Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Insights into Imaging 4/2018

Open Access 01-08-2018 | Guideline

Breast ultrasound: recommendations for information to women and referring physicians by the European Society of Breast Imaging

Authors: Andrew Evans, Rubina M. Trimboli, Alexandra Athanasiou, Corinne Balleyguier, Pascal A. Baltzer, Ulrich Bick, Julia Camps Herrero, Paola Clauser, Catherine Colin, Eleanor Cornford, Eva M. Fallenberg, Michael H. Fuchsjaeger, Fiona J. Gilbert, Thomas H. Helbich, Karen Kinkel, Sylvia H. Heywang-Köbrunner, Christiane K. Kuhl, Ritse M. Mann, Laura Martincich, Pietro Panizza, Federica Pediconi, Ruud M. Pijnappel, Katja Pinker, Sophia Zackrisson, Gabor Forrai, Francesco Sardanelli, for the European Society of Breast Imaging (EUSOBI) , with language review by Europa Donna–The European Breast Cancer Coalition

Published in: Insights into Imaging | Issue 4/2018

Login to get access

Abstract

This article summarises the information that should be provided to women and referring physicians about breast ultrasound (US). After explaining the physical principles, technical procedure and safety of US, information is given about its ability to make a correct diagnosis, depending on the setting in which it is applied. The following definite indications for breast US in female subjects are proposed: palpable lump; axillary adenopathy; first diagnostic approach for clinical abnormalities under 40 and in pregnant or lactating women; suspicious abnormalities at mammography or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI); suspicious nipple discharge; recent nipple inversion; skin retraction; breast inflammation; abnormalities in the area of the surgical scar after breast conserving surgery or mastectomy; abnormalities in the presence of breast implants; screening high-risk women, especially when MRI is not performed; loco-regional staging of a known breast cancer, when MRI is not performed; guidance for percutaneous interventions (needle biopsy, pre-surgical localisation, fluid collection drainage); monitoring patients with breast cancer receiving neo-adjuvant therapy, when MRI is not performed. Possible indications such as supplemental screening after mammography for women aged 40–74 with dense breasts are also listed. Moreover, inappropriate indications include screening for breast cancer as a stand-alone alternative to mammography. The structure and organisation of the breast US report and of classification systems such as the BI-RADS and consequent management recommendations are illustrated. Information about additional or new US technologies (colour-Doppler, elastography, and automated whole breast US) is also provided. Finally, five frequently asked questions are answered.

Teaching Points

• US is an established tool for suspected cancers at all ages and also the method of choice under 40.
• For US-visible suspicious lesions, US-guided biopsy is preferred, even for palpable findings.
• High-risk women can be screened with US, especially when MRI cannot be performed.
• Supplemental US increases cancer detection but also false positives, biopsy rate and follow-up exams.
• Breast US is inappropriate as a stand-alone screening method.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Sardanelli F, Helbich TH (2012) Mammography: EUSOBI recommendations for women's information. Insights Imaging 3:7–10CrossRefPubMed Sardanelli F, Helbich TH (2012) Mammography: EUSOBI recommendations for women's information. Insights Imaging 3:7–10CrossRefPubMed
2.
go back to reference Sardanelli F, Fallenberg EM, Clauser P et al (2017) Mammography: an update of the EUSOBI recommendations on information for women. Insights Imaging 8:11–18CrossRefPubMed Sardanelli F, Fallenberg EM, Clauser P et al (2017) Mammography: an update of the EUSOBI recommendations on information for women. Insights Imaging 8:11–18CrossRefPubMed
4.
go back to reference Ziskin MC (1993) Fundamental physics of ultrasound and its propagation in tissue. Radiographics 13:705–709CrossRefPubMed Ziskin MC (1993) Fundamental physics of ultrasound and its propagation in tissue. Radiographics 13:705–709CrossRefPubMed
5.
go back to reference Venta LA, Dudiak CM, Salomon CG, Flisak ME (1994) Sonographic evaluation of the breast. Radiographics 14:29–50CrossRefPubMed Venta LA, Dudiak CM, Salomon CG, Flisak ME (1994) Sonographic evaluation of the breast. Radiographics 14:29–50CrossRefPubMed
6.
go back to reference Britton P, Warwick J, Wallis MG et al (2012) Measuring the accuracy of diagnostic imaging in symptomatic breast patients: team and individual performance. Br J Radiol 85:415–422CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Britton P, Warwick J, Wallis MG et al (2012) Measuring the accuracy of diagnostic imaging in symptomatic breast patients: team and individual performance. Br J Radiol 85:415–422CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
7.
go back to reference The American College of Radiology (2016) ACR–AAPM Technical standard for diagnostic medical physics performance monitoring of real time ultrasound equipment. http://www.acr.org. Accessed 08 Sep 2017 The American College of Radiology (2016) ACR–AAPM Technical standard for diagnostic medical physics performance monitoring of real time ultrasound equipment. http://​www.​acr.​org. Accessed 08 Sep 2017
8.
go back to reference Wilson AR, Marotti L, Bianchi S et al (2013) The requirements of a specialist breast centre. Eur J Cancer 49:3579–3587CrossRefPubMed Wilson AR, Marotti L, Bianchi S et al (2013) The requirements of a specialist breast centre. Eur J Cancer 49:3579–3587CrossRefPubMed
9.
go back to reference European Society of Radiology (ESR) (2014) Renewal of radiological equipment. Insights Imaging 5:543–546CrossRef European Society of Radiology (ESR) (2014) Renewal of radiological equipment. Insights Imaging 5:543–546CrossRef
10.
go back to reference Vourtsis A, Kachulis A (2018) The performance of 3D ABUS versus HHUS in the visualisation and BI-RADS characterisation of breast lesions in a large cohort of 1,886 women. Eur Radiol 28:592–601CrossRefPubMed Vourtsis A, Kachulis A (2018) The performance of 3D ABUS versus HHUS in the visualisation and BI-RADS characterisation of breast lesions in a large cohort of 1,886 women. Eur Radiol 28:592–601CrossRefPubMed
11.
go back to reference Skaane P, Gullien R, Eben EB, Sandhaug M, Schulz-Wendtland R, Stoeblen F (2015) Interpretation of automated breast ultrasound (ABUS) with and without knowledge of mammography: a reader performance study. Acta Radiol 56:404–412CrossRefPubMed Skaane P, Gullien R, Eben EB, Sandhaug M, Schulz-Wendtland R, Stoeblen F (2015) Interpretation of automated breast ultrasound (ABUS) with and without knowledge of mammography: a reader performance study. Acta Radiol 56:404–412CrossRefPubMed
12.
go back to reference Perry N, Broeders M, de Wolf C, Törnberg S, Holland R, von Karsa L (2008) European guidelines for quality assurance in breast cancer screening and diagnosis. Fourth edition--summary document. Ann Oncol 19:614–622CrossRefPubMed Perry N, Broeders M, de Wolf C, Törnberg S, Holland R, von Karsa L (2008) European guidelines for quality assurance in breast cancer screening and diagnosis. Fourth edition--summary document. Ann Oncol 19:614–622CrossRefPubMed
15.
go back to reference del Cura JL, Elizagaray E, Zabala R, Legórburu A, Grande D (2005) The use of unenhanced Doppler sonography in the evaluation of solid breast lesions. AJR Am J Roentgenol 184:1788–1794CrossRefPubMed del Cura JL, Elizagaray E, Zabala R, Legórburu A, Grande D (2005) The use of unenhanced Doppler sonography in the evaluation of solid breast lesions. AJR Am J Roentgenol 184:1788–1794CrossRefPubMed
16.
go back to reference Mehta TS, Raza S, Baum JK (2000) Use of Doppler ultrasound in the evaluation of breast carcinoma. Semin Ultrasound CT MR 21:297–307CrossRefPubMed Mehta TS, Raza S, Baum JK (2000) Use of Doppler ultrasound in the evaluation of breast carcinoma. Semin Ultrasound CT MR 21:297–307CrossRefPubMed
18.
go back to reference Raza S, Odulate A, Ong EM, Chikarmane S, Harston CW (2010) Using real-time tissue elastography for breast lesion evaluation: our initial experience. J Ultrasound Med 29:551–563CrossRefPubMed Raza S, Odulate A, Ong EM, Chikarmane S, Harston CW (2010) Using real-time tissue elastography for breast lesion evaluation: our initial experience. J Ultrasound Med 29:551–563CrossRefPubMed
19.
go back to reference Lee SH, Chang JM, Kim WH et al (2014) Added value of shear-wave elastography for evaluation of breast masses detected with screening US imaging. Radiology 273:61–69CrossRefPubMed Lee SH, Chang JM, Kim WH et al (2014) Added value of shear-wave elastography for evaluation of breast masses detected with screening US imaging. Radiology 273:61–69CrossRefPubMed
20.
go back to reference Berg W, Cosgrove D, Doré C et al (2012) Shear-wave elastography improves the specificity of breast US: the BE1 multinational study of 939 masses. Radiology 262:435–449CrossRefPubMed Berg W, Cosgrove D, Doré C et al (2012) Shear-wave elastography improves the specificity of breast US: the BE1 multinational study of 939 masses. Radiology 262:435–449CrossRefPubMed
21.
go back to reference Mendelson EB, Bohm-Velez M, Berg WA et al (2013) ACR BI-RADS® ultrasound. ACR BI-RADS® atlas, breast imaging reporting and data system. American College of Radiology, Reston, VA Mendelson EB, Bohm-Velez M, Berg WA et al (2013) ACR BI-RADS® ultrasound. ACR BI-RADS® atlas, breast imaging reporting and data system. American College of Radiology, Reston, VA
22.
go back to reference Meng Z, Chen C, Zhu Y et al (2015) Diagnostic performance of the automated breast volume scanner: a systematic review of inter-rater reliability/agreement and meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy for differentiating benign and malignant breast lesions. Eur Radiol 25:3638–3647 Meng Z, Chen C, Zhu Y et al (2015) Diagnostic performance of the automated breast volume scanner: a systematic review of inter-rater reliability/agreement and meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy for differentiating benign and malignant breast lesions. Eur Radiol 25:3638–3647
23.
go back to reference Brem RF, Tabár L, Duffy SW et al (2015) Assessing improvement in detection of breast cancer with three-dimensional automated breast US in women with dense breast tissue: the SomoInsight study. Radiology 274:663–673CrossRefPubMed Brem RF, Tabár L, Duffy SW et al (2015) Assessing improvement in detection of breast cancer with three-dimensional automated breast US in women with dense breast tissue: the SomoInsight study. Radiology 274:663–673CrossRefPubMed
24.
go back to reference Wilczek B, Wilczek HE, Rasouliyan L, Leifland K (2016) Adding 3D automated breast ultrasound to mammography screening in women with heterogeneously and extremely dense breasts: report from a hospital-based, high-volume, single-center breast cancer screening program. Eur J Radiol 85:1554–1563CrossRefPubMed Wilczek B, Wilczek HE, Rasouliyan L, Leifland K (2016) Adding 3D automated breast ultrasound to mammography screening in women with heterogeneously and extremely dense breasts: report from a hospital-based, high-volume, single-center breast cancer screening program. Eur J Radiol 85:1554–1563CrossRefPubMed
25.
go back to reference Hooley RJ, Scoutt LM, Philpotts LE (2013) Breast ultrasonography: state of the art. Radiology 268:642–659CrossRefPubMed Hooley RJ, Scoutt LM, Philpotts LE (2013) Breast ultrasonography: state of the art. Radiology 268:642–659CrossRefPubMed
26.
go back to reference Irwig L, Houssami N, van Vliet C (2004) New technologies in screening for breast cancer: a systematic review of their accuracy. Br J Cancer 90:2118–2122CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Irwig L, Houssami N, van Vliet C (2004) New technologies in screening for breast cancer: a systematic review of their accuracy. Br J Cancer 90:2118–2122CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
27.
go back to reference Houssami N, Lord SJ, Ciatto S (2009) Breast cancer screening: emerging role of new imaging techniques as adjuncts to mammography. Med J Aust 190:493–497PubMed Houssami N, Lord SJ, Ciatto S (2009) Breast cancer screening: emerging role of new imaging techniques as adjuncts to mammography. Med J Aust 190:493–497PubMed
28.
go back to reference Tagliafico AS, Calabrese M, Mariscotti G et al (2016) Adjunct screening with tomosynthesis or ultrasound in women with mammography-negative dense breasts: interim report of a prospective comparative trial. J Clin Oncol 34:1882–1888 Tagliafico AS, Calabrese M, Mariscotti G et al (2016) Adjunct screening with tomosynthesis or ultrasound in women with mammography-negative dense breasts: interim report of a prospective comparative trial. J Clin Oncol 34:1882–1888
29.
go back to reference Melnikow J, Fenton JJ, Whitlock EP et al (2016) Supplemental screening for breast cancer in women with dense breasts: a systematic review for the U.S. Preventive Service Task Force [Internet].Rockville (MD): Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (United States). Report No.: 14–05201-EF-3. U.S. Preventive Services Task Force Evidence Syntheses, formerly Systematic Evidence Reviews Melnikow J, Fenton JJ, Whitlock EP et al (2016) Supplemental screening for breast cancer in women with dense breasts: a systematic review for the U.S. Preventive Service Task Force [Internet].Rockville (MD): Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (United States). Report No.: 14–05201-EF-3. U.S. Preventive Services Task Force Evidence Syntheses, formerly Systematic Evidence Reviews
30.
go back to reference Mann RM, Hoogeveen YL, Blickman JG, Boetes C (2008) MRI compared to conventional diagnostic work-up in the detection and evaluation of invasive lobular carcinoma of the breast: a review of existing literature. Breast Cancer Res Treat 107:1–14CrossRefPubMed Mann RM, Hoogeveen YL, Blickman JG, Boetes C (2008) MRI compared to conventional diagnostic work-up in the detection and evaluation of invasive lobular carcinoma of the breast: a review of existing literature. Breast Cancer Res Treat 107:1–14CrossRefPubMed
31.
go back to reference Kim MY, Kim HS, Choi N, Yang JH, Yoo YB, Park KS (2015) Screening mammography-detected ductal carcinoma in situ: mammographic features based on breast cancer subtypes. Clin Imaging 39:983–986CrossRefPubMed Kim MY, Kim HS, Choi N, Yang JH, Yoo YB, Park KS (2015) Screening mammography-detected ductal carcinoma in situ: mammographic features based on breast cancer subtypes. Clin Imaging 39:983–986CrossRefPubMed
32.
go back to reference Berg WA, Blume JD, Cormack JB et al (2008) Combined screening with ultrasound and mammography vs mammography alone in women at elevated risk of breast cancer. JAMA 299:2151–2163CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Berg WA, Blume JD, Cormack JB et al (2008) Combined screening with ultrasound and mammography vs mammography alone in women at elevated risk of breast cancer. JAMA 299:2151–2163CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
33.
go back to reference Sardanelli F, Boetes C, Borisch B et al (2010) Magnetic resonance imaging of the breast: recommendations from the EUSOMA working group. Eur J Cancer 46:1296–1316CrossRefPubMed Sardanelli F, Boetes C, Borisch B et al (2010) Magnetic resonance imaging of the breast: recommendations from the EUSOMA working group. Eur J Cancer 46:1296–1316CrossRefPubMed
35.
go back to reference Scheel JR, Lee JM, Sprague BL, Lee CI, Lehman CD (2014) Screening ultrasound as an adjunct to mammography in women with mammographically dense breasts. Am J Obstet Gynecol 212:9–17CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Scheel JR, Lee JM, Sprague BL, Lee CI, Lehman CD (2014) Screening ultrasound as an adjunct to mammography in women with mammographically dense breasts. Am J Obstet Gynecol 212:9–17CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
36.
go back to reference Corsetti V, Houssami N, Ghirardi M et al (2011) Evidence of the effect of adjunct ultrasound screening in women with mammography-negative dense breasts: interval breast cancers at 1 year follow-up. Eur J Cancer 47:1021–1026CrossRefPubMed Corsetti V, Houssami N, Ghirardi M et al (2011) Evidence of the effect of adjunct ultrasound screening in women with mammography-negative dense breasts: interval breast cancers at 1 year follow-up. Eur J Cancer 47:1021–1026CrossRefPubMed
37.
go back to reference Nothacker M, Duda V, Hahn M et al (2009) Early detection of breast cancer: benefits and risks of supplemental breast ultrasound in asymptomatic women with mammographically dense breast tissue. A systematic review. BMC Cancer 9:335CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Nothacker M, Duda V, Hahn M et al (2009) Early detection of breast cancer: benefits and risks of supplemental breast ultrasound in asymptomatic women with mammographically dense breast tissue. A systematic review. BMC Cancer 9:335CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
39.
go back to reference Pan B, Yao R, Zhu QL et al (2016) Clinicopathological characteristics and long-term prognosis of screening detected non-palpable breast cancer by ultrasound in hospital-based Chinese population (2001-2014). Oncotarget 7:76840–76851PubMedPubMedCentral Pan B, Yao R, Zhu QL et al (2016) Clinicopathological characteristics and long-term prognosis of screening detected non-palpable breast cancer by ultrasound in hospital-based Chinese population (2001-2014). Oncotarget 7:76840–76851PubMedPubMedCentral
40.
go back to reference Sprague BL, Stout NK, Schechter C et al (2015) Benefits, harms, and cost-effectiveness of supplemental ultrasonography screening for women with dense breasts. Ann Intern Med 162:157–166CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Sprague BL, Stout NK, Schechter C et al (2015) Benefits, harms, and cost-effectiveness of supplemental ultrasonography screening for women with dense breasts. Ann Intern Med 162:157–166CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
41.
go back to reference Chang JM, Koo HR, Moon WK (2015) Radiologist-performed hand-held ultrasound screening at average risk of breast cancer: results from a single health screening center. Acta Radiol 56:652–658CrossRefPubMed Chang JM, Koo HR, Moon WK (2015) Radiologist-performed hand-held ultrasound screening at average risk of breast cancer: results from a single health screening center. Acta Radiol 56:652–658CrossRefPubMed
43.
go back to reference Arleo EK, Saleh M, Ionescu D, Drotman M, Min RJ, Hentel K (2014) Recall rate of screening ultrasound with automated breast volumetric scanning (ABVS) in women with dense breasts: a first quarter experience. Clin Imaging 38:439–444CrossRefPubMed Arleo EK, Saleh M, Ionescu D, Drotman M, Min RJ, Hentel K (2014) Recall rate of screening ultrasound with automated breast volumetric scanning (ABVS) in women with dense breasts: a first quarter experience. Clin Imaging 38:439–444CrossRefPubMed
44.
go back to reference Cid JA, Rampaul RS, Ellis IO et al (2004) Woman feels breast lump-surgeon cannot: the role of ultrasound in arbitration. Eur J Cancer 40:2053–2055CrossRefPubMed Cid JA, Rampaul RS, Ellis IO et al (2004) Woman feels breast lump-surgeon cannot: the role of ultrasound in arbitration. Eur J Cancer 40:2053–2055CrossRefPubMed
45.
go back to reference Leddy R, Irshad A, Zerwas E et al (2013) Role of breast ultrasound and mammography in evaluating patients presenting with focal breast pain in the absence of a palpable lump. Breast J 19:582–589CrossRefPubMed Leddy R, Irshad A, Zerwas E et al (2013) Role of breast ultrasound and mammography in evaluating patients presenting with focal breast pain in the absence of a palpable lump. Breast J 19:582–589CrossRefPubMed
46.
go back to reference Moon WK, Im JG, Koh YH, Noh DY, Park IA (2000) US of mammographically detected clustered microcalcifications. Radiology 217:849–854CrossRefPubMed Moon WK, Im JG, Koh YH, Noh DY, Park IA (2000) US of mammographically detected clustered microcalcifications. Radiology 217:849–854CrossRefPubMed
47.
go back to reference Bennani-Baiti B, Bennani-Baiti N, Baltzer PA (2016) Diagnostic performance of breast magnetic resonance imaging in non-calcified equivocal breast findings: results from a systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS One 11:e0160346CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Bennani-Baiti B, Bennani-Baiti N, Baltzer PA (2016) Diagnostic performance of breast magnetic resonance imaging in non-calcified equivocal breast findings: results from a systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS One 11:e0160346CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
48.
go back to reference Bennani-Baiti B, Baltzer PA (2017) MR imaging for diagnosis of malignancy in mammographic microcalcifications: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Radiology 283:692–701CrossRefPubMed Bennani-Baiti B, Baltzer PA (2017) MR imaging for diagnosis of malignancy in mammographic microcalcifications: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Radiology 283:692–701CrossRefPubMed
49.
go back to reference Meissnitzer M, Dershaw DD, Lee CH, Morris EA (2009) Targeted ultrasound of the breast in women with abnormal MRI findings for whom biopsy has been recommended. AJR Am J Roentgenol 193:1025–1029CrossRefPubMed Meissnitzer M, Dershaw DD, Lee CH, Morris EA (2009) Targeted ultrasound of the breast in women with abnormal MRI findings for whom biopsy has been recommended. AJR Am J Roentgenol 193:1025–1029CrossRefPubMed
50.
go back to reference Liberman L, Feng TL, Dershaw DD, Morris EA, Abramson AF (1998) US-guided core breast biopsy: use and cost-effectiveness. Radiology 208:717–723CrossRefPubMed Liberman L, Feng TL, Dershaw DD, Morris EA, Abramson AF (1998) US-guided core breast biopsy: use and cost-effectiveness. Radiology 208:717–723CrossRefPubMed
52.
go back to reference Spick C, Baltzer PA (2014) Diagnostic utility of second-look US for breast lesions identified at MR imaging: systematic review and meta-analysis. Radiology 273:401–409CrossRefPubMed Spick C, Baltzer PA (2014) Diagnostic utility of second-look US for breast lesions identified at MR imaging: systematic review and meta-analysis. Radiology 273:401–409CrossRefPubMed
53.
go back to reference Graf O, Helbich TH, Fuchsjaeger MH et al (2004) Follow-up of palpable circumscribed noncalcified solid breast masses at mammography and US: can biopsy be averted? Radiology 233:850–856CrossRefPubMed Graf O, Helbich TH, Fuchsjaeger MH et al (2004) Follow-up of palpable circumscribed noncalcified solid breast masses at mammography and US: can biopsy be averted? Radiology 233:850–856CrossRefPubMed
54.
go back to reference 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 244:87–93CrossRefPubMed 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 244:87–93CrossRefPubMed
55.
go back to reference Schueller G, Schueller-Weidekamm C, Helbich TH (2008) Accuracy of ultrasound-guided, large-core needle breast biopsy. Eur Radiol 18:1761–1773CrossRefPubMed Schueller G, Schueller-Weidekamm C, Helbich TH (2008) Accuracy of ultrasound-guided, large-core needle breast biopsy. Eur Radiol 18:1761–1773CrossRefPubMed
56.
go back to reference Schueller G, Jaromi S, Ponhold L et al (2008) US-guided 14-gauge core-needle breast biopsy: results of a validation study in 1352 cases. Radiology 248:406–413CrossRefPubMed Schueller G, Jaromi S, Ponhold L et al (2008) US-guided 14-gauge core-needle breast biopsy: results of a validation study in 1352 cases. Radiology 248:406–413CrossRefPubMed
57.
go back to reference Berg WA, Gilbreath PL (2000) Multicentric and multifocal cancer: whole-breast US in preoperative evaluation. Radiology 214:59–66CrossRefPubMed Berg WA, Gilbreath PL (2000) Multicentric and multifocal cancer: whole-breast US in preoperative evaluation. Radiology 214:59–66CrossRefPubMed
58.
go back to reference Moon WK, Noh DY, Im JG (2002) Multifocal, multicentric, and contralateral breast cancers: bilateral whole-breast US in the preoperative evaluation of patients. Radiology 224:569–576CrossRefPubMed Moon WK, Noh DY, Im JG (2002) Multifocal, multicentric, and contralateral breast cancers: bilateral whole-breast US in the preoperative evaluation of patients. Radiology 224:569–576CrossRefPubMed
59.
go back to reference Kim AH, Kim MJ, Kim EK, Park BW, Moon HJ (2014) Positive predictive value of additional synchronous breast lesions in whole breast ultrasonography at the diagnosis of breast cancer: clinical and imaging factors. Ultrasonography 33:170–177CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Kim AH, Kim MJ, Kim EK, Park BW, Moon HJ (2014) Positive predictive value of additional synchronous breast lesions in whole breast ultrasonography at the diagnosis of breast cancer: clinical and imaging factors. Ultrasonography 33:170–177CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
60.
go back to reference Ganott MA, Zuley ML, Abrams GS et al (2014) Ultrasound-guided core biopsy versus fine needle aspiration for evaluation of axillary lymphadenopathy in patients with breast cancer. ISRN Oncol: 703160 Ganott MA, Zuley ML, Abrams GS et al (2014) Ultrasound-guided core biopsy versus fine needle aspiration for evaluation of axillary lymphadenopathy in patients with breast cancer. ISRN Oncol: 703160
62.
go back to reference Liedtke C, Rody A (2017) Neoadjuvant therapy for patients with triple negative breast cancer (TNBC). Rev Recent Clin Trials 12:73–80CrossRefPubMed Liedtke C, Rody A (2017) Neoadjuvant therapy for patients with triple negative breast cancer (TNBC). Rev Recent Clin Trials 12:73–80CrossRefPubMed
63.
go back to reference Marinovich ML, Houssami N, Macaskill P, von Minckwitz G, Blohmer JU, Irwig L (2015) Accuracy of ultrasound for predicting pathologic response during neoadjuvant therapy for breast cancer. Int J Cancer 136:2730–2737CrossRefPubMed Marinovich ML, Houssami N, Macaskill P, von Minckwitz G, Blohmer JU, Irwig L (2015) Accuracy of ultrasound for predicting pathologic response during neoadjuvant therapy for breast cancer. Int J Cancer 136:2730–2737CrossRefPubMed
64.
go back to reference Marinovich ML, Sardanelli F, Ciatto S et al (2012) Early prediction of pathologic response to neoadjuvant therapy in breast cancer: systematic review of the accuracy of MRI. Breast 21:669–677CrossRefPubMed Marinovich ML, Sardanelli F, Ciatto S et al (2012) Early prediction of pathologic response to neoadjuvant therapy in breast cancer: systematic review of the accuracy of MRI. Breast 21:669–677CrossRefPubMed
65.
go back to reference Marinovich ML, Macaskill P, Irwig L et al (2013) Meta-analysis of agreement between MRI and pathologic breast tumour size after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Br J Cancer 109:1528–1536CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Marinovich ML, Macaskill P, Irwig L et al (2013) Meta-analysis of agreement between MRI and pathologic breast tumour size after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Br J Cancer 109:1528–1536CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
66.
go back to reference Marinovich ML, Houssami N, Macaskill P et al (2013) Meta-analysis of magnetic resonance imaging in detecting residual breast cancer after neoadjuvant therapy. J Natl Cancer Inst 105:321–333CrossRefPubMed Marinovich ML, Houssami N, Macaskill P et al (2013) Meta-analysis of magnetic resonance imaging in detecting residual breast cancer after neoadjuvant therapy. J Natl Cancer Inst 105:321–333CrossRefPubMed
67.
68.
go back to reference Seiler SJ, Sharma PB, Hayes JC et al (2017) Multimodality imaging-based evaluation of single-lumen silicone breast implants for rupture. Radiographics 37:366–382CrossRefPubMed Seiler SJ, Sharma PB, Hayes JC et al (2017) Multimodality imaging-based evaluation of single-lumen silicone breast implants for rupture. Radiographics 37:366–382CrossRefPubMed
69.
go back to reference Hold PM, Alam S, Pilbrow WJ et al (2012) How should we investigate breast implant rupture? Breast J 18:253–256CrossRefPubMed Hold PM, Alam S, Pilbrow WJ et al (2012) How should we investigate breast implant rupture? Breast J 18:253–256CrossRefPubMed
70.
go back to reference Gray RJ, Pockaj BA, Garvey E, Blair S (2018) Intraoperative margin management in breast conserving surgery: a systematic review of the literature. Ann Surg Oncol 25:18–27CrossRefPubMed Gray RJ, Pockaj BA, Garvey E, Blair S (2018) Intraoperative margin management in breast conserving surgery: a systematic review of the literature. Ann Surg Oncol 25:18–27CrossRefPubMed
71.
go back to reference Ramos M, Díaz JC, Ramos T et al (2013) Ultrasound-guided excision combined with intraoperative assessment of gross macroscopic margins decreases the rate of reoperations for non-palpable invasive breast cancer. Breast 22:520–524CrossRefPubMed Ramos M, Díaz JC, Ramos T et al (2013) Ultrasound-guided excision combined with intraoperative assessment of gross macroscopic margins decreases the rate of reoperations for non-palpable invasive breast cancer. Breast 22:520–524CrossRefPubMed
72.
go back to reference Naz S, Hafeez S, Hussain Z, Hilal K (2017) Negative predictive value of ultrasound in predicting tumor-free margins in specimen sonography. J Coll Physicians Surg Pak 27:747–750PubMed Naz S, Hafeez S, Hussain Z, Hilal K (2017) Negative predictive value of ultrasound in predicting tumor-free margins in specimen sonography. J Coll Physicians Surg Pak 27:747–750PubMed
73.
go back to reference Moschetta M, Telegrafo M, Introna T et al (2015) Role of specimen US for predicting resection margin status in breast conserving therapy. G Chir 36:201–204PubMed Moschetta M, Telegrafo M, Introna T et al (2015) Role of specimen US for predicting resection margin status in breast conserving therapy. G Chir 36:201–204PubMed
74.
go back to reference Londero V, Zuiani C, Panozzo M, Linda A, Girometti R, Bazzocchi M (2010) Surgical specimen ultrasound: is it able to predict the status of resection margins after breast-conserving surgery? Breast 19:532–537CrossRefPubMed Londero V, Zuiani C, Panozzo M, Linda A, Girometti R, Bazzocchi M (2010) Surgical specimen ultrasound: is it able to predict the status of resection margins after breast-conserving surgery? Breast 19:532–537CrossRefPubMed
75.
go back to reference Maxwell AJ, Ridley NT, Rubin G et al (2009) Royal college of radiologists breast group imaging classification. Clin Radiol 64:624–627 Maxwell AJ, Ridley NT, Rubin G et al (2009) Royal college of radiologists breast group imaging classification. Clin Radiol 64:624–627
76.
go back to reference Barnett SB, Ter Haar GR, Ziskin MC, Rott HD, Duck FA, Maeda K (2000) International recommendations and guidelines for the safe use of diagnostic ultrasound in medicine. Ultrasound Med Biol 26:355–366 Barnett SB, Ter Haar GR, Ziskin MC, Rott HD, Duck FA, Maeda K (2000) International recommendations and guidelines for the safe use of diagnostic ultrasound in medicine. Ultrasound Med Biol 26:355–366
Metadata
Title
Breast ultrasound: recommendations for information to women and referring physicians by the European Society of Breast Imaging
Authors
Andrew Evans
Rubina M. Trimboli
Alexandra Athanasiou
Corinne Balleyguier
Pascal A. Baltzer
Ulrich Bick
Julia Camps Herrero
Paola Clauser
Catherine Colin
Eleanor Cornford
Eva M. Fallenberg
Michael H. Fuchsjaeger
Fiona J. Gilbert
Thomas H. Helbich
Karen Kinkel
Sylvia H. Heywang-Köbrunner
Christiane K. Kuhl
Ritse M. Mann
Laura Martincich
Pietro Panizza
Federica Pediconi
Ruud M. Pijnappel
Katja Pinker
Sophia Zackrisson
Gabor Forrai
Francesco Sardanelli
for the European Society of Breast Imaging (EUSOBI) , with language review by Europa Donna–The European Breast Cancer Coalition
Publication date
01-08-2018
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in
Insights into Imaging / Issue 4/2018
Electronic ISSN: 1869-4101
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s13244-018-0636-z

Other articles of this Issue 4/2018

Insights into Imaging 4/2018 Go to the issue