Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Bildgebende Diagnostik des Mammakarzinoms

Breast cancer imaging

  • CME Weiterbildung •Zertifizierte Fortbildung
  • Published:
Der Radiologe Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Zusammenfassung

Die Fortschritte bei den bildgebenden Verfahren der weiblichen Brust haben in den letzten Jahren die Diagnostik, die Therapie und die Prognose des Mammakarzinoms erheblich beeinflusst. Die Früherkennungsmammographie in traditioneller oder digitaler Technik gilt heute als der „Goldstandard“ für die frühzeitige Detektion von Brustkrebs. Weitere Modalitäten wie die Mammasonographie und die kontrastmittelgestützte MR-Mammographie spielen bei der bildgebenden Diagnostik, im Staging sowie in der Nachsorge des Mammakarzinoms eine wichtige Rolle. Die perkutane Nadelbiopsie stellt eine schnellere, weniger invasive und kostengünstigere Methode dar als die diagnostische Exzision für die histologische Sicherung der Diagnose. Neue Modalitäten wie Tomosynthese der Brust, kontrastverstärkte Mammographie und Positronenemissionstomographie erheben den Anspruch, zu einer weiteren Verbesserung der Bildgebung beizutragen. Weitere Studien sind notwendig, um diese neuen Methoden an die klinischen Bedürfnisse zu adaptieren und ihren Stellenwert im klinischen Alltag zu bewerten.

Abstract

Advances in female breast imaging have substantially influenced the diagnosis, therapy, and prognosis of breast cancer in the past few years. Mammography using conventional or digital technique is considered the gold standard for the early detection of breast cancer. Other modalities such as breast ultrasound and contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging of the breast play an important role in diagnostic imaging, staging, and follow-up of breast cancer. Percutaneous needle biopsy is a faster, less invasive, and more cost-effective method than surgical biopsy for verifying the histological diagnosis. New methods such as breast tomosynthesis, contrast-enhanced mammography, and positron emission tomography promise to further improve breast imaging. Further studies are mandatory to adapt these new methods to clinical needs and to evaluate their performance in clinical practice.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Abb. 1
Abb. 2
Abb. 3
Abb. 4
Abb. 5

Literatur

  1. Armstrong K, Moye E, Williams S et al. (2007) Screening mammography in women 40 to 49 years of age: a systematic review for the American College of Physicians. Ann Intern Med 146: 516–526

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Avril N, Rose CA, Schelling M et al. (2000) Breast imaging with positron emission tomography and fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose: use and limitations. J Clin Oncol 18: 3495–3502

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Barlow WE, Lehman CD, Zheng Y et al. (2002) Performance of diagnostic mammography for women with signs or symptoms of breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 94: 1151–1159

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Bassett LW, Kimme-Smith C (1991) Breast sonography. AJR Am J Roentgenol 156: 449–455

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Bassett LW, Ysrael M, Gold RH et al. (1991) Usefulness of mammography and sonography in women less than 35 years of age. Radiology 180: 831–835

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Bedrosian I, Mick R, Orel SG et al. (2003) Changes in the surgical management of patients with breast carcinoma based on preoperative magnetic resonance imaging. Cancer 98: 468–473

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Delorme S (2004) Mammakarzinom. Sonographie und Magnetresonanzmammographie. Radiologe 44: 621–637

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Eltahir A, Jibril JA, Squair J et al. (1999) The accuracy of „one-stop“ diagnosis for 1,110 patients presenting to a symptomatic breast clinic. J R Coll Surg Edinb 44: 226–230

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Fischer U, Helbich T (2006) ACR BI-RADS: Illustrierte Anleitung zur einheitlichen Befunderstellung von Mammographie, Mammasonographie und MR Mammographie. Thieme, Stuttgart New York

  10. 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 

  11. Gennaro G, di Maggio C (2006) Dose comparison between screen/film and full-field digital mammography. Eur Radiol 16: 2559–2566

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Gur D (2007) Tomosynthesis: potential clinical role in breast imaging. AJR Am J Roentgenol 189: 614–615

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Helbich TH, Stadler A, Wolf G (1999) Staging des Mammakarzinoms. Wertigkeit bildgebender Verfahren. Radiologe 39: 546–554

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Jong RA, Yaffe MJ, Skarpathiotakis M et al. (2003) Contrast-enhanced digital mammography: initial clinical experience. Radiology 228: 842–850

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Kreienberg R, Kopp I, Lorenz W et al. (2004) Diagnostik, Therapie und Nachsorge des Mammakarzinoms der Frau – Eine nationale S3-Leitlinie. Deutsche Krebsgesellschaft e.V., Informationszentrum für Standards in der Onkologie (ISTO), Frankfurt

  16. Kriege M, Brekelmans CT, Obdeijn IM et al. (2006) Factors affecting sensitivity and specificity of screening mammography and MRI in women with an inherited risk for breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat 100: 109–119

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Kuhl C (2007) The current status of breast MR imaging. Part I. Choice of technique, image interpretation, diagnostic accuracy, and transfer to clinical practice. Radiology 244: 356–378

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Kuhl CK (2007) Current status of breast MR imaging. Part 2. Clinical applications. Radiology 244: 672–691

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Kuhl CK, Schrading S, Weigel S et al. (2005) Die „EVA“-Studie: Evaluierung der Leistungsfähigkeit diagnostischer Verfahren (Mammographie, Sonographie, MRT) zur sekundären und tertiären Prävention des familiären Mammakarzinoms – Zwischenergebnisse nach der ersten Hälfte der Förderungsperiode. Fortschr Roentgenstr 177: 818–827

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Kuhl CK, 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 

  21. Lehman CD, Gatsonis C, Kuhl CK et al. (2007) MRI evaluation of the contralateral breast in women with recently diagnosed breast cancer. N Engl J Med 356: 1295–1303

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Lewin JM, Isaacs PK, Vance V et al. (2003) Dual-energy contrast-enhanced digital subtraction mammography: feasibility. Radiology 229: 261–268

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Liberman L (2000) Centennial dissertation. Percutaneous imaging-guided core breast biopsy: state of the art at the millennium. AJR Am J Roentgenol 174: 1191–1199

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Liberman L (2002) Percutaneous image-guided core breast biopsy. Radiol Clin North Am 40: 483–500

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Liberman L, Morris EA, Dershaw DD et al. (2003) MR imaging of the ipsilateral breast in women with percutaneously proven breast cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol 180: 901–910

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Liberman L, Morris EA, Kim CM et al. (2003) MR imaging findings in the contralateral breast of women with recently diagnosed breast cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol 180: 333–341

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Madjar H, Rickard M, Jellins J et al. (1999) IBUS guidelines for the ultrasonic examination of the breast. IBUS International Faculty. International Breast Ultrasound School. Eur J Ultrasound 9: 99–102

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Morris EA, Liberman L, Ballon DJ et al. (2003) MRI of occult breast carcinoma in a high-risk population. AJR Am J Roentgenol 181: 619–626

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Page DL, Dupont WD, Rogers LW et al. (1982) Intraductal carcinoma of the breast: follow-up after biopsy only. Cancer 49: 751–758

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Park JM, Franken EA Jr, Garg M et al. (2007) Breast tomosynthesis: present considerations and future applications. Radiographics [Suppl 1] 27: S231–240

  31. Parker SH, Klaus AJ, McWey PJ et al. (2001) Sonographically guided directional vacuum-assisted breast biopsy using a handheld device. AJR Am J Roentgenol 177: 405–408

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Pediconi F, Catalano C, Roselli A et al. (2007) Contrast-enhanced MR mammography for evaluation of the contralateral breast in patients with diagnosed unilateral breast cancer or high-risk lesions. Radiology 243: 670–680

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Perlet C, Heywang-Kobrunner SH, Heinig A et al. (2006) Magnetic resonance-guided, vacuum-assisted breast biopsy: results from a European multicenter study of 538 lesions. Cancer 106: 982–990

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Pfarl G, Helbich TH, Riedl CC et al. (2002) Stereotaktische Nadelbiopsie der Brust: Diagnosesicherheit verschiedener Biopsie-Systeme und Nadelkaliber. Fortschr Roentgenstr 174: 614–619

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Pfarl G, Helbich TH, Riedl CC et al. (2002) Stereotactic 11-gauge vacuum-assisted breast biopsy: a validation study. AJR Am J Roentgenol 179: 1503–1507

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Pisano ED, Gatsonis C, Hendrick E et al. (2005) Diagnostic performance of digital versus film mammography for breast-cancer screening. N Engl J Med 353: 1773–1783

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Pisano ED, Hendrick RE, Yaffe MJ et al. (2008) Diagnostic accuracy of digital versus film mammography: exploratory analysis of selected population subgroups in DMIST. Radiology 246: 376–383

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Rosen PP, Kosloff C, Lieberman PH et al. (1978) Lobular carcinoma in situ of the breast. Detailed analysis of 99 patients with average follow-up of 24 years. Am J Surg Pathol 2: 225–251

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Rosen EL, Turkington TG, Soo MS et al. (2005) Detection of primary breast carcinoma with a dedicated, large-field-of-view FDG PET mammography device: initial experience. Radiology 234: 527–534

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Schorn C, Fischer U, Luftner-Nagel S 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 

  41. Schulz-Wendtland R. (2007) Mammasonographie: Wellness – IGEL. Fortschr Röntgenstr 179: S1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Schulz-Wendtland R, Becker N, Bock K et al. (2007) Mammographiescreening. Radiologe 47: 359–369

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  43. Seely JM, Nguyen ET, Jaffey J (2007) Breast MRI in the evaluation of locally recurrent or new breast cancer in the postoperative patient: correlation of morphology and enhancement features with the BI-RADS category. Acta Radiol 28: 1–8

    Google Scholar 

  44. Smith RA, Saslow D, Sawyer KA et al. (2003) American Cancer Society guidelines for breast cancer screening: update 2003. CA Cancer J Clin 53: 141–169

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Statistisches Bundesamt (2006) Datenreport 2006. Bundeszentrale für politische Bildung, Bonn, http://www.destatis.de/jetspeed/portal/cms/Sites/destatis/Internet/DE/Content/Publikationen/Querschnittsveroeffentlichungen/Datenreport/Downloads/1Gesundheit,property=file.pdf

  46. Watermann D, Madjar H, Sauerbrei W et al. (2004) Assessment of breast cancer vascularisation by Doppler ultrasound as a prognostic factor of survival. Oncol Rep 11: 905–910

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Wittekind C, Klimpfinger M, Sobin LH (2005) TNM Atlas. Illustrierter Leitfaden zur TNM/pTNM-Klassifikation maligner Tumoren. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York

Download references

Interessenkonflikt

Der korrespondierende Autor gibt an, dass kein Interessenkonflikt besteht.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Radiologische Klinik, Stadtklinik Baden-Baden, Brustzentrum Klinikum Mittelbaden, Baden-Baden, Deutschland

    M. Funke

  2. Frauenklinik, Stadtklinik Baden-Baden, Brustzentrum Klinikum Mittelbaden, Balger Straße 50, 76530, Baden-Baden, Deutschland

    C. Villena

Authors
  1. M. Funke
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. C. Villena
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to M. Funke.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Funke, M., Villena, C. Bildgebende Diagnostik des Mammakarzinoms. Radiologe 48, 601–614 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00117-008-1676-z

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00117-008-1676-z

Schlüsselwörter

Keywords

Search

Navigation