Histologic work-up of non-palpable breast lesions classified as probably benign at initial mammography and/or ultrasound (BI-RADS category 3)

European Journal of Radiology

Volumn 82, Issue 3, 2013, Pages 398-403

  Gruber, R ^a   Jaromi, S ^a,b   Rudas, M ^a   Pfarl, G ^b   Riedl, C C ^a   Flory D ^a   Graf, O ^a   Sickles, E A ^c   Helbich, T H ^a  

^a MEDICAL UNIVERSITY OF VIENNA   (Austria)

^b Social Medical Center Vienna East   (Austria)

^c UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Breast neoplasms; Cancer screening; Diagnosis; Needle breast biopsy

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; ATYPICAL DUCTAL HYPERPLASIA; BREAST CALCIFICATION; BREAST CANCER; BREAST CARCINOMA; BREAST TUMOR; CANCER SURGERY; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC VALUE; DIFFERENTIAL DIAGNOSIS; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; HISTOPATHOLOGY; HUMAN; IMAGE ANALYSIS; INTRADUCTAL CARCINOMA; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MAMMOGRAPHY; NEEDLE BIOPSY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; TUMOR BIOPSY; ULTRASOUND;

ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; AUSTRIA; BIOPSY, NEEDLE; BREAST NEOPLASMS; FEMALE; HUMANS; INCIDENCE; MALE; MAMMOGRAPHY; MIDDLE AGED; PALPATION; PREVALENCE; PROGNOSIS; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; RISK FACTORS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84873919891     PISSN: 0720048X     EISSN: 18727727     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2012.02.004     Document Type: Article

References (52)

1. M.A. Helvie, D.R. Pennes, M. Rebner, and D.D. Adler Mammographic follow-up of low-suspicion lesions: compliance rate and diagnostic yield Radiology 178 1991 155 158
2. J.W. Leung, and E.A. Sickles The probably benign assessment Radiol Clin North Am 45 2007 773 789 vi
3. E.A. Sickles Breast calcifications: mammographic evaluation Radiology 160 1986 289 293
4. E.A. Sickles Combining spot-compression and other special views to maximize mammographic information Radiology 173 1989 571
5. E.A. Sickles Breast masses: mammographic evaluation Radiology 173 1989 297 303
6. E.A. Sickles Periodic mammographic follow-up of probably benign lesions: results in 3184 consecutive cases Radiology 179 1991 463 468
7. E.A. Sickles Management of probably benign lesions of the breast Radiology 193 1994 582 583
8. E.A. Sickles Nonpalpable circumscribed, noncalcified solid breast masses: likelihood of malignancy based on lesion size and age of patient Radiology 192 1994 439 442
9. E.A. Sickles Management of probably benign breast lesions Radiol Clin North Am 33 1995 1123 1130
10. E.A. Sickles Probably benign breast lesions: when should follow-up be recommended and what is the optimal follow-up protocol? Radiology 213 1999 11 14
11. E.A. Sickles, S.H. Ominsky, R.A. Sollitto, H.B. Galvin, and D.L. Monticciolo Medical audit of a rapid-throughput mammography screening practice: methodology and results of 27,114 examinations Radiology 175 1990 323 327
12. E.A. Sickles, and S.H. Parker Appropriate role of core breast biopsy in the management of probably benign lesions Radiology 188 1993 315
13. A.T. Stavros, D. Thickman, C.L. Rapp, M.A. Dennis, S.H. Parker, and G.A. Sisney Solid breast nodules: use of sonography to distinguish between benign and malignant lesions Radiology 196 1995 123 134
14. X. Varas, F. Leborgne, and J.H. Leborgne Nonpalpable, probably benign lesions: role of follow-up mammography Radiology 184 1992 409 414
15. X. Varas, J.H. Leborgne, F. Leborgne, J. Mezzera, and S. Jaumandreu Revisiting the mammographic follow-up of BI-RADS category 3 lesions AJR Am J Roentgenol 179 2002 691 695
16. I. Vizcaino, L. Gadea, and L. Andreo Short-term follow-up results in 795 nonpalpable probably benign lesions detected at screening mammography Radiology 219 2001 475 483
17. S. Yasmeen, P.S. Romano, and M. Pettinger Frequency and predictive value of a mammographic recommendation for short-interval follow-up J Natl Cancer Inst 95 2003 429 436
18. J.C. de Waal Periodic mammographic follow-up of probably benign lesions Radiology 181 1991 608
19. L.E. Duijm, J.O. Zaat, and G.L. Guit Nonpalpable, probably benign breast lesions in general practice: the role of follow-up mammography Br J Gen Pract 48 1998 1421 1423
20. O. Graf, T.H. Helbich, and M.H. Fuchsjaeger Follow-up of palpable circumscribed noncalcified solid breast masses at mammography and US: can biopsy be averted? Radiology 233 2004 850 856
21. F.M. Hall Follow-up as an alternative to biopsy for mammographically detected lesions interpreted as probably benign Radiology 173 1989 284 285
22. F.M. Hall Follow-up of probably benign breast lesions Radiology 217 2000 303 305
23. F.I. Jackson Acceptability of periodic follow-up as an alternative to biopsy for mammographically detected lesions interpreted as probably benign Radiology 173 1989 580 581
24. K.K. Lindfors, J. O'Connor, C.R. Acredolo, and S.E. Liston Short-interval follow-up mammography versus immediate core biopsy of benign breast lesions: assessment of patient stress AJR Am J Roentgenol 171 1998 55 58
25. R.J. Brenner, and E.A. Sickles Surveillance mammography and stereotactic core breast biopsy for probably benign lesions: a cost comparison analysis Acad Radiol 4 1997 419 425
26. D. Cyrlak Induced costs of low-cost screening mammography Radiology 168 1988 661 663
27. R. Gruber, R. Bernt, and T.H. Helbich Cost-effectiveness of percutaneous core needle breast biopsy (CNBB) versus open surgical biopsy (OSB) of nonpalpable breast lesions: metaanalysis and cost evaluation for German-speaking countries Rofo 180 2008 134 142
28. R. Gruber, E. Walter, and T.H. Helbich Impact of stereotactic 11-g vacuum-assisted breast biopsy on cost of diagnosis in Austria Eur J Radiol 2009
29. R. Gruber, E. Walter, and T.H. Helbich Cost comparison between ultrasound-guided 14-g large core breast biopsy and open surgical biopsy: an analysis for Austria Eur J Radiol 2009
30. M. Wallis, A. Tardivon, T. Helbich, and I. Schreer Guidelines from the European Society of Breast Imaging for diagnostic interventional breast procedures Eur Radiol 17 2007 581 588
31. D.B. Kopans Caution on core Radiology 193 1994 325 326 [discussion 326-328]
32. J.W. Leung, and E.A. Sickles Developing asymmetry identified on mammography: correlation with imaging outcome and pathologic findings AJR Am J Roentgenol 188 2007 667 675
33. V. Reston Breast imaging reporting and data system-mammography (BI-RADS mammography) 4th ed. 2003 Radiology ACo
34. V. Reston Breast imaging reporting and data system ultrasound (BI-RADS US) 1st ed. 2003 Radiology ACo
35. E.B. Mendelson Problem-solving ultrasound Radiol Clin North Am 42 2004 909 918 vii
36. G. Rahbar, A.C. Sie, and G.C. Hansen Benign versus malignant solid breast masses: US differentiation Radiology 213 1999 889 894
37. E.L. Rosen, J.A. Baker, and M.S. Soo Malignant lesions initially subjected to short-term mammographic follow-up Radiology 223 2002 221 228
38. O. Graf, T.H. Helbich, and M.H. Fuchsjager Ultrasound follow-up of palpable solid, probably benign breast lesions (BI-RADS category III) Rofo 176 2004 1251 1256
39. G. Pfarl, and T.H. Helbich Breast imaging reporting and data system (BI-RADS) - German version Rofo 174 2002 921 926
40. T.H. Helbich, W. Matzek, and M.H. Fuchsjager Stereotactic and ultrasound-guided breast biopsy Eur Radiol 14 2004 383 393
41. F.M. Lomoschitz, T.H. Helbich, and M. Rudas Stereotactic 11-gauge vacuum-assisted breast biopsy: influence of number of specimens on diagnostic accuracy Radiology 232 2004 897 903
42. R.J. Jackman, F. Burbank, and S.H. Parker Atypical ductal hyperplasia diagnosed at stereotactic breast biopsy: improved reliability with 14-gauge, directional, vacuum-assisted biopsy Radiology 204 1997 485 488
43. R.J. Jackman, K.W. Nowels, M.J. Shepard, S.I. Finkelstein, and F.A. Marzoni Jr. Stereotaxic large-core needle biopsy of 450 nonpalpable breast lesions with surgical correlation in lesions with cancer or atypical hyperplasia Radiology 193 1994 91 95
44. L. Liberman, and dissertation. Centennial Percutaneous imaging-guided core breast biopsy: state of the art at the millennium AJR Am J Roentgenol 174 2000 1191 1199
45. L. Liberman, M.A. Cohen, D.D. Dershaw, A.F. Abramson, L.E. Hann, and P.P. Rosen Atypical ductal hyperplasia diagnosed at stereotaxic core biopsy of breast lesions: an indication for surgical biopsy AJR Am J Roentgenol 164 1995 1111 1113
46. L. Liberman, C.A. Gougoutas, and M.F. Zakowski Calcifications highly suggestive of malignancy: comparison of breast biopsy methods AJR Am J Roentgenol 177 2001 165 172
47. M. Memarsadeghi, G. Pfarl, C. Riedl, T. Wagner, M. Rudas, and T.H. Helbich [Value of 14-gauge ultrasound-guided large-core needle biopsy of breast lesions: own results in comparison with the literature] Rofo 175 2003 374 380
48. G. Pfarl, T.H. Helbich, and C.C. Riedl Stereotactic 11-gauge vacuum-assisted breast biopsy: a validation study AJR Am J Roentgenol 179 2002 1503 1507
49. E.B. Wilson Statistical inference Science 63 1926 289 296
50. O. Graf, T.H. Helbich, G. Hopf, C. Graf, and E.A. Sickles Probably benign breast masses at US: is follow-up an acceptable alternative to biopsy? Radiology 244 2007 87 93
51. J.W. Leung, and E.A. Sickles Multiple bilateral masses detected on screening mammography: assessment of need for recall imaging AJR Am J Roentgenol 175 2000 23 29
52. S.P. Poplack, A.N. Tosteson, M.R. Grove, W.A. Wells, and P.A. Carney Mammography in 53,803 women from the New Hampshire mammography network Radiology 217 2000 832 840