Literature DB >> 27277631

Breast US in patients with breast cancer presenting as only microcalcifications on mammography: can US differentiate ductal carcinoma in situ from invasive cancer?

Ji-Yeon Han1, Jin Hwa Lee2,3, Eun-Kyung Kim4, Suyoung Shin1,5, Myong Jin Kang1, Keun-Cheol Lee6, Kyung Jin Nam1.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To retrospectively review sonographic findings of breast cancers presenting as only microcalcifications on mammography and to evaluate factors essential for differentiating ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) from invasive cancers.
METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of 620 consecutive patients with confirmed breast cancer according to surgery performed between March 2008 and October 2011 at our institution. Of these, 53 lesions from 52 patients who had only microcalcifications without a mass or other associated findings on mammography were selected. Sonographic findings of microcalcification areas were analyzed and correlated with the histopathological findings.
RESULTS: Of the 53 lesions, 26 (49.18 %) were classified as invasive cancer and 27 (50.9 %) as DCIS. Ultrasonography (US) showed only echogenic calcifications in five (9.4 %), calcifications within hypoechoic parenchymal thickening in 14 (26.4 %), calcifications within ductal changes in three (5.7 %), and calcifications within a mass in 14 (26.4 %). Seventeen (32.1 %) lesions were not visible on US. Negative findings in US were more frequently observed for DCIS (n = 15, 55.6 %) than for invasive cancers (n = 2, 7.7 %) (p < 0.001). Masses (n = 11, 42.3 % of invasive cancer; n = 3, 11.1 % of DCIS; p = 0.01) were more frequently observed in invasive cancers than in DCIS.
CONCLUSIONS: US findings of breast cancers presenting as only mammographic microcalcifications were significantly different between DCIS and invasive cancers. Targeted US of microcalcifications might be helpful for predicting invasive cancers and for determining the clinical preoperative work-up, including axillary staging.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Breast neoplasms; Mammography; Microcalcification; Noninfiltrating intraductal carcinoma; Ultrasonography

Year:  2013        PMID: 27277631     DOI: 10.1007/s10396-013-0474-z

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Med Ultrason (2001)        ISSN: 1346-4523            Impact factor:   1.314


  18 in total

1.  US of mammographically detected clustered microcalcifications.

Authors:  W K Moon; J G Im; Y H Koh; D Y Noh; I A Park
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2000-12       Impact factor: 11.105

2.  Sonographic findings of high-grade and non-high-grade ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast.

Authors:  Ji-Sung Park; Young-Mi Park; Eun-Kyung Kim; Suk-Jung Kim; Sang-Suk Han; Sun-Joo Lee; Hyun-Sin In; Ji-Hwa Ryu
Journal:  J Ultrasound Med       Date:  2010-12       Impact factor: 2.153

3.  Breast US in patients who had microcalcifications with low concern of malignancy on screening mammography.

Authors:  Seok Seon Kang; Eun Young Ko; Boo-Kyung Han; Jung Hee Shin
Journal:  Eur J Radiol       Date:  2007-08-20       Impact factor: 3.528

4.  Sonographically guided biopsy of suspicious microcalcifications of the breast: a pilot study.

Authors:  Mary Scott Soo; Jay A Baker; Eric L Rosen; Thuy T Vo
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2002-04       Impact factor: 3.959

5.  Ductal carcinoma in situ: mammographic findings and clinical implications.

Authors:  D D Dershaw; A Abramson; D W Kinne
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1989-02       Impact factor: 11.105

6.  Ultrasound demonstration of mammographically detected microcalcifications.

Authors:  H Gufler; C H Buitrago-Téllez; H Madjar; K H Allmann; M Uhl; A Rohr-Reyes
Journal:  Acta Radiol       Date:  2000-05       Impact factor: 1.990

Review 7.  Ductal carcinoma in situ: the mammographer's perspective.

Authors:  P C Stomper; F R Margolin
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  1994-03       Impact factor: 3.959

8.  Diagnostic ultrasonography and mammography for invasive and noninvasive breast cancer in women aged 30 to 39 years.

Authors:  Tomo Osako; Kaoru Takahashi; Takuji Iwase; Kotaro Iijima; Yumi Miyagi; Seiichiro Nishimura; Keiichiro Tada; Masujiro Makita; Futoshi Akiyama; Goi Sakamoto; Fujio Kasumi
Journal:  Breast Cancer       Date:  2007       Impact factor: 4.239

Review 9.  Microinvasive breast cancer and the role of sentinel node biopsy: an institutional experience and review of the literature.

Authors:  Amber A Guth; Cecilia Mercado; Daniel F Roses; Farbod Darvishian; Baljit Singh; Joan F Cangiarella
Journal:  Breast J       Date:  2008 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 2.431

10.  The breast imaging reporting and data system: positive predictive value of mammographic features and final assessment categories.

Authors:  L Liberman; A F Abramson; F B Squires; J R Glassman; E A Morris; D D Dershaw
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  1998-07       Impact factor: 3.959

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.