Ultrasonographic BI-RADS Assessment of Palpable Breast Masses with Pathological Correlation
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
Objective: To retrospectively evaluate ultrasonographic findings and diagnostic value of ultrasonography in palpable breast masses at Surin Hospital by using terminology of American College of Radiology Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (ACR BI-RADS) for categorization breast masses from ultrasonographic findings and correlation with histopathological reports of breast masses.
Research Design: Retrospective descriptive study
Method: Ultrasonographic examination of 29 patients with palpable breast masses with had pathological-proven during October 1, 2007 and September 30, 2008 at Surin Hospital were reviewed. The final assessment of ultrasonographic BI-RADS and histopathological diagnosis were compared.
Result: Ultrasonographic BI-RADS categorizations of all 29 patients were as follow: BI-RADS 2 in 7 patients, BI-RADS 3 in 9 patients, BI-RADS 4 in 10 patients and BI-RADS 5 in 3 patients. All of 3 patients in the BI-RADS 5 category and 4 patients in the BI-RADS 4 category had malignant tumor. 3 patients in the BI-RADS 3 and 3 patients in the BI-RADS 4 categories had fibrocystic changes. 3 patients in the BI-RADS 4 category and 6 patients in BI-RADS 3 category had fibroadenoma
Conclusion: The ultrasonographic BI-RADS descriptors and categories are very helpful in categorizing lesions, making management recommendations, differentiating between benign and malignant masses and reduced number of biopsy performed for benign lesion.
Keywords: ultrasonographic findings, palpable breast mass, BI-RADS
Article Details
References
2. Lazarus E, Mainiero MB, Schepps B, Koelliker SL, Livingston LS, BI-RADS lexi¬con for US and mammography: Interobserver variability and positive pre¬dictive value. Radiology 2006 May; 239(2):385-91.
3. American College of Radiology. BI-RADS: ultrasound, 1st ed. In: BI-RADS atlas, 4th ed. Reston, VAACR, 2003
4. Elmore JG, Armstrong K, Lehman CD, Fletcher AW Screening for breast cancer. JAMA 2005 Mar 9;293(10):1245-56
5. Crystal P, Strano SD, Shcharynski S, Koretz MJ. Using Sonography to Screen women with mammographically dense breasts. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2003 Jul; 181(1):177-82
6. Corsetti V, Houssami N, Ferrari A, Ghirardi M et al. Breast screening with ultrasound in women with mammography-negative dense breasts: evidence on incremental cancer detection and false positive, and associated cost. Eur. J Cancer 2008 Mar; 44(4):539-44
7. Obenauser S, Hermann KP, Grabbe E, Applications and literature review of the BI-RADS classification. Eur Radiol 2005 May; 15(5):1027-36
8. Masroor I, Prediction of benignity or malignancy of a lesion using BI-RADS. J Coll Physicians Surg Pak 2005 Nov; 15(11):686-8
9. Costantini M, Belli P, Ierardi C, Frances-chini G et al. Solid breast mass characteris-tisation: use of the sonographic BI-RADS classification. Radiol Med. 2007 Sep; 112(6):877-94
10. Andrea S. Hong, Eric L. Rosen, Mary S. Soo, Jay A. Baker, BI-RADS for sonography: Positive and negative pre-dictive value of sonographic features. AJR 2005;184:1260-1265
11. Park YM, Kim EK, Lee JH, Ryu JH, Han SS, Choi SJ, Lee SJ, Yoon HK, Palpable breast masses with probably benign morphology at sonography: can biopsy be deferred? Acta Radiologica 2008 Dec; 49(10);1104-11
12. Wiratkapun C, Lertsitichai P, Wibulphol-prasert B, Positive predictive value of breast cancer in the lesions categorized as BI-RADS category 5. J Med Asso.Thai 2006 Aug; 89(8):1253-9
13. Leconte I, Fellah L, us and dense breasts: Where do we stand? J Radiol, 2008 Sep; 89(9 Pt 2):1169-79
14. Kang SS, Ko EY, Han BK, Shin JH, Breast US in patient who had microcalcifications with low concern of malignancy on screening mammography. Eur J Radiol, 2008 Aug; 67(2):285-91
