Skip to main content

Radiology of Benign Breast Disease

  • Chapter
Benign Breast Diseases
  • 169 Accesses

Abstract

Screening mammography has been successful in detecting small and early cancers, resulting in favourable prognoses. At the same time this has also resulted in detection of previously occult benign breast disease. The distinction between benign and malignant lesions is not always simple. Although some mammographically detected lesions such as calcifying fibroadenomas, oil cysts, intra-mammary lymph nodes, vascular calcification and lipomas have pathognomonic features, a relatively large group of soft tissue lesions or calcifications are mammographically indeterminate. In these cases the diagnosis can be confirmed only by needle core biopsy or surgical excision. The outcome of breast cancer can be assessed by applying well-defined criteria such as grade, the presence of vascular invasion and lymph node metastasis. In benign breast disease, there are inconsistencies in assessing the subsequent outcome of most lesions. These factors will be discussed in the following chapters.

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

Access this chapter

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • American College of Radiology (ACR) (1998) Illustrated breast imaging report and data system (BI-RADS™). 3rd edn. American College of Radiology, Reston, pp 180–181

    Google Scholar 

  • Azavedo E, Svane G, Auer G (1989) Stereotactic fine-needle biopsy in 2594 mammographically detected non-palpable lesions. Lancet 1:1033–1036

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

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

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Brenner RJ, Sickles EA (1991) Surveillance mammography and stereotactic core biopsy for probably benign lesions: a cost comparison analysis. Acad Radiol 4:419–425

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brenner RJ, Fajardo L, Fisher PR, et al. (1996) Percutaneous core biopsy of the breast: effect of operator experience and number of samples on diagnostic accuracy. Am J Roentgenol 166:341–346

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Burnett SJD, Ng YY, Perry NM, et al. (1995) Benign biopsies in the prevalent round of breast screening — a review of 37 cases. Clin Radiol 50:254–258

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Caplan LS, Blackman D, Nadel M, Monticciolo DL (1999) Coding mammograms using the classification “probably benign finding — short interval follow-up suggested.” Am J Roentgenol 172:339–342

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Chinyama CN, Gaunt L, Rice J, Gomes P, Allsopp R (2003) Symptomatic breast cancer in Guernsey: the effect of biannual screening up to the age of 75 (Meeting Abstract). Proc Pathological Society of Great Britain & Ireland. http://www.pathsoc.org

    Google Scholar 

  • Cole P, Elwood JM, Kaplan SD (1978) Incidence rates and risk factors of benign breast neoplasms. Am J Epidemiol 108:112–120

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Dronkers DJ (2002) Percutaneous diagnostic procedures, preoperative localization and specimen radiography. In: Dronkers DJ, Hendriks JHCL, Holland R, Rosenbusch G (eds). The practice of mammography. Thieme, Stuttgart, pp 130–146

    Google Scholar 

  • Ernst MF, Avenarius JKA, Schuur KH, Roukema JA (2002) Wire localisation of non-palpable lesions: out of date? Breast 11:408–413

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Fleming NT, Armstrong BK, Sheiner HJ (1982) The comparative epidemiology of benign breast lumps and breast cancer in Western Australia. Int J Cancer 30:147–152

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Helvie MA, Baker DE, Alder DD, Andersson I, Naylor B, Buckwalter KA (1990) Radiographically guided fine-needle aspiration of nonpalpable breast lesions. Radiology 174:657–661

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Heywang-Köbrunner SH, Boetes C (2002) Magnetic resonance imaging. In: Dronkers DJ, Hendriks JHCL, Holland R, Rosenbusch G (eds). The practice of mammography. Thieme, Stuttgart, pp 170–179

    Google Scholar 

  • Heywang-Köbrunner SH, Dershaw DD, Schreer I (2001) Sonography; benign breast disorders; percutaneous biopsy. In: diagnostic breast imaging. Thieme, Stuttgart, pp 87–102; pp 181–196; pp 132–151

    Google Scholar 

  • Hutter RVP, et al. (1986) Is “fibrocystic disease” of the breast precancerous? Arch Pathol Lab Med 110:171–173

    Google Scholar 

  • Jackson VP, Dines KA, Bassett LW, Gold RH, Reynolds HE (1991) Diagnostic importance of the radiographic density of noncalcified breast masses: Analysis of 91 lesions. Am J Roentgenol 157:25–28

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Jonsson H, Larsson LG, Lenner P (2003) Detection of breast cancer with mammography in the first screening round in relation to expected incidence in different age groups. Acta Oncologica 42:22–29

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lacquement MA, Mitchell D, Hollingsworth AB (1999) Positive predictive value of the Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System. J Am Coll Surg 189:34–40

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Liberman L, Evans WP 3rd, Dershaw DD, et al. (1994) Radiography of microcalcification in stereotaxic mammary core biopsy specimens. Radiology 190:223–225

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Liberman L, Abramson AF, Squires FB, Glassman JR, Morris EA, Dershaw DD (1998) The breast imaging reporting and data system: positive predictive value of mammographic features and final assessment categories. Am J Roentgenol 171:35–40

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Müller-Schimpfle M, Ohmenhäuser K, Stoll P, Dietz K, Claussen CD (1997) Menstrual cycle and age: influence on parenchymal contrast medium enhancement in MR imaging of the breast. Radiology 203:145–149

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • NHSBSP (2001) Publication No 49. Clinical guidelines for breast cancer screening assessment

    Google Scholar 

  • Parker SH, Burbank F, Jackman RJ et al. (1994) Percutaneous large core breast biopsy; a multi-institutional study. Radiology 193:359–364

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Perry NM, on behalf of the EUSOMA Working Party (2001) Quality assurance in the diagnosis of breast disease. Eur J Cancer 37:159–172

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Philpotts LE, Shaheen NA, Carter D, Lange RC, Lee CH (1999) Comparison of rebiospy rates after stereotactic core needle biopsy of the breast with 11-gauge vacuum suction probe versus 14-gauge needle and automatic gun. Am J Roentgenol 172:683–687

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Sickles EA (1995) Management of probably benign lesions (review). Radiol Clin North Am 33:1123–1130

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Sniege N, Lim SC, Whitman GJ, et al. (2003) Atypical ductal hyperplasia diagnosis by directional vacuum-assisted stereotactic biopsy of breast microcalcifications. Considerations for surgical excision. Am J Clin Pathol 119:248–253

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tate PS, Rogers EL, McGee EM, et al. (2001) Stereotactic breast biopsy: a six-year surgical experience. J Ky Med Assoc 99:98–103

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Westerhof JP, Fischer U, Moritz JD, Oestmann JW (1998) MR imaging of mammographically detected clustered microcalcifications: is there any value? Radiology 207:675–681

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • White RR, Halperin TJ, Olson JA Jr, Soo MS, Bentley RC, Seigler HF (2001) Impact of core-needle breast biopsy on surgical management of mammographic abnormalities. Ann Surg 233:769–777

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Zonderland HM (2002) Sonography of the breast. In: Dronkers DJ, Hendriks JHCL, Holland R, Rosenbusch G (eds) The practice of mammography. Thieme, Stuttgart, pp 151–169

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2004 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Gaunt, L.M. (2004). Radiology of Benign Breast Disease. In: Benign Breast Diseases. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-18527-4_1

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-18527-4_1

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-642-62146-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-642-18527-4

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics