Literature DB >> 18647850

BI-RADS 3, 4, and 5 lesions: value of US in management--follow-up and outcome.

Sughra Raza1, Sona A Chikarmane, Sarah S Neilsen, Lisa M Zorn, Robyn L Birdwell.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To evaluate the use, final outcome, and positive biopsy rate of American College of Radiology ultrasonographic (US) Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) categories 3, 4, and 5 recommended for breast masses.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: At US, consecutive masses, palpable and nonpalpable, categorized as BI-RADS 3, 4, and 5 between January 1, 2003, and December 31, 2004, were retrospectively reviewed with institutional review board approval. Medical records provided imaging and histologic information.
RESULTS: After patients lost to follow-up were excluded, the study population was 767 patients with 926 masses (476 palpable, 450 nonpalpable). In BI-RADS 3 masses (n = 356), imaging follow-up of 252 masses documented stability for 6-24 months. Aspiration of 24 masses revealed cysts. Biopsy in 80 masses revealed three malignancies, all of which were diagnosed within 6 months of the index examination, were smaller than 1 cm, and were node negative (negative predictive value = 99.2%). In BI-RADS 4 masses (n = 524), aspiration results indicated 35 cysts; biopsy in 455 revealed 85 malignancies (positive predictive value [PPV] = 16.2%). Imaging follow-up only in 34 revealed no cancers 2 and more years later. Among BI-RADS 5 masses (n = 46), 43 were malignant and three benign (PPV = 93.4%).
CONCLUSION: Inconsistent use of BI-RADS category 3 occurred in 14.0% of cases when biopsy was recommended. Although biopsy was performed in almost equal numbers of palpable and nonpalpable masses, only 11% of palpable BI-RADS 3 and 4 masses were malignant, as compared with 22% of nonpalpable masses. Strict adherence to lexicon characteristics of probably benign lesions should improve specificity. RSNA, 2008

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18647850     DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2483071786

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Radiology        ISSN: 0033-8419            Impact factor:   11.105


  40 in total

1.  Molecular imaging using light-absorbing imaging agents and a clinical optical breast imaging system--a phantom study.

Authors:  Stephanie M W Y van de Ven; Niculae Mincu; Jean Brunette; Guobin Ma; Mario Khayat; Debra M Ikeda; Sanjiv S Gambhir
Journal:  Mol Imaging Biol       Date:  2011-04       Impact factor: 3.488

2.  Role of multi-mode ultrasound in the diagnosis of level 4 BI-RADS breast lesions and Logistic regression model.

Authors:  Xiaoling Leng; Guofu Huang; Lanhui Yao; Fucheng Ma
Journal:  Int J Clin Exp Med       Date:  2015-09-15

3.  Lexicon for standardized interpretation of gamma camera molecular breast imaging: observer agreement and diagnostic accuracy.

Authors:  Amy Lynn Conners; Carrie B Hruska; Cindy L Tortorelli; Robert W Maxwell; Deborah J Rhodes; Judy C Boughey; Wendie A Berg
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2012-06       Impact factor: 9.236

4.  Can unenhanced breast MRI be used to decrease negative biopsy rates?

Authors:  Sibel Kul; Şükrü Oğuz; İlker Eyüboğlu; Özlem Kömürcüoğlu
Journal:  Diagn Interv Radiol       Date:  2015 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 2.630

5.  Growing BI-RADS category 3 lesions on follow-up breast ultrasound: malignancy rates and worrisome features.

Authors:  Su Min Ha; Eun Young Chae; Joo Hee Cha; Hee Jung Shin; Woo Jung Choi; Hak Hee Kim
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2018-04-25       Impact factor: 3.039

6.  Does patient age affect the PPV3 of ACR BI-RADS Ultrasound categories 4 and 5 in the diagnostic setting?

Authors:  Yue Hu; Yaping Yang; Ran Gu; Liang Jin; Shiyu Shen; Fengtao Liu; Hongli Wang; Jingsi Mei; Xiaofang Jiang; Qiang Liu; Fengxi Su
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2018-01-04       Impact factor: 5.315

7.  Diagnostic value of commercially available shear-wave elastography for breast cancers: integration into BI-RADS classification with subcategories of category 4.

Authors:  Ji Hyun Youk; Hye Mi Gweon; Eun Ju Son; Kyung Hwa Han; Jeong-Ah Kim
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2013-05-08       Impact factor: 5.315

8.  Additional diagnostic value of MRI in patients with suspicious breast lesions based on ultrasound.

Authors:  O Sarica; F Uluc
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2014-07-01       Impact factor: 3.039

9.  Nonpalpable BI-RADS 4 breast lesions: sonographic findings and pathology correlation.

Authors:  Eda Elverici; Ayşe Nurdan Barça; Hafize Aktaş; Arzu Özsoy; Betül Zengin; Mehtap Çavuşoğlu; Levent Araz
Journal:  Diagn Interv Radiol       Date:  2015 May-Jun       Impact factor: 2.630

10.  Multiple bilateral circumscribed masses at screening breast US: consider annual follow-up.

Authors:  Wendie A Berg; Zheng Zhang; Jean B Cormack; Ellen B Mendelson
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2013-04-24       Impact factor: 11.105

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.