Advertisement

Full Breast Ultrasonography of the Benign Lesions

  • Aristida Colan-Georges
Chapter
  • 1.3k Downloads

Abstract

Benign findings are presented as they appear on FBU, with detailed aspects about the anatomical location in the DE scanning and with the imaging descriptors according to the US BI-RADS assessment in use; the diagnosis is completed by analyzing the vasculature using Doppler techniques and sonoelastography, with respect to the Ueno/Tsukuba scoring and the FLR quantitative evaluation.

Keywords

Benign breast findings Doppler Sonoelastography Full breast ultrasonography Cystic dysplasia Fibroadenoma Papilloma Ductal ectasia 

References

  1. 1.
    Stavros AT, Thickman D, Rapp CL, Dennis MA, Parker SH, Sisney GA (1995) Solid breast nodules: use of sonography to distinguish between benign and malignant lesions. Radiology 196:123–134CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Stavros AT, Rapp LC, Parker HS (2004) Breast ultrasound. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, PhiladelphiaGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Taylor KJ, Merritt C, Piccoli C, Schmidt R et al (2002) Ultrasound as a complement to mammography and breast examination to characterize breast masses. Ultrasound Med Biol 28(1):19–26CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kobayashi T (1975) Ultrasonic diagnosis of breast cancer. Ultrasound Med Biol 1(4):383–391CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Aristida G, Ernestina A, Viorela E, Simona B (2013) New horizons in breast Doppler ductal echography: the positive and differential diagnosis of ductal ectasia, with etiopathological correlations. ECR Viena. EPOS TM. doi: 10.1594/ecr2013/C-0667
  6. 6.
    Tot T (2007) The theory of the sick breast lobe and the possible consequences. Int J Surg Pathol 1:68–71Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Georgescu A, Bondari S, Manda A, Andrei E-M (2012) The differential diagnosis between breast cancer and fibro-micro-cystic dysplasia by full breast ultrasonography – a new approach. ECR Viena. EPOS TM. doi: 10.1594/ecr2012/C-0167, Control Nr #4281
  8. 8.
    Visscher DW, Nassar A, Degnim AC et al (2014) Sclerosing adenosis and risk of breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat 144(1):205–212. Published online Feb 8. doi: 10.1007/s10549-014-2862-5 Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Jensen RA, Page DL, Dupont WD et al (1989) Invasive breast cancer risk in women with sclerosing adenosis. Cancer 64(10):1977–1983, Pubmed citationCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Günhan-Bilgen I, Memiş A, Ustün EE et al (2002) Sclerosing adenosis: mammographic and ultrasonographic findings with clinical and histopathological correlation. Eur J Radiol 44(3):232–238, Eur J Radiol (link) – Pubmed citationCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Taskin F, Koseoglu K, Unsal A et al (2011) Sclerosing adenosis of the breast: radiologic appearance and efficiency of core needle biopsy. Diagn Interv Radiol 17:311–316. doi: 10.4261/1305-3825.DIR.3785-10.2, Pubmed citationPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Linda A, Zuiani C, Londero V, Cedolini C et al (2012) Magnetic resonance imaging of radial sclerosing lesions (radial scars) of the breast. Eur J Radiol 81(11):3201–3207. doi: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2012.01.038 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ichihara S, Moritani S, Ohitake T, Ohuchi N (2005) Ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast: the pathological reason for the diversity of its clinical imaging. In: Research and development in breast ultrasound. Springer, Tokyo, pp 104–113CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Tsunoda-Shimizu H, Kato Y, Ueno E, Endo T et al (2005) Usefulness of depth to width ratio in differentiation of regular invasive ductal carcinoma from fibroadenoma. In: Research and development in breast ultrasound. Springer, Tokyo, pp 57–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kobayashi T (1977) Gray scale echography for breast cancer. Radiology 122:207–214CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Teboul M (2003) Practical ductal echography: guide to intelligent and intelligible Ultrasound imaging of the breast. Saned Editors, MadridGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Amy D (2010) Lobar ultrasound of the breast. In: Tot T (ed), breast cancer. Springer, London Limited. doi: 10.1007/978-1-84996-314-5_8 Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kujiraoka Y, Ueno E, Yohno E, Morishima I, Tsunoda-Shimizu H (2005) Incident angle of the plunging artery of breast tumors. In: Research and development in breast ultrasound. Springer, Tokyo, pp 72–75CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Adamietz BR, Kahmann L, Fasching PA, Schulz-Wendtland R, Uder M et al (2011) Differentiation between phyllodes tumor and fibroadenoma using real-time Elastography. Ultraschall Med Suppl 2:E75–E79. doi: 10.1055/s-0031-1282024 Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Li L-J, Zeng H, Ou B, Luo B-M, Xiao X-Y et al (2014) Ultrasonic elastography features of phyllodes tumors of the breast: a clinical research. PLoS One 9(1), e85257. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0085257 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Wurdinger S, Herzog AB, Fischer DR et al (2005) Differentiation of phyllodes breast tumors from fibroadenomas on MRI. AJR Am J Roentgenol 185(5):1317–1321CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Yabuuchi H, Soeda H, Matsuo Y et al (2006) Phyllodes tumor of the breast: correlation between MR findings and histologic grade. Radiology 241:702–709, http://dx.doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2413051470 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Arrigoni MG, Dockerty MB, Judd ES (1971) The identification and treatment of mammary hamartoma. Surg Gynecol Obstet 133(4):577–582, Pubmed citationPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Da Costa D, Taddese A, Cure ML, Gerson D, Poppiti R, Esserman LE (2007) Common and unusual diseases of the nipple-areolar complex. RadioGraphics 27:S65–S77, © RSNA, 2007CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Geffroy D, Doutriaux-Doumulins I, Labbe-Devilliers C et al (2011) Paget’s disease of the nipple and differential diagnosis. J Radiol 92(10):889–898. doi: 10.1016/j.jradio.2011.07.010, Epub 2011 Sep7CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Yim JH, Wick MR, Philpott GW, Norton JA, Doherty GM (1997) Underlying pathology in mammary Paget’s disease. Ann Surg Oncol 4(4):287–292CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Günhan-Bilgen I, Oktay A (2006) Paget’s disease of the breast: clinical, mammographic, sonographic and pathologic findings in 52 cases. Eur J Radiol 60(2):256–263, Epub 2006 Aug 2CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Riordan J, Wambach K (2010) Breast related problems. In: Riordan J, Wambach K (eds) Breastfeeding and human lactation. Jones & Bartlett, Boston, pp 291–324Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Park HS, Yoon CH, Kim HJ (1999) The prevalence of congenital inverted nipple. Aesthetic Plast Surg 20:144CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Graf O, Helbich TH, Hopf G, Graf C, Sickles EA (2007) Probably benign breast masses at US: is follow-up an acceptable alternative to biopsy? Radiology 244:87–93, © RSNA 2007CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Lower EE, Hawkins HH, Baughman RP (2001) Breast disease in sarcoidosis. Sarcoidosis Vasc Diffuse Lung Dis 18(3):301–306PubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Hermann G, Nagi C, Mester J, Tierstein A (2008) Unusual presentation of sarcoidosis of the breast. Br J Radiol 81:e231–e233 [PUBMED]CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Isley ML, Cluver RC, Leddy JR, Baker KM (2012) Primary sarcoid of the breast with incidental malignancy. J Clin Imaging Sci 2:46CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Aristida Colan-Georges
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Radiology and Imaging DiagnosisCounty Emergency Clinical HospitalCraiovaRomania

Personalised recommendations