. Using sonography to screen women with mammographically dense breasts. AJR 2003 181 177-182 (Pubitemid 36741481)
5. Leconte I, Feger C, Galant C et al. Mammography and subsequent whole-breast sonography of nonpalpable breast cancers: the importance of radiologic breast density. AJR 2003 180 1675-1679 (Pubitemid 36687107)
6. Corsetti V, Houssami N, Ferrari A et al. Breast screening with ultrasound in women with mammography-negative dense breasts: Evidence on incremental cancer detection and false positives, and associated cost. Eur J Cancer 2008 44 539-544
7. Houssami N, Irwig L, Simpson J M. et al. Sydney breast imaging accuracy study: Comparative sensitivity and specificity of mammography and sonography in young women with symptoms. AJR 2003 180 935-940 (Pubitemid 36363028)
8. Schulz K D., Albert U S., (eds). Level-3-Guideline for early detection of breast carcinoma (Stufe-3-Leitlinie, Brustkrebsfrüherkennung). München Zuckschwert 2008
9. Kopans D B. Effectiveness of US breast cancer screening remains to be demonstrated (letter). Radiology 2003 227 606
10. Gordon P B. Ultrasound for breast cancer screening and staging. Radiol Clin North Am 2002 40 403-441
11. Nothacker M, Duda V, Hahn M et al. Early detection of breast cancer: benefits and risks of supplemental breast ultrasound in asymptomatic women with mammographically dense breast tissue. A systematic review. BMC cancer 2009 9 335
12. Ohta T, Okamotot K, Kanemaki Y et al. Use of ultrasonography as an alternative modality for first-line examination in detecting breast cancer in selected patients. Clin Breast Cancer 2007 7 624-626 (Pubitemid 47025820)
13. Berg W A., Blume J D., Cormack J B. et al. Combined screening with ultrasound and mammography vs. mammography alone in women at elevated risk of breast cancer. JAMA 2008 299 2151-2163 (Pubitemid 351679706)
14. Benson S R., Blue J, Judd K et al. Ultrasound is now better than mammography in detection of invasive breast cancer. Am J Surg 2004 188 381-385 (Pubitemid 39330540)
15. Berg W A., Gutierrez L, NessAiver M S. et al. Diagnostic accuracy of mammography, clinical examination, US, and MR imaging in preoperative assessment of breast cancer. Radiology 2004 233 830-849
16. Chan S W., Cheung P S., Chan S et al. Benefit of ultrasonography in the detection of clinically and mammographically occult breast cancer. World J Surg 2008 32 2593-2598
17. Madjar H, Becker S, Doubeck T et al. Impact of breast ultrasound screening in gynecological practice. Ultraschall in Med 2010 31 289-295
18. Lenz S. Breast ultrasound in office gynecology - ten years of experience. Ultraschall in Med 2011 32 S3-S7
19. BMU. RS II, 1-1602/14.6./09.11.2009.
20. American College of Radiology (ACR). ACR-BI-RADS® - Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS). Breast Imaging Atlas. 3rd ed. Reston (VA) America College of Radiology 2003
21. Moy L, Slanetz P J., Moore R et al. Specificity of mammography and US in the evaluation of a palpable abnormality: retrospective review. Radiology 2002 225 176-181
22. Heinig J, Witter R, Schmitz L et al. Accuracy of classification o breast ultrasound findings based on criteria used for BI-RADS. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2008 32 573-578
23. Fu C Y., Hsu H H., u J C. et al. Influence of age on PPV of sonographic BI-RADS categories 3, 4, and 5. Ultraschall in Med 2011 32 S8-S13
24. Eusoma guidelines for quality assurance in breast cancer screening and diagnosis. 4th edition. 2006
25. Graf O, Helbich T H., Hopf G et al. Probably benign breast masses at US: is follow-up an acceptable alternative to biopsy? Radiology 2007 244 87-93 (Pubitemid 46981961)