Literature DB >> 22508447

Sonographic features of histopathologically benign solid breast lesions that have been classified as BI-RADS 4 on sonography.

Fusun Taskin1, Kutsi Koseoglu, Serdar Ozbas, Muhan Erkus, Can Karaman.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To describe the sonographic (US) features associated with ultrasonography BI-RADS category 4 lesions that have a benign histopathological outcome.
METHODS: One hundred seventy-two histopathologically proven benign lesions in 169 patients, which had been classified as BI-RADS category 4 with ultrasonography, were retrospectively evaluated. Ultrasonography and histopathology findings were analyzed. The frequency of sonographic findings according to the histopathological diagnosis was determined.
RESULTS: Among the 172 lesions, there were 66 (38%) fibroadenomas, 31 (18%) sclerosing adenoses, 24 (14%) fibrocystic changes, 16 (9%) mastitis/inflammations, 9 (5.5%) intraductal papillomas, 8 (5%) focal fibroses, 4 (2.5%) atypical ductal hyperplasias, 4 (2.5%) fat necroses, 2 (1%) phyllodes tumors, 1 (0.5%) tubular adenomas, 1 (0.5%) epidermal inclusion cysts, and 6 (3.5%) "other benign lesions." The most frequent sonographic findings were heterogeneity, indistinct margin, microlobulation in fibroadenomas; heterogeneity, irregular-indefinite margin, and antiparallel orientation in sclerosing adenosis; heterogeneity, microlobulation, and acoustic shadowing in fibrocystic changes.
CONCLUSIONS: BI-RADS category 4 lesions demonstrate more than one suspicious ultrasonography feature, and biopsy is necessary to diagnose malignancy captured in 33% of lesions in this study. At this time, any lesion with more than one suspicious BI-RADS US feature cannot avoid a diagnostic biopsy.
Copyright © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22508447     DOI: 10.1002/jcu.21923

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Ultrasound        ISSN: 0091-2751            Impact factor:   0.910


  7 in total

1.  Epidermal inclusion cyst of the breast: A literature review.

Authors:  Annalisa Paliotta; Paolo Sapienza; Giuseppe D'Ermo; Gennaro Cerone; Giuseppe Pedullà; Daniele Crocetti; Antonietta DE Gori; Giorgio DE Toma
Journal:  Oncol Lett       Date:  2015-11-24       Impact factor: 2.967

2.  Sonographic Evaluation of Incidental Synchronous Masses in Patients with Breast Cancer: Clinical Significance and Diagnostic Workup.

Authors:  Sara Rehman; Imran Khalid Niazi; Muhammad Atif Naveed; Ainy Javaid; Bushra Rehman
Journal:  Eur J Breast Health       Date:  2020-12-24

3.  Breast contrast-enhanced ultrasound: is a scoring system feasible? A preliminary study in China.

Authors:  Xiaoyun Xiao; Bing Ou; Haiyun Yang; Huan Wu; Baoming Luo
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-08-18       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 4.  Are Irregular Hypoechoic Breast Masses on Ultrasound Always Malignancies?: A Pictorial Essay.

Authors:  Youe Ree Kim; Hun Soo Kim; Hye-Won Kim
Journal:  Korean J Radiol       Date:  2015-10-26       Impact factor: 3.500

5.  Sonographic features that can be used to differentiate between small triple-negative breast cancer and fibroadenoma.

Authors:  Ga Young Yoon; Joo Hee Cha; Hak Hee Kim; Hee Jung Shin; Eun Young Chae; Woo Jung Choi
Journal:  Ultrasonography       Date:  2017-08-04

Review 6.  Standards of the Polish Ultrasound Society - update. Sonomammography examination.

Authors:  Wiesław Jakubowski; Katarzyna Dobruch-Sobczak; Bartosz Migda
Journal:  J Ultrason       Date:  2012-09-30

7.  A Low-Cost, Low-Skill Model for Efficient Breast Cancer Screening in Low Resource Rural Settings of a Developing Country.

Authors:  Sachin Khanduri; Mriganki Chaudhary; Tushar Sabharwal; Tarim Usmani; Aakshit Goyal; Shobha Khanduri; Saurav Bhagat; Fahimul Huda; Santosh Yadav; Gaurav Katyal
Journal:  Cureus       Date:  2017-08-16
  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.