Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Breast Imaging

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Oncoplastic and Reconstructive Breast Surgery

  • 2805 Accesses

Abstract

The incidence of breast cancer has increased all over the world, which can be a result of social-demographic changes and access to health care services. Despite the increase in the incidence of breast cancer, an increase in mortality rate in developed countries has not been observed. Mammography is currently the most important method in breast evaluation. Other diagnostic methods, such as ultrasonography, magnetic resonance imaging, scintigraphy, and PET–CT, are used as auxiliary methods in the diagnosis of breast cancer and they are chosen according to the characteristics of the lesion that will be evaluated. There are two different levels of approach for breast evaluation, and these have an influence on the choice of imaging methods: asymptomatic patient evaluation for breast cancer screening and symptomatic patient evaluation to diagnose either a benign or a malignant tumor. Indications and limits are described here to help surgeons in their decisions and surgical planning.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 149.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Veronesi U et al (2005) Breast cancer. Lancet 365:1727–1741

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Jemal A et al (2005) Cancer Statistics, 2005. CA Cancer J Clin 55:10–30

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Ries LAG, et al (1994) Cancer statistics review 1973–91: tables and graphs. National institutes of health publication, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda n94–2789

    Google Scholar 

  4. Kelsey JL (1990) Breast cancer epidemiology: summary and future directions. Epidemiology 131:984–986

    Google Scholar 

  5. INCA (2011) Estimativas da incidência e da mortalidade por câncer no Brasil. Disponível em: hppt://www.inca.gov.br/estimativa2011. Accessed 10 oct 2011

  6. American College of Radiology (2003) Breast imaging reporting and data system (BI-RADS), 4th edn. American College of Radiology, Reston

    Google Scholar 

  7. Chu KC, Smart CR, Taronev RE (1998) Analysis of breast cancer mortality and stage distribution by age for the health insurance plan clinical trial. J Natl Cancer Inst 80:1125–1132

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Andersson I, Janzon L (1997) Reduced breast cancer mortality in women under age 50: update results from the malmo mammographic screening program. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr 22:63–67

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Bjurstam N et al (1997) The Gothenburg breast screening trial: first results on mortality, incidence, and mode of detection for women ages 39–49 years at randomization. Cancer 80:2091–2099

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Brown D (2000) Death rates from breast cancer fall by a third. BMJ 321:849

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Frisell J et al (1997) Follow-up after 11 years: update of mortality results in the stockholm mammographic Screening Trial. Breast Cancer Res Treat 45:263–270

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Jackman VP (2002) Screening mammography: controversies and headlines. Radiology 225:323–326

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Miller AB et al (1992) Canadian national breast screening study I: breast cancer detection and death rates among women aged 40–49 years. Can Med Assoc J 147:1459–1476

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Miller AB et al (1992) Canadian national breast screening study II: breast cancer detection and death rates among women aged 50–59 years. Can Med Assoc J 147:1447–1488

    Google Scholar 

  15. Tabar L et al (1995) Efficacy of breast cancer screening by age: new results from the Swedish two-county trial. Cancer 75:2507–2517

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Liberman L (2004) Breast cancer screening with MRI: what are the data for patients at high risk? New Engl J Med 351:497–500

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Shapiro S (1977) Evidence on screening for breast cancer from a randomized trial. Cancer 39:2772

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Shapiro S, Strax P, Venet L et al (1982) Ten- to fourteen-year effect of screening on breast cancer mortality. J Natl Cancer Inst 69:349–355

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Shapiro S (1977) Evidence on screening for breast cancer from a randomized trial. Cancer 39:2772

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Crystal P et al (2003) Using sonography to screen women with mammographically dense breast. AJR 181:177–182

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Kolb TM, Lichy J, Newhouse JH (2002) Comparison of the performance of screening mammography, physical examination and breast US, and evaluation of factors that influence them: an analysis of 27,825 patients’ evaluations. Radiology 225:165–175

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Kriege R et al (2004) Efficacy of MRI and mammography for breast-cancer screening in women with a familial or genetic predisposition. New Engl J Med 351:425–437

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Warner E et al (2004) Surveillance of BRCA2 and BRCA2 mutation carriers with magnetic resonance imaging, ultrasound, mammography, and clinical breast examination. JAMA 292:1713–1725

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Kuhl CK et al (2005) Mammography, breast ultrasound, and magnetic resonance imaging for surveillance of women at high familiar risk for breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 23:8469–8476

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. BRASIL (2004) Ministério da Saúde. Instituto Nacional de Câncer. Coordenação de Prevenção e Vigilância. Controle do câncer de mama: documento de consenso. Rio de Janeiro, INCA/CONPREV

    Google Scholar 

  26. Moy L, Slanetz PJ, Moore R et al (2002) Specificity of mammography and US in the evaluation of a palpable abnormality: retrospective review. Radiology 225:176–181

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Sickles EA (1986) Nonpalpable, circumscribed, noncalcified solid breast masses: likelihood of malignancy based on lesion size and age of patients. Radiology 192:439–442

    Google Scholar 

  28. Stravos TM et al (1995) Solid breast nodules: use of sonography to distinguish between benign and malignant lesions. Radiology 196:123–134

    Google Scholar 

  29. Rahbar H et al (1999) Benign versus malignant solid breast masses: US differentiation. Radiology 213:889–894

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Hylton N (2005) Magnetic resonance imaging of the breast: opportunities to improve breast cancer management. J Clin Oncol 23:1678–1684

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Kuhl CK et al (1997) Healthy premenopausal breast parenchyma in dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging of the breast: normal contrast medium enhancement and cyclical-phase dependency. Radiology 203:137–144

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Muller-Schimpfle M et al (1997) Menstrual cycle and age: influence on parenchymal contrast medium enhancement in MR imaging of the breast. Radiology 203:145–149

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Nunes LW, Schnall MD, Orel SG et al (1997) Breast MR imaging interpretation model. Radiology 202:833–841

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Fischer U, Kopka L, Grabbe E (1999) Breast carcinoma: effect of preoperative contrast-enhanced MR imaging on the therapeutic approach. Radiology 213:881–888

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Kuhl CK et al (1999) Dynamic breast MR imaging: are signal intensity time course data useful for differential diagnosis of enhancing lesions? Radiology 211:101–110

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Warner et al (2001) Comparison of breast magnetic resonance imaging, mammography, and ultrasound for surveillance of women at high risk for hereditary breast cancer. J Clinl Oncol 19:3524–3531

    Google Scholar 

  37. Kriege M, Brekelmans CT, Boetes C et al (2004) Magnetic resonance imaging screening study group. Efficacy of MRI and mammography for breast-cancer screening in women with a familial or genetic predisposition. N Engl J Med 351:427–437

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Kuhl CK, Schrading S, Leutner CC et al (2005) Mammography, breast ultrasound, and magnetic resonance imaging for surveillance of women at high familial risk for breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 23:8469–8476

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Leach MO, Boggis CR, Dixon AK et al (2005) Screening with magnetic resonance imaging and mammography of a UK population at high familial risk of breast cancer: a prospective multicentre cohort study (MARIBS). Lancet 365:1769–1778

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Warner E, Plewes DB, Hill KA et al (2004) Surveillance of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers with magnetic resonance imaging, ultrasound, mammography, and clinical breast examination. JAMA 292:1317–1325

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. Sardanelli F, Podo F, D’Agnolo G et al (2007) High breast cancer risk Italian trial. Multicenter comparative multimodality surveillance of women at genetic-familial high risk for breast cancer (HIBCRIT study): interim results. Radiology 242:698–715

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Lehman CD, Isaacs C, Schnall MD et al (2007) Cancer yield of mammography, MR, and US in high-risk women: prospective multi-institution breast cancer screening study. Radiology 244:381–388

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Kuhl C, Weigel S, Schrading S et al (2010) Prospective multicenter cohort study to refine management recommendations for women at elevated familial risk of breast cancer: the EVA Trial. J Clin Oncol 20:1450–1457

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Warner E, Yaffe M, Andrews KS et al (2007) American cancer society guidelines for breast screening with MRI as an adjunct to mammography. CA Cancer J Clin 57:75–89

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Lee CH, Dershaw D, Kopens D et al (2010) Breast cancer screening with imaging: recommendations from the Society of Breast Imaging and the ACR on the use of mammography, breast MRI, breast ultrasound, and other technologies for the detection of clinically occult breast cancer. J Am Coll Radiol 7:18–27

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Stomper PC et al (1999) Breast MRI in the evaluation of patients with occult primary breast carcinoma. Breast J 5:230–234

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Schorn C et al (1999) MRI of the breast in patients with metastatic disease of unknown primary. Eur Radiol 9:470–473

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  48. Morris E et al (1997) MR imaging of the breast in patients with occult primary breast carcinoma. Radiology 205:437–440

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  49. Orel S et al (1999) Breast MR imaging in patients with axillary node metastases and unknown primary malignancy. Radiology 212:543–549

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  50. Fischer U et al (2004) The influence of preoperative MRI of the breasts on recurrence rate in patients with breast cancer. Eur Radiol 10:1725–1731

    Google Scholar 

  51. Kuhl CK, Schmiedel A, Morakkabati N et al (2002) Breast MR imaging of the asymptomatic contralateral breast in the work up or follow-up of patients with unilateral breast cancer. Radiology 217–268

    Google Scholar 

  52. Liberman L, Moris EA, Kim CM et al (2003) MR imaging findings in the contralateral breast in women with recently diagnosed breast cancer. AJR 180:333–341

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Turnbull L, Brown S, Harvey I et al (2010) Comparative effectiveness of MRI in breast cancer (COMICE) trial: a randomized controlled trial. Lancet 375:563–571

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Tan MP (2009) An algorithm for the integration of breast magnetic resonance imaging into clinical practice. Am J Surg 197:691–694

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Sardanelli F et al (2010) Magnetic resonance imaging of the breast: recommendations from the EUSOMA working group. Eur J Cancer 46:1296–1316

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Pickles M et al (2005) Role of dynamic contrast enhanced MRI in monitoring early response of locally advanced breast cancer to neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Breast Cancer Res Treat 91:01–10

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  57. Rieber A, Brambs HJ, Gabelmann A et al (2002) Breast MRI for monitoring response of primary breast cancer to neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Eur Radiolgy 12:1711–1719

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  58. Martincich L et al (2004) Monitoring response to primary chemotherapy in breast cancer using dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging. Breast Cancer Res Treat 83:67–76

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Morrogh M, Morris EA, Liberman L et al (2007) The predictive value of ductography and magnetic resonance imaging in the management of nipple discharge. Ann Surg Oncol 14:3369–3378

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Dershaw D (2002) Breast imaging and the conservative treatment of breast cancer. Radiol Clin Am 40:501–516

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. Berg WA, Nguyen TK, Middleton MS, Soo MS et al (2002) MR imaging of extra-capsular silicon from breast implant: diagnostic pitfalls. AJR 178:465–472

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Kuhl C, Schrading S, Bieling HB et al (2007) MRI for diagnosis of pure ductal carcinoma in situ: a prospective observational study. Lancet 370:485–492

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. Cher DJ, Conwell JA, Mandel JS (2001) MRI for detecting silicone breast implant rupture: Meta-analysis and implications. Ann Plast Surg 47:367–380

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  64. Hölmich LH et al (2005) The diagnosis of breast-implant rupture: Clinical findings compared with findings at magnetic resonance imaging. An Plastic Surg 54:583–589

    Article  Google Scholar 

  65. Mc Carthy MC, Pusic AL, Kerrigan CL. Silicon breast implants and magnetic resonance imaging screening for rupture: do US Food and Drug Administration recommendations reflect an evidence-based practice approach to patient care? Plast Reconstr Surg 2008; 121:1127-1134

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Breast Radiology, DAPI Clinic, Curitiba, Brazil

    Linei Urban

  2. Oncoplastic and Reconstructive Division, Breast Unit, Hospital Nossa Senhora das Graças, Positivo University, Curitiba, Brazil

    Cicero Urban

Authors
  1. Linei Urban
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Cicero Urban
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Cicero Urban .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. , BreastUnit, Hospital Nossa Senhora das Gracas, Rua Padre Agostinho 913 ap 51, Curitiba, 80430050, Brazil

    Cicero Urban

  2. , Plastic and Reconstructive Division, European Institute of Oncology, Via Ripamonti, 435, Milan, 20100, Italy

    Mario Rietjens

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2013 Springer-Verlag Italia

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Urban, L., Urban, C. (2013). Breast Imaging. In: Urban, C., Rietjens, M. (eds) Oncoplastic and Reconstructive Breast Surgery. Springer, Milano. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-88-470-2652-0_3

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-88-470-2652-0_3

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Milano

  • Print ISBN: 978-88-470-2651-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-88-470-2652-0

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation