Top

Published in:

01-12-2020 | Magnetic Resonance Imaging | Guideline

Image-guided breast biopsy and localisation: recommendations for information to women and referring physicians by the European Society of Breast Imaging

Authors: Ulrich Bick, Rubina M. Trimboli, Alexandra Athanasiou, Corinne Balleyguier, Pascal A. T. Baltzer, Maria Bernathova, Krisztina Borbély, Boris Brkljacic, Luca A. Carbonaro, Paola Clauser, Enrico Cassano, Catherine Colin, Gul Esen, Andrew Evans, Eva M. Fallenberg, Michael H. Fuchsjaeger, Fiona J. Gilbert, Thomas H. Helbich, Sylvia H. Heywang-Köbrunner, Michel Herranz, Karen Kinkel, Fleur Kilburn-Toppin, Christiane K. Kuhl, Mihai Lesaru, Marc B. I. Lobbes, Ritse M. Mann, Laura Martincich, Pietro Panizza, Federica Pediconi, Ruud M. Pijnappel, Katja Pinker, Simone Schiaffino, Tamar Sella, Isabelle Thomassin-Naggara, Anne Tardivon, Chantal Van Ongeval, Matthew G. Wallis, Sophia Zackrisson, Gabor Forrai, Julia Camps Herrero, 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 1/2020

Abstract

We summarise here the information to be provided to women and referring physicians about percutaneous breast biopsy and lesion localisation under imaging guidance. After explaining why a preoperative diagnosis with a percutaneous biopsy is preferred to surgical biopsy, we illustrate the criteria used by radiologists for choosing the most appropriate combination of device type for sampling and imaging technique for guidance. Then, we describe the commonly used devices, from fine-needle sampling to tissue biopsy with larger needles, namely core needle biopsy and vacuum-assisted biopsy, and how mammography, digital breast tomosynthesis, ultrasound, or magnetic resonance imaging work for targeting the lesion for sampling or localisation. The differences among the techniques available for localisation (carbon marking, metallic wire, radiotracer injection, radioactive seed, and magnetic seed localisation) are illustrated. Type and rate of possible complications are described and the issue of concomitant antiplatelet or anticoagulant therapy is also addressed. The importance of pathological-radiological correlation is highlighted: when evaluating the results of any needle sampling, the radiologist must check the concordance between the cytology/pathology report of the sample and the radiological appearance of the biopsied lesion. We recommend that special attention is paid to a proper and tactful approach when communicating to the woman the need for tissue sampling as well as the possibility of cancer diagnosis, repeat tissue sampling, and or even surgery when tissue sampling shows a lesion with uncertain malignant potential (also referred to as “high-risk” or B3 lesions). Finally, seven frequently asked questions are answered.

Rules for the informed consent required for needle tissue sampling and lesion localisation can be different according to national, regional, or local regulations, including written informed consent after presentation of written information about advantages and disadvantages associated to the procedure or oral informed consent described in the radiological report.

Del Turco MR, Ponti A, Bick U et al (2010) Quality indicators in breast cancer care. Eur J Cancer 46:2344–2356. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejca.2010.06.119 CrossRefPubMed

Hayes MK (2017) Update on preoperative breast localization. Radiol Clin North Am 55:591–603. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rcl.2016.12.012 CrossRefPubMed

Cheang E, Ha R, Thornton CM, Mango VL (2018) Innovations in image-guided preoperative breast lesion localization. Br J Radiol 91(1085):20170740. https://doi.org/10.1259/bjr.20170740 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Tomkovich KR (2014) Interventional radiology in the diagnosis and treatment of diseases of the breast: a historical review and future perspective based on currently available techniques. AJR Am J Roentgenol 203:725–733. https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.14.12994 CrossRefPubMed

Papalouka V, Kilburn-Toppin F, Gaskarth M, Gilbert F (2018) MRI-guided breast biopsy: a review of technique, indications, and radiological-pathological correlations. Clin Radiol 73:908.e17–908.e25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crad.2018.05.029 CrossRef

Mayo RC 3rd, Kalambo MJ, Parikh JR (2019) Preoperative localization of breast lesions: current techniques. Clin Imaging 56:1–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clinimag.2019.01.013 CrossRefPubMed

Sardanelli F, Helbich TH (2012) Mammography: EUSOBI recommendations for women's information. Insights Imaging 3:7–10. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13244-011-0127-y CrossRefPubMed

Sardanelli F, Fallenberg EM, Clauser P et al (2017) Mammography: an update of the EUSOBI recommendations on information for women. Insights Imaging 8:11–18. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13244-016-0531-4 CrossRefPubMed

Mann RM, Balleyguier C, Baltzer PA et al (2015) Breast MRI: EUSOBI recommendations for women’s information. Eur Radiol 25:3669–3678. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-015-3807-z CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

10.

Evans A, Trimboli RM, Athanasiou A et al (2018) Breast ultrasound: recommendations for information to women and referring physicians by the European Society of Breast Imaging. Insights Imaging 9:449–461. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13244-018-0636-z CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

11.

Wallis M, Tarvidon A, Helbich T, Schreer I (2007) Guidelines from the European Society of Breast Imaging for diagnostic interventional breast procedures. Eur Radiol 17:581–588. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-006-0408-x CrossRef

12.

Plecha D, Bai S, Patterson H, Thompson C, Shenk R (2015) Improving the accuracy of axillary lymph node surgery in breast cancer with ultrasound-guided wire localization of biopsy proven metastatic lymph nodes. Ann Surg Oncol 22:4241–4246. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-015-4527-y CrossRefPubMed

13.

Nakamura R, Yamamoto N, Miyaki T, Itami M, Shina N, Ohtsuka M (2018) Impact of sentinel lymph node biopsy by ultrasound-guided core needle biopsy for patients with suspicious node positive breast cancer. Breast Cancer 25:86–93. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12282-017-0795-7 CrossRefPubMed

14.

Rautiainen S, Masarwah A, Sudah M et al (2013) Axillary lymph node biopsy in newly diagnosed invasive breast cancer: comparative accuracy of fine-needle aspiration biopsy versus core-needle biopsy. Radiology 269:54–60. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.13122637 CrossRefPubMed

15.

Dahabreh IJ, Wieland LS, Adam GP, Halladay C, Lau J, Trikalinos TA (2014) Core needle and open surgical biopsy for diagnosis of breast lesions: an update to the 2009 report. Comparative effectiveness review No. 139. Publication No. 14-EHC040-EF. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, Rockville, MD, USA. Available at: https://effectivehealthcare.ahrq.gov/topics/breast-biopsy-update/research

16.

Lee AHS, Denley HE, Pinder SE et al (2003) Excision biopsy findings of patients with breast needle core biopsies reported as suspicious of malignancy (B4) or lesion of uncertain malignant potential (B3). Histopathology 42:331–336. https://doi.org/10.1097/COC.0000000000000524 CrossRefPubMed

17.

Houssami N, Ciatto S, Bilous M, Vezzosi V, Bianchi S (2007) Borderline breast core needle histology: predictive values for malignancy in lesions of uncertain malignant potential (B3). Br J Cancer 96:1253–1257. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bjc.6603714 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

18.

Dillon MF, McDermott EW, Hill AD, O’Doherty A, O’Higgins N, Quinn CM (2007) Predictive value of breast lesions of “uncertain malignant potential” determined by needle core biopsy. Ann Surg Oncol 14:704–711. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-006-9212-8 CrossRefPubMed

19.

Lieske B, Ravichandran D, Alvi A, Lawrence DAS, Wright DJ (2008) Screen-detected breast lesions with an indeterminate (B3) core needle biopsy should be excised. Eur J Surg Oncol 34:1293–1298. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejso.2007.11.005 CrossRefPubMed

20.

El-Sayed ME, Rakha EA, Reed J, Lee AH, Evans AJ, Ellis IO (2008) Predictive value of needle core biopsy diagnoses of lesions of uncertain malignant potential (B3) in abnormalities detected by mammographic screening. Histopathology 53:650–657. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2559.2008.03158.x CrossRef

21.

Hayes BD, O’Doherty A, Quinn CM (2009) Correlation of needle core biopsy with excision histology in screen-detected B3 lesions: the Merriot Breast Screening Unit experience. J Clin Pathol 62:1136–1140. https://doi.org/10.1136/jcp.2009.067280 CrossRefPubMed

22.

Londero V, Zuiani C, Linda A, Battigelli L, Brondani G, Bazzocchi M (2011) Borderline breast lesions: comparison of malignancy underestimation rates with 14-gauge core needle biopsy versus 11-gauge vacuum-assisted device. Eur Radiol 21:1200–1206. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-010-2053-7 CrossRefPubMed

23.

Bianchi S, Caini S, Renne G et al (2011) Positive predictive value for malignancy on surgical excision of breast lesions of uncertain malignant potential (B3) diagnosed by stereotactic vacuum-assisted needle core biopsy (VANCB): a large multi-institutional study in Italy. Breast 20:264–270. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.breast.2010 CrossRefPubMed

24.

Rakha EA, Lee AH, Jenkins JA, Murphy AE, Hamilton LJ, Ellis IO (2011) Characterization and outcome of breast needle core biopsy diagnoses of lesions of uncertain malignant potential (B3) in abnormalities detected by mammographic screening. Int J Cancer 129:1417–1424. https://doi.org/10.1002/ijc.25801 CrossRef

25.

Rageth CJ, O'Flynn EA, Comstock C et al (2016) First International Consensus Conference on lesions of uncertain malignant potential in the breast (B3 lesions). Breast Cancer Res Treat 159:203–213. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-016-3935-4 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

26.

Perry N, Broeders M, de Wolf C, Tornberg S, Holland R, von Karsa L (2008) European guidelines for quality assurance in breast cancer screening and diagnosis. Fourth edition–summary document. Ann Oncol 19:614–622. https://doi.org/10.1093/annonc/mdm481 CrossRefPubMed

27.

Rageth CJ, O'Flynn EAM, Pinker K et al (2019) Second International Consensus Conference on lesions of uncertain malignant potential in the breast (B3 lesions). Breast Cancer Res Treat 174:279–296. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-018-05071-1 CrossRefPubMed

28.

Purushothaman HN, Lekanidi K, Shousha S, Wilson R (2016) Lesions of uncertain malignant potential in the breast (B3): what do we know? Clin Radiol 71:134–140. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crad.2015.10.008 CrossRefPubMed

29.

Farras Roca JA, Tardivon A, Thibault F et al (2017) Diagnostic performance of ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration of nonpalpable breast lesions in a multidisciplinary setting: the Institut Curie's experience. Am J Clin Pathol 147:571–579. https://doi.org/10.1093/ajcp/aqx009 CrossRefPubMed

30.

Bumberger A, Clauser P, Kolta M et al (2019) Can we predict lesion detection rates in second-look ultrasound of MRI-detected breast lesions? A systematic analysis. Eur J Radiol 113:96–100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2019.02.008 CrossRefPubMed

31.

Chaiwun B, Thorner P (2007) Fine needle aspiration for evaluation of breast masses. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol 19:48–55. https://doi.org/10.1097/GCO.0b013e328011f9ae CrossRefPubMed

32.

Kazi M, Suhani PR, Parshad R, Seenu V, Mathur S, Haresh KP (2017) Fine-needle aspiration cytology (FNAC) in breast cancer: a reappraisal based on retrospective review of 698 cases. World J Surg 41:1528–1533. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-017-3906-x CrossRef

33.

Akçil M, Karaağaoğlu E, Demirhan B (2008) Diagnostic accuracy of fine-needle aspiration cytology of palpable breast masses: an SROC curve with fixed and random effects linear meta-regression models. Diagn Cytopathol 36:303–310. https://doi.org/10.1002/dc.20809 CrossRefPubMed

34.

Willems SM, van Deurzen CHM, van Diest PJ (2012) Diagnosis of breast lesions: fine-needle aspiration cytology or core needle biopsy? A review. J Clin Pathol 65:287–292. https://doi.org/10.1136/jclinpath-2011-200410 CrossRefPubMed

35.

van Breest Smallenburg V, Nederend J, Voogd AC et al (2013) Trends in breast biopsies for abnormalities detected at screening mammography: a population-based study in the Netherlands. Br J Cancer 109:242–248. https://doi.org/10.1038/bjc.2013.253 CrossRef

36.

Berg WA, Sechtin AG, Marques H, Zhang Z (2010) Cystic breast masses and the ACRIN 6666 experience. Radiol Clin North Am 48:931–987. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rcl.2010.06.007 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

37.

Lam E, Chan T, Wiseman SM (2014) Breast abscess: evidence based management recommendations. Expert Rev Anti-Infect Ther 12:753–762. https://doi.org/10.1586/14787210.2014.913982 CrossRefPubMed

38.

Colin C, Delov AG, Peyron-Faure N, Rabilloud M, Charlot M (2019) Breast abscesses in lactating women: evidence for ultrasound-guided percutaneous management to avoid surgery. Emerg Radiol. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10140-019-01694-z CrossRef

39.

Kang YD, Kim YM (2016) Comparison of needle aspiration and vacuum-assisted biopsy in the ultrasound-guided drainage of lactational breast abscesses. Ultrasonography 35:148–152. https://doi.org/10.14366/usg.15041 CrossRefPubMed

40.

Fishman JE, Milikowski C, Ramsinghani R, Velasquez MV, Aviram G (2003) US-guided core-needle biopsy of the breast: How many specimens are necessary. Radiology 226:779–782. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2263011622 CrossRefPubMed

41.

Mahoney MC, Newell MS (2013) Breast intervention: how I do it. Radiology 268:12–24. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.13120985 CrossRefPubMed

42.

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(2):406–413. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2482071994 CrossRefPubMed

43.

Perrot N, Jalaguier-Coudray A, Frey I, Thomassin-Naggara I, Chopier J (2013) US-guided core needle biopsy: false-negatives. How to reduce them? Eur J Radiol 82:424–426. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2012.03.003 CrossRef

44.

Brennan ME, Turner RM, Ciatto S et al (2011) Ductal carcinoma in situ at core-needle biopsy: meta-analysis of underestimation and predictors of invasive breast cancer. Radiology 260:119–128. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.11102368 CrossRefPubMed

45.

Poellinger A, Bick U, Freund T, Diekmann S, Hamm B, Diekmann F (2007) Evaluation of 11-gauge and 9-gauge vacuum-assisted breast biopsy systems in a breast parenchymal model. Acad Radiol 14:677–684. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acra.2007.02.013 CrossRef

46.

Preibsch H, Baur A, Wietek BM et al (2015) Vacuum-assisted breast biopsy with 7-gauge, 8-gauge, 9-gauge, 10-gauge, and 11-gauge needles: how many specimens are necessary? Acta Radiol 56:1078–1084. https://doi.org/10.1177/0284185114549224 CrossRefPubMed

47.

Lomoschitz FM, Helbich TH, Rudas M et al (2004) Stereotactic 11-gauge vacuum-assisted breast biopsy: influence of number of specimens on diagnostic accuracy. Radiology 232:897–903. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2323031224 CrossRefPubMed

48.

Spick C, Schernthaner M, Pinker K et al (2016) MR-guided vacuum-assisted breast biopsy of MRI-only lesions: a single center experience. Eur Radiol 26:3908–3916. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-016-4267-9 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

49.

Hanna WC, Demyttenaere SV, Ferri LE, Fleiszer DM (2005) The use of stereotactic excisional biopsy in the management of invasive breast cancer. World J Surg 29:1490–1496. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-005-7828-7 CrossRefPubMed

50.

Doridot V, Meunier M, El Khoury C et al (2005) Stereotactic radioguided surgery by siteSelect for subclinical mammographic lesions. Ann Surg Oncol 12:181–188. https://doi.org/10.1245/ASO.2005.01.004 CrossRefPubMed

51.

O’Flynn EAM, Wilson ARM, Michell MJ (2010) Image-guided breast biopsy: state-of the-art. Clin Radiol 65:259–270. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crad.2010.01.008 CrossRefPubMed

52.

Sie A, Bryan DC, Gaines V et al (2006) Multicenter evaluation of the breast lesion excision system, a percutaneous, vacuum- assisted, intact-specimen breast biopsy device. Cancer 107:945–949. https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.22090 CrossRefPubMed

53.

Seror JY, Lesieur B, Scheuer-Niro B, Zerat L, Rouzier R, Uzan S (2012) Predictive factors for complete excision and underestimation of one-pass en bloc excision of non-palpable breast lesions with the Intact (R) breast lesion excision system. Eur J Radiol 81:719–724. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2011.01.049 CrossRefPubMed

54.

Milos RI, Bernathova M, Baltzer PA et al (2017) The breast lesion excision system (BLES) under stereotactic guidance cannot be used as a therapeutic tool in the excision of small areas of microcalcifications in the breast. Eur J Radiol 93:252–257. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2017.05.045 CrossRefPubMed

55.

Sanderink WBG, Laarhuis BI, Strobbe LJA et al (2019) A systematic review on the use of the breast lesion excision system in breast disease. Insights Imaging 10:49. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13244-019-0737-3 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

56.

Thomassin-Naggara I, Lalonde L, David J, Darai E, Uzan S, Trop I (2012) A plea for the biopsy marker: how, why and why not clipping after breast biopsy? Breast Cancer Res Treat 132:881–893. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-011-1847-x CrossRefPubMed

57.

Schueller G, Schueller-Weidekamm C, Helbich TH (2008) Accuracy of ultrasound-guided, large-core needle breast biopsy. Eur Radiol 18:1761–1773. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-008-0955-4 CrossRefPubMed

58.

Newell MS, Mahoney MC (2014) Ultrasound-guided percutaneous breast biopsy. Tech Vasc Intervent Rad 17:23–31. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.tvir.2013.12.005 CrossRef

59.

Nakano S, Imawari Y, Mibu A, Otsuka M, Oinuma T (2018) Differentiating vacuum-assisted breast biopsy from core needle biopsy: Is it necessary? Br J Radiol 91:20180250. https://doi.org/10.1259/bjr.20180250 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

60.

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. https://doi.org/10.2214/ajr.179.6.1791503 CrossRefPubMed

61.

Ames V, Britton PD (2011) Stereotactically guided breast biopsy: a review. Insights Imaging 2:171–176. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13244-010-0064-1 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

62.

Viala J, Gignier P, Perret B et al (2013) Stereotactic vacuum-assisted biopsies on a digital breast 3D-tomosynthesis system. Breast J 19:4–9. https://doi.org/10.1111/tbj.12044 CrossRefPubMed

63.

Bernardi D, Belli P, Benelli E et al (2017) Digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT): recommendations from the Italian College of Breast Radiologists (ICBR) by the Italian Society of Medical Radiology (SIRM) and the Italian Group for Mammography Screening (GISMa). Radiol Med 122:723–730. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11547-017-0769-z CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

64.

Schrading S, Distelmaier M, Dirrichs T et al (2015) Digital breast tomosynthesis-guided vacuum-assisted breast biopsy: initial experiences and comparison with prone stereotactic vacuum-assisted biopsy. Radiology 274:654–662. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.14141397 CrossRefPubMed

65.

Bahl M, Maunglay M, D’Alessandro HA, Lehman CD (2019) Comparison of upright digital breast tomosynthesis-guided versus prone stereotactic vacuum-assisted breast biopsy. Radiology 290:298–304. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2018181788 CrossRefPubMed

66.

Heywang-Köbrunner SH, Sinnatamby R, Lebeau A, Lebrecht A, Britton PD, Schreer I, Consensus Group (2009) Interdisciplinary consensus on the uses and technique of MR-guided vacuum-assisted breast biopsy (VAB): results of a European consensus meeting. Eur J Radiol 72:289–294. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2008.07.010 CrossRefPubMed

67.

Plantade R, Thomassin-Naggara I (2014) MRI vacuum-assisted breast biopsies. Diagn Interv Imaging 95:779–801. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.diii.2013.12.023 CrossRefPubMed

68.

Imschweiler T, Haueisen H, Kampmann G et al (2014) MRI-guided vacuum-assisted breast biopsy: comparison with stereotactically guided and ultrasound-guided techniques. Eur Radiol 24:128–135. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-013-2989-5 CrossRefPubMed

69.

Abe H, Schmidt RA, Shah RN et al (2010) MR-directed (“second-look”) ultrasound examination for breast lesions detected initially on MRI: MR and sonographic findings. AJR Am J Roentgenol 194:370–377. https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.09.2707 CrossRefPubMed

70.

Hooley RJ, Scoutt LM, Philpotts LE (2013) Breast ultrasonography: state of the art. Radiology 268:642–659. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.13121606 CrossRefPubMed

71.

Spick C, Baltzer PA (2014) Diagnostic utility of second-look US for breast lesions identified at MR imaging: systematic review and meta-analysis. Radiology 273:401–409. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.14140474 CrossRefPubMed

72.

Schrading S, Strobel K, Keulers A, Dirrichs T, Kuhl CK (2017) Safety and efficacy of magnetic resonance-guided vacuum-assisted large-volume breast biopsy (MR-guided VALB). Invest Radiol 52:186–193. https://doi.org/10.1097/RLI.0000000000000331 CrossRefPubMed

73.

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. https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.21720 CrossRefPubMed

74.

Clauser P, Mann R, Athanasiou A et al (2018) A survey by the European Society of Breast Imaging on the utilisation of breast MRI in clinical practice. Eur Radiol 28:1909–1918. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-017-5121-4 CrossRefPubMed

75.

Tot T, Gere M (2008) Radiological-pathological correlation in diagnosing breast carcinoma: the role of pathology in the multimodality era. Pathol Oncol Res 14:173–178. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12253-008-9061-9 CrossRefPubMed

76.

Youk JH, Kim EK, Kim MJ et al (2011) Concordant or discordant? Imaging-pathology correlation in a sonography-guided core needle biopsy of a breast lesion. Korean J Radiol 12:232–240. https://doi.org/10.3348/kjr.2011.12.2.232 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

77.

Apesteguía L, Pina LJ (2011) Ultrasound-guided core-needle biopsy of breast lesions. Insights Imaging 2:493–500. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13244-011-0090-7 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

78.

Dratwa C, Jalaguier-Coudray A, Thomassin-Piana J et al (2016) Breast MR biopsy: pathological and radiological correlation. Eur Radiol 26(8):2510–2519. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-015-4071-y CrossRefPubMed

79.

Liberman L, Feng TL, Dershaw DD, Morris EA, Abramson AF (1998) US-guided core breast biopsy: use and cost-effectiveness. Radiology 208:717–723. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiology.208.3.9722851 CrossRefPubMed

80.

Adler K, Samreen N, Glazebrook KN (2019) Bhatt AA (2019) Imaging features and treatment options for breast pseudoaneurysms after biopsy: a case-based pictorial. J Ultrasound Med. https://doi.org/10.1002/jum.15082 CrossRef

81.

Reisenauer C, Fazzio RT, Hesley G (2017) JOURNAL CLUB: Ultrasound-guided breast interventions: low Incidence of infectious complications with use of an uncovered probe. AJR Am J Roentgenol 208:1147–1153. https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.16.16440 CrossRefPubMed

82.

Brenner RJ, Gordon LM (2011) Malignant seeding following percutaneous breast biopsy: documentation with comprehensive imaging and clinical implications. Breast J 17:651–656. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1524-4741.2011.01156.x CrossRefPubMed

83.

Santiago L, Adrada BE, Huang ML, Wei W, Candelaria RP (2017) Breast cancer neoplastic seeding in the setting of image-guided needle biopsies of the breast. Breast Cancer Res Treat 166:29–39. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-017-4401-7 CrossRefPubMed

84.

Loughran CF, Keeling CR (2011) Seeding of tumour cells following breast biopsy: a literature review. Br J Radiol 84:869–874. https://doi.org/10.1259/bjr/77245199 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

85.

Fitzal F, Sporn EP, Draxler W et al (2006) Preoperative core needle biopsy does not increase local recurrence rate in breast cancer patients. Breast Cancer Res Treat 97:9–15. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-005-6935-3 CrossRefPubMed

86.

Sennerstam RB, Franzén BSH, Wiksell HOT, Auer GU (2017) Core-needle biopsy of breast cancer is associated with a higher rate of distant metastases 5 to 15 years after diagnosis than FNA biopsy. Cancer Cytopathol 125:748–756. https://doi.org/10.1002/cncy.21909 CrossRefPubMed

87.

Altundag K (2017) Imaging modalities for the detection of distant metastases in breast cancer patients diagnosed in the 1970s and 1990s: Does it make any sense? Cancer Cytopathol 125:954. https://doi.org/10.1002/cncy.21925 CrossRefPubMed

88.

Bates T, Davidson T, Mansel RE (2002) Litigation for pneumothorax as a complication of fine-needle aspiration of the breast. Br J Surg 89:134–137. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.0007-1323.2001.01994.x CrossRefPubMed

89.

Somerville P, Seifert PJ, Destounis SV, Murphy PF, Young W (2008) Anticoagulation and bleeding risk after core needle biopsy. AJR Am J Roentgenol 191:1194–1197. https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.07.3537 CrossRefPubMed

90.

Jaffe TA, Raiff D, Ho LM, Kim CY (2015) Management of anticoagulant and antiplatelet medications in adults undergoing percutaneous interventions. AJR Am J Roentgenol 205:421–428. https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.14.13342 CrossRefPubMed

91.

Soo AE, Shelby RA, Miller LS et al (2014) Predictors of pain experienced by women during percutaneous imaging-guided breast biopsies. J Am Coll Radiol 11:709–716. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacr.2014.01.013 CrossRefPubMed

92.

Miller LS, Shelby RA, Balmadrid MH et al (2016) Patient anxiety before and immediately after imaging-guided breast biopsy procedures: impact of radiologist-patient communication. J Am Coll Radiol 13:e62–e71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacr.2016.09.034 CrossRefPubMed

93.

Soo MS, Jarosz JA, Wren AA et al (2016) Imaging-guided core-needle breast biopsy: impact of meditation and music interventions on patient anxiety, pain, and fatigue. J Am Coll Radiol 13:526–534. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacr.2015.12.004 CrossRefPubMed

94.

Delaloge S, Bonastre J, Borget I et al (2016) The challenge of rapid diagnosis in oncology: Diagnostic accuracy and cost analysis of a large-scale one-stop breast clinic. Eur J Cancer 66:131–137. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejca.2016.06.021 CrossRefPubMed

95.

Boinon D, Dauchy S, Charles C et al (2018) Patient satisfaction with a rapid diagnosis of suspicious breast lesions: Association with distress and anxiety. Breast J 24:154–160. https://doi.org/10.1111/tbj.12856 CrossRefPubMed

96.

Jeffries DO, Dossett LA, Jorns JM (2017) Localization for breast surgery: the next generation. Arch Pathol Lab Med 141:1324–1329. https://doi.org/10.5858/arpa.2017-0214-RA CrossRefPubMed

97.

Riedl CC, Pfarl G, Helbich TH et al (2002) Comparison of wire versus carbon localization of non-palpable breast lesions. Rofo 174:1126–1131. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-2002-33933 CrossRefPubMed

98.

Rose A, Collins JP, Neerhut P, Bishop CV, Mann GB (2003) Carbon localisation of impalpable breast lesions. Breast 12:264–269CrossRef

99.

Ruiz-Delgado ML, López-Ruiz JA, Sáiz-López A (2008) Abnormal mammography and sonography associated with foreign-body giant-cell reaction after stereotactic vacuum-assisted breast biopsy with carbon marking. Acta Radiol 49:1112–1118. https://doi.org/10.1080/02841850802452075 CrossRefPubMed

100.

Helvie MA, Ikeda DM, Adler DD (1991) Localization and needle aspiration of breast lesions: complications in 370 cases. AJR Am J Roentgenol 157:711–714. https://doi.org/10.2214/ajr.157.4.1892023 CrossRefPubMed

101.

Rissanen TJ, Mäkäräinen HP, Mattila SI et al (1993) Wire localized biopsy of breast lesions: a review of 425 cases found in screening or clinical mammography. Clin Radiol 47:14–22CrossRef

102.

Rissanen TJ, Mäkäräinen HP, Kiviniemi HO, Suramo II (1994) Ultrasonographically guided wire localization of nonpalpable breast lesions. J Ultrasound Med 13:183–188CrossRef

103.

Riedl CC, Pfarl G, Memarsadeghi M et al (2005) Lesion miss rates and false-negative rates for 1115 consecutive cases of stereotactically guided needle-localized open breast biopsy with long-term follow-up. Radiology 237:847–853. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2373041391 CrossRefPubMed

104.

Bachir N, Lemaitre J, Lardinois I (2018) Intrathoracic hooked wire migration managed by minimally invasive thoracoscopic surgery. Acta Chir Belg 3:1–4. https://doi.org/10.1080/00015458.2018.1523298 CrossRef

105.

Luini A, Zurrida S, Galimberti V, Paganelli G (1998) Radioguided surgery of occult breast lesions. Eur J Cancer 34:204–205CrossRef

106.

Grüning T, Brogsitter C, Jones IW, Heales JC (2012) Resolution recovery in planar bone scans: diagnostic value in metastatic disease. Nucl Med Commun 33:1307–1310. https://doi.org/10.1097/MNM.0b013e328359d3ce CrossRefPubMed

107.

De Cicco C, Pizzamiglio M, Trifirò G et al (2002) Radioguided occult lesion localisation (ROLL) and surgical biopsy in breast cancer. Technical aspects. Q J Nucl Med 46:145–151PubMed

108.

Monti S, Galimberti V, Trifiro G et al (2007) Occult breast lesion localization plus sentinel node biopsy (SNOLL): experience with 959 patients at the European Institute of Oncology. Ann Surg Oncol 14:2928–2931. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-007-9452-2 CrossRefPubMed

109.

Sajid MS, Parampalli U, Haider Z, Bonomi R (2012) Comparison of radioguided occult lesion localization (ROLL) and wire localization for non-palpable breast cancers: a meta-analysis. J Surg Oncol 105:852858. https://doi.org/10.1002/jso.23016 CrossRef

110.

Gray RJ, Salud C, Nguyen K et al (2001) Randomized prospective evaluation of a novel technique for biopsy or lumpectomy of nonpalpable breast lesions: radioactive seed versus wire localization. Ann Surg Oncol 8:711–715CrossRef

111.

Barentsz MW, van den Bosch MA, Veldhuis WB et al (2013) Radioactive seed localization for non-palpable breast cancer. Br J Surg 100:582–588. https://doi.org/10.1002/bjs.9068 CrossRefPubMed

112.

Goudreau SH, Joseph JP, Seiler SJ (2015) Preoperative radioactive seed localization for nonpalpable breast lesions: technique, pitfalls, and solutions. Radiographics 35:1319–1334. https://doi.org/10.1148/rg.2015140293 CrossRefPubMed

113.

Janssen NNY, van la Parra RFD, Loo CE et al (2018) Breast conserving surgery for extensive DCIS using multiple radioactive seeds. Eur J Surg Oncol 44:67–73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejso.2017.11.002 CrossRefPubMed

114.

Price ER, Khoury AL, Esserman LJ, Joe BN, Alvarado MD (2018) Initial clinical experience with an inducible magnetic seed system for preoperative breast lesion localization. AJR Am J Roentgenol 210:913–917. https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.17.18345 CrossRefPubMed

115.

Harvey JR, Lim Y, Murphy J et al (2018) Safety and feasibility of breast lesion localization using magnetic seeds (Magseed): a multi-centre, open-label cohort study. Breast Cancer Res Treat 169:531–536. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-018-4709-y CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

116.

Lamb LR, Bahl M, Specht MC, D'Alessandro HA, Lehman CD (2018) Evaluation of a nonradioactive magnetic marker wireless localization program. AJR Am J Roentgenol 211:940–945. https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.18.19637 CrossRefPubMed

117.

Chan BK, Wiseberg-Firtell JA, Jois RH, Jensen K, Audisio RA (2015) Localization techniques for guided surgical excision of non-palpable breast lesions. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 12:CD009206. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD009206.pub2 CrossRef

Title: Image-guided breast biopsy and localisation: recommendations for information to women and referring physicians by the European Society of Breast Imaging
Authors: Ulrich Bick
Rubina M. Trimboli
Alexandra Athanasiou
Corinne Balleyguier
Pascal A. T. Baltzer
Maria Bernathova
Krisztina Borbély
Boris Brkljacic
Luca A. Carbonaro
Paola Clauser
Enrico Cassano
Catherine Colin
Gul Esen
Andrew Evans
Eva M. Fallenberg
Michael H. Fuchsjaeger
Fiona J. Gilbert
Thomas H. Helbich
Sylvia H. Heywang-Köbrunner
Michel Herranz
Karen Kinkel
Fleur Kilburn-Toppin
Christiane K. Kuhl
Mihai Lesaru
Marc B. I. Lobbes
Ritse M. Mann
Laura Martincich
Pietro Panizza
Federica Pediconi
Ruud M. Pijnappel
Katja Pinker
Simone Schiaffino
Tamar Sella
Isabelle Thomassin-Naggara
Anne Tardivon
Chantal Van Ongeval
Matthew G. Wallis
Sophia Zackrisson
Gabor Forrai
Julia Camps Herrero
Francesco Sardanelli
for the European Society of Breast Imaging (EUSOBI), with language review by Europa Donna–The European Breast Cancer Coalition
Publication date: 01-12-2020
Publisher: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Keywords: Magnetic Resonance Imaging
Ultrasound
Magnetic Resonance Imaging
Mammography
Ultrasound
Mammography
Published in: Insights into Imaging / Issue 1/2020
Electronic ISSN: 1869-4101
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13244-019-0803-x

At a glance: The STEP trials

Springer Medicine

Image-guided breast biopsy and localisation: recommendations for information to women and referring physicians by the European Society of Breast Imaging

Abstract

At a glance: The STEP trials

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 1/2020

Diffusion tensor-based fiber tracking of the male urethral sphincter complex in patients undergoing radical prostatectomy: a feasibility study

Performance indicators for radiation protection management: suggestions from the European Society of Radiology

Radiology artificial intelligence, a systematic evaluation of methods (RAISE): a systematic review protocol

Assessing diagnostic radiology knowledge among Syrian medical undergraduates

Mapping the ischemic penumbra and predicting stroke progression in acute ischemic stroke: the overlooked role of susceptibility weighted imaging

Gyriform restricted diffusion in adults: looking beyond thrombo-occlusions