Figure 36-69 A 40-year-old woman with diagnosed stage III breast carcinoma had abnormal liver function tests. Intravenous contrast-enhanced computed tomography image of the liver shows two hypodense lesions (arrows) from metastatic breast carcinoma.

One large randomized control study investigated quality of life issues related to surveillance for metastatic disease in breast cancer patients.210 The results suggested that type of follow-up (i. e., intensive surveillance vs. routine clinical management) does not affect various dimensions of health-related quality of life. These dimensions include overall health and quality-of-life perception, emotional well-being, body image, social functioning, symptoms, and satisfaction with care. These parameters were almost identical between intensive and clinical-only surveillance groups. No comparison differences in any of the dimensions of quality-of-life issues were statistically significant between the two groups. Nonetheless, more than 70% of the breast cancer subjects said they wanted to be seen frequently by a physician and undergo diagnostic tests even if they were free of symptoms. This preference for intensive surveillance was not affected by whether the patient had been assigned to the intensive or minimalist follow-up regimen. Education of both physicians and patients seems to be an issue of extreme importance in order to provide cost-effective follow-up management of patients with breast cancer.

Figure 36-70 A 53-year-old woman with stage III breast carcinoma had abnormal liver function tests. A, Precontrast computed tomography (CT) scan of the liver shows inhomogeneous hypodense zones (arrows) caused by metastatic breast carcinoma. B, Intravenous contrast-enhanced CT scan of same patient. The vascular metastases were masked by the contrast agent.


1.  Bassett LW, Gold RH, Kimme-Smith C: History of the technical development of mammography in syllabus. In Haus AG, Yaffe MJ (eds): RSNA categorical course in physics, Oak Brook, IL, Radiological Society of North America, 1994.

2.  Hendrick RE: Quality assurance in mammography: Accreditation, Legislation, and compliance with quality assurance standards. Radiol Clin North Am 30:243, 1992.

3.  American College of Radiology: Breast imaging reporting and data system (BI-RADS™), Reston, VA, American College of Radiology, 1993.

4.  Fornage BD, Coan JD, David CL: Ultrasound-guided needle biopsy of the breast and other interventional procedures. Radiol Clin North Am 30:167, 1992.

5.  Homer MJ: Localization of nonpalpable breast lesions: Technical Aspects and analysis of 80 cases. AJR Am J Roentgenol 140:807, 1983.

6.  Homer MJ, Smith TH, Safaii H: Prebiopsy needle localization. Radiol Clin North Am 30:139, 1992.

7.  Jackson VP, Bassett LW: Stereotactic fine-needle aspiration biopsy for nonpalpable breast lesions. AJR Am J Roentgenol 154:1196,


8.  Parker SH, et al: Stereotactic breast biopsy with a biopsy gun. Radiology 176:741, 1990.

9.  Bassett LW, et al: Automated and hand-held breast ultrasound: Effect on patient management. Radiology 165:103, 1987.

10. Fornage BD: Percutaneous biopsies of the breast: State-of-the-art. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 14:29, 1991.

11.  Stavros AT, et al: Solid breast nodules: Use of sonography to disTinguish between benign and malignant lesions. Radiology 196:123, 1995.

12.  Pisano ED et al: Diagnostic performance of digital versus film mammography for breast cancer screening. N Engl J Med 353: 1773-1783, 2005.

13.  Heywang SH, et al: MR of the breast: Histopathologic correlation. Eur J Radiol 3:175-183, 1987.

14.  Rosen EL, Eubank WB, Mankoff DA: FDG PET, PET/CT, and Breast cancer imaging. Radiographics 27(suppl 1):S215, 2007.

15.  Shen Y, Zelen M: Screening sensitivity and sojourn time from breast cancer early detection clinical trials: Mammograms and physical examinations. J Clin Oncol 19:3490, 2001.

16.  Parker SL, et al: Cancer statistics, 1996. CA Cancer J Clin 65:5, 1996.

17.  Seidman H, Stellman SD, Mushinski MH: A different perspective on breast cancer risk factors: Some implications for the nonattriButable risk. CA Cancer J Clin 32:301, 1982.

18.  Fletcher SW, et al: Report of the International Workshop on Screening for Breast Cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 85:1644, 1993.

19.  Tabar L, et al: Reduction in mortality from breast cancer after mass screening with mammography: Randomised trial from the Breast Cancer Screening Working Group of the Swedish National Board of Health and Welfare, Lancet 1:829, 1985.

20.  Howe HL, et al: Annual report to the nation on the status of canCer (1973 through 1998), featuring cancers with recent increasing Trends. J Natl Cancer Inst 93:824, 2001.

21.  Baum M: Screening mammography re-evaluated. Lancet 355:751, 2000.

22.  Peto R, et al: UK and USA breast cancer deaths down 25% in year 2000 at ages 20-69 years. Lancet 355:1822, 2000.

23.  Blanks RG, et al: Effect of NHS breast screening programme on mortality from breast cancer in England and Wales, 1990-8: Comparison of observed with predicted mortality. BMJ 321:665, 2000.

24.  Smart CR, et al: Benefit of mammography screening in women ages 40-49 years. Cancer 75:1619, 1995.

25.  Thurfjell EL, Lindgren JAA: Breast cancer survival rates with mam-mographic screening: Similar favorable survival rates for women Younger and those older than 50 years. Radiology 201:421, 1996.

26.  American College of Radiology (ACR): Standards for the performance of diagnostic mammography and problem-solving breast Evaluation [adopted by the ACR Council 1994] in ACR Digest of Official Actions. Reston, VA, American College of Radiology, 1994.

27.  Sickles EA, et al: Mammographic screening: How to operate successfully at low cost. Radiology 160:95, 1986.

28.  General Accounting Office: Screening mammography: Low cost services do not compromise quality. Washington, DC, General Accounting Office, 1990.

29.  Bassett LW, Gold RH: Breast radiography using the oblique projection. Radiology 149:585, 1983.

30.  Helvie MA, et al: Breast thickness on routine mammograms: Effect on image quality and radiation dose. AJR Am J Roentgenol 163: 1371, 1994.

31.  Jackson VP, Lex AM, Smith DJ: Patient discomfort during screen-Film mammography. Radiology 168:421, 1988.

32.  Stomper PC, et al: Is mammography painful: A multicenter Patient study. Arch Intern Med 148:521, 1988.

33.  American College of Radiology Committee on Quality Assurance In Mammography: Mammography quality control. Reston, VA, American College of Radiology, 1992.

34.  Berkowitz JE, Gatewood MB, Gayler BW: Equivocal mammo-Graphic findings: Evaluation with spot compression. Radiology 171:369, 1989.

35.  Faulk RM, Sickles EA: Efficacy of spot compression-magnification and tangential views in mammographic evaluation of palpable breast masses. Radiology 185:87, 1992.

36.  Feig SA: Importance of supplementary mammographic views to Diagnostic accuracy. AJR Am J Roentgenol 151:40, 1988.

37.  FeiG SA: Breast masses: Mammographic and sonographic evaluaTion. Radiol Clin North Am 30:67, 1992.

38.  Feig SA, Yaffe M: Digital imaging systems. In Basset LW et al (eds): Diagnosis of diseases of the breast. Philadelphia, WB Saunders, 1996.

39.  Fajardo LL, et al: Detection of breast abnormalities on teleradiology transmitted mammograms. Invest Radiol 25:1111, 1990.

40.  Thurfjell EL, Lernevall KA, Taube AAS: Benefit of independent double reading in a population-based mammography screening program. Radiology 191:241, 1994.

41.  Vyborny CJ: Can computers help radiologists read mammograms? Radiology 191:315, 1994.

42.  Vyborny CJ, Giger ML: Computer vision and artificial intelligence in mammography. AJR Am J Roentgenol 162:699, 1994.

43.  Shtern F: Digital mammography and related technologies: A perspective from the National Cancer Institute. Radiology 183:629, 1992.

44.  D'Orsi CJ, Kopans DB: Mammographic feature analysis. Semin Roentgenol 28:204, 1993.

45.  American College of Radiology: Breast imaging reporting and data system (BI-RADS), 4th ed. Reston, VA, American College of Radiology, 2003.

46.  McNicholas MM, et al: Pain and increased mammographic density in postmenopausal women. AJR Am J Roentgenol 163:311, 1994.

47.  Gold RH, Montgomery CK, Rambo ON: Significance of margin-ation of benign and malignant infiltrative mammary lesions: Roentgenologic-pathologic correlation. AJR Am J Roentgenol 118: 881, 1973.

48.  Hall FM, et al: Nonpalpable breast lesions: Recommendations for biopsy based on suspicion of carcinoma at mammography. Radiology 167:353, 1988.

49.  Moskowitz M: The predictive value of certain mammographic signs in screening for breast cancer. Cancer 51:1007, 1983.

50.  Sickles EA: Nonpalpable, circumscribed, noncalcified solid breast masses: Likelihood of malignancy based on lesion size and age of patient. Radiology 192:439, 1994.

51.  Brenner RJ, Sickles EA: Acceptability of periodic follow-up as an alternative to biopsy for mammographically detected lesions interpreted as probably benign, Radiology 171:645, 1989.

52.  Sickles EA: Periodic mammographic follow-up of probably benign lesions: Results in 3,184 consecutive cases. Radiology 179:463, 1991.

53.  Jackson VP, et al: Diagnostic importance of radiographic density of noncalcified breast masses: Analysis of 91 lesions. AJR Am J Roentgenol 157:25, 1991.

54.  Lanyi M: Pathogenesis, pathophysiology, and composition of breast calcifications. In Lanyi M (ed): Diagnosis and differential diagnosis of breast calcifications, New York, Springer-Verlag, 1986.

55.  Hilton SV, et al: Real-time breast sonography: Application in 300 consecutive patients. AJR Am J Roentgenol 147:479, 1986.

56.  Brenner RJ, et al: Spontaneous regression of interval benign cysts of the breast. Radiology 193:365, 1994.

57.  Crothers JG, et al: Fibroadenolipoma of the breast. Br J Radiol 48:191, 1985.

58.  Bassett LW, Gold RH, Mirra JM: Nonneoplastic breast calcifications in lipid cysts: Development after excision and primary irradiation. AJR Am J Roentgenol 138:335, 1981.

59.  Mendelson EB: Evaluation of the postoperative breast. Radiol Clin North Am 30:107, 1992.

60.  Tabar L, Dean PB: Stellate lesions. In Tabar L, Dean PB (eds): Teaching atlas of mammography. NewYork, Thieme Stratton, 1985.

61.  Orel SG, et al: Radial scar with microcalcifications: Radiologic-pathologic correlation. Radiology 183:479, 1992.

62.  Kopans DB, Meyer JE, Grabbe J: Dermal deposits mistaken for breast calcifications. Radiology 149:592, 1983.

63.  Sickles EA, Galvin HB: Breast arterial calcifications in association with diabetes mellitus: Too weak a correlation to have clinical utility. Radiology 171:577, 1989.

64.  Bassett LW: Mammographic analysis of calcifications. Radiol Clin North Am 30:93, 1992.

65.  Bassett LW, Gold RH, Cove HC: Mammographic spectrum of traumatic fat necrosis: The fallibility of "pathognomonic" signs of carcinoma. AJR Am J Roentgenol 130:119, 1978.

66.  Sickles EA, Abele JS: Milk of calcium within tiny benign breast cysts. Radiology 141:655, 1981.

67.  World Health Organization: Histological typing of breast tumors, vol 2. Geneva, World Health Organization, 1981.

68.  Leibman AJ, Lewis M, Kruse B: Tubular carcinoma of the breast. AJR Am J Roentgenol 160:263, 1993.

69.  Meyer JE, et al: Medullary carcinoma of the breast: Mammo-Graphic and US appearance. Radiology 170:79, 1989.

70.  Mitnick JS, et al: Invasive papillary carcinoma of the breast: Mam-Mographic appearance. Radiology 177:803, 1990.

71.  Czernobilsky B: Intracystic carcinoma of the female breast. Surg Gynecol Obstet 124:93, 1967.

72.  Helvie MA, et al: Invasive lobular carcinoma: Imaging features And clinical detection. Invest Radiol 28:202, 1993.

73.  Hilleran DJ, et al: Invasive lobular carcinoma: Mammographic findings in a 10-year experience. Radiology 178:149, 1991.

74.  Sickles EA: The subtle and atYpical mammographic features of Invasive lobular carcinoma. Radiology 178:25, 1991.

75.  Toombs BD, Kalisher L: Metastatic disease to the breast: Clinical, Pathologic, and radiographic features. AJR Am J Roentgenol 129: 673, 1977.

76.  Bohman LG, et al: Breast metastases from extramammary maligNancies. Radiology 144:309, 1982.

77.  Powell RW, McSweeney MB, Wilson C: X-ray calcifications as the Only basis for breast biopsy. Ann Surg 197:555, 1983.

78.  Page DL, Anderson TJ (eds): Diagnostic histopathology of the breast. Edinburgh, Churchill Livingstone, 1987.

79.  Betsill WL, et al: Intraductal carcinoma: Long-term follow-up after treatment by biopsy alone. JAMA 239:1863, 1978.

80.  Page DL, et al: Intraductal carcinoma of the breast: Follow-up After biopsy only. Cancer 49:751, 1982.

81.  Lagios MD: Duct carcinoma in situ. Surg Clin North Am 70:853, 1990.

82.  Holland R, et al: The presence of an extensive intraductal compoNent following a limited resection correlates with prominent residual disease in the remainder of the breast. J Clin Oncol 8:113, 1990.

83.  Holland R, et al: Clinical practice: Extent distribution, and mam-Mographic/histological correlations of breast ductal carcinoma in situ. Lancet 335:519, 1990.

84.  Paulus DD: Conservative treatment of breast cancer: Mammography in patient selection and follow-up. AJR Am J Roentgenol 143:483, 1984.

85.  Dershaw DD: Mammography in patients with breast cancer treated by breast conservation (lumpectomy with or without radiation). AJR Am J Roentgenol 164:309, 1995.

86.  Dershaw DD, Abramson A, Kinne DW: Ductal carcinoma in situ: Mammographic findings and clinical implications. Radiology 170:411, 1989.

87.  Stomper PC, Connolly JL: Ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast: Correlation between mammographic calcifications and tumor subtype. AJR Am J Roentgenol 159:483, 1992.

88.  Kinkel K, et al: Focal areas of increased opacity in ductal carcinoma in situ of the comedo type: Mammographic-pathologic correlation. Radiology 192:443, 1994.

89.  Boyages J, et al: Factors associated with local recurrence as a first site of failure following the conservation treatment of early breast cancer. Recent Results Cancer Res 115:92, 1989.

90.  Eberlein TJ, et al: Predictors of local recurrence following conservative breast surgery and radiation therapy: The influence of tumor size. Arch Surg 125:771, 1990.

91.  Osteen RT, et al: Early breast cancer: Predictors of breast recurrence for patients treated with conservative surgery and radiation therapy. Radiother Oncol 19:29, 1990.

92.  Schnitt SJ, et al: Pathologic findings on reexcision of the primary Site in breast cancer patients considered for treatment by primary radiation therapy. Cancer 59:675, 1987.

93.  Vicini FA, et al: Recurrence in the breast following conservative surgery and radiation therapy for early-stage breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr 11:33, 1992.

94.  Stomper PC, Margolin FR: Ductal carcinoma in situ: The mam-mographer'S perspective. AJR Am J Roentgenol 162:585, 1994.

95.  Graham RA, et al: The efficacy of specimen radiography in evaluating the surgical margins of impalpable breast carcinoma. AJR Am J Roentgenol 162:33, 1994.

96.  Lagios MD, et al: Duct carcinoma in situ: Relationship of extent of Noninvasive disease to the frequency of occult invasion, multicentricity, lymph node metastases, and short term treatment failures. Cancer 50:1309, 1982.

97.  Gluck BS, et al: Microcalcifications on postoperative mammograms as an indicator of adequacy of tumor excision. Radiology 188:469, 1993.

98.  Sickles EA: Mammographic features of 300 consecutive nonpalpable breast cancers. AJR Am J Roentgenol 146:661, 1986.

99.  KopansDB, etal:Asymmetricbreasttissue. Radiology 171:639,1989.

100.  Adler DD, Rebner M, Pennes DR: Accessory breast tissue in the axilla. Radiology 163:709, 1987.

101.  Sickles EA: The spectrum of breast asymmetries: Imaging features, work-up, management. Radiol Clin North Am 45:765, 2007.

102.  Bassett LW, Shayestehfar B, Hirbawi I: Obtaining previous mammograms for comparison: Usefulness and costs. AJR Am J Roentgenol 163:1083, 1994.

103.  Bassett LW, et al: Clinical Practice Guideline No 13. AHCPR Publication No. 95-0632. Rockville, MD, Agency for Health Care Policy and Research, Public Health Service, US Department of Health and Human Services, 1994.

104.  Kalisher L, Chu AM, Peyster RG: Clinicopathological correlation of xeroradiography in determining involvement of metastatic axillary nodes in female breast cancer. Radiology 121:333, 1976.

105.  Gisvold JJ, et al: Breast biopsy: A comparative study of stereotaxi-cally guided core and excisional techniques. AJR Am J Roentgenol 162:815, 1994.

106.  Meyer JE, et al: Occult breast abnormalities: Percutaneous preoperative needle localization. Radiology 50:335, 1984.

107.  Rasmussen OS, Seerup A: Preoperative radiographically guided wire marking of nonpalpable breast lesions. Acta Radiol Diagn (Stockh) 25:13, 1984.

108.  Moskowitz M: Impact of a priori medical decisions on screening for breast cancer. Radiology 171:605 1989.

109.  Howard J: Using mammography for cancer control: An unrealized potential. CA Cancer J Clin 33:33, 1987.

110.  Cyrlak D: Induced costs of low-cost screening mammography. Radiology 68:661, 1988.

111.  Linver MN, et al: The mammography audit: A primer for the mammography quality standards act (MQSA). AJR Am J Roentgenol 165:19, 1995.

112.  Murphy WA, Destouet JM, Monsees BS: Professional quality assurance for mammography screening programs. Radiology 175:319, 1990.

113.  Sickles EA, et al: Medical audit of a rapid-throughput mammography screening practice: Methodology and results of 27,114 examinations. Radiology 175:323, 1990.

114.  Linver MN: The medical audit: Statistical basis of clinical outcomes analysis. In Bassett LW, Jackson VP, Fu KL, Fu YS (eds): Diagnosis of disease of the breast. 2005, pp 135-148.

115.  Wild JJ, Neal D: The use of high-frequency ultrasonic waves for detecting changes of texture in the living tissue. Lancet 1:655, 1951.

116.  Jellins J, et al: Ultrasonic gray scale visualization of breast disease. Ultrasound Med Biol 1:393, 1975.

117.  Kobayashi T: Diagnostic ultrasound in breast cancer: Analysis of retrotumorous echo patterns correlated with sonic attenuation by cancerous connective tissue. J Clin Ultrasound 7:471, 1979.

118.  Cole-Beuglet C, et al: Ultrasound mammography: A comparison with radiographic mammography. Radiology 139:693, 1981.

119.  Cole-Beuglet C, et al: Ultrasound analysis of 104 primary breast carcinomas classified according to histopathologic type. Radiology 147:191, 1983.

120.  Kopans DB, Meyer JE, Lindfors KK: Whole-breast ultrasound imaging: Four-year follow-up. Radiology 157:505, 1985.

121.  Sickles EA, Filly RA, Callen PW: Breast cancer detection with sonography and mammography: Comparison using state of the art equipment. AJR Am J Roentgenol 140:843, 1983.

122.  Feig SA: The role of ultrasound in a breast imaging center. Semin Ultrasound CT MR 10:90, 1989.

123.  Sickles EA, Filly RA, Callen PW: Benign breast lesions: Ultrasound detection and diagnosis. Radiology 151:467, 1984.

124.  Evans WP: Fine-needle aspiration cytology and core biopsy of nonpalpable breast lesions. Curr Opin Radiol 4:130, 1992.

125.  Gordon PB, Goldenberg LS: Malignant breast masses detected only by ultrasound: A retrospective review. Cancer 76:626, 1995.

126.  Jackson VP: Management of solid breast nodules: What is the role Of sonography? Radiology 196:14, 1995.

127.  DeBruhl ND, et al: Silicone breast implants: US evaluation. RadiOlogy 189:95, 1993.

128.  Gorczyca DP, et al: Silicone breast implant ruptures in an animal Model: Comparison of mammography, MR imaging, US and CT. Radiology 190:227, 1994.

129.  Turner DA, Alcorn FS, Adler YT: Nuclear magnetic resonance in the diaGnosis of breast cancer. Radiol Clin North Am 26:673, 1988.

130.  Heywang SH, et al: MR imaging of the breast using gadoli-nium-DTPA. J Comput Assist Tomogr 10:199, 1986.

131. Heywang-Kobrunner SH: Contrast-Enhanced MRI of the breast— Overview after 1250 patient examinations. Electromedica2:43,1993.

132.  Harms SE, et al: Fat-suppressed three-dimensional MR imaging of the breast. Radiographics 13:247, 1993.

133.  Kaiser WA, Zeitler E: MR imaging of the breast: Fast imaging sequences with and without Gd-DTPA, Radiology 170:681, 1989.

134.  Lewis-Jones HG, Whitehouse GH, Leinster SJ: The role of MRI in the assessment of local recurrent breast carcinoma. Clin Radiol 43:197, 1991.

135.  Orel SG, et al: Suspicious breast lesions: MR imaging with radiologic-Pathologic correlation. Radiology 190:485, 1994.

136.  Harms SE, et al: MR imaging of the breast with rotating delivery of excitation off resonance: Clinical experience with pathologic Correlation. Radiology 186:493, 1993.

137.  Alcorn FS, et al: Magnetic resonance imaging in the study of the Breast. Radiographics 5:631, 1985.

138.  Heywang SH, et al: MR imaging of the breast using gadolin-ium-DTPA. J Comput Assist Tomogr 10:199, 1986.

139.  Heywang SH, et al: MR imaging of the breast with Gd-DTPA: Use and limitations. Radiology 171:9, 1989.

140.  Heywang-Kobrunner SH: Contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging of the breast. Invest Radiol 29:94, 1994.

141.  Heywang-Kobrunner SH: Contrast-Enhanced MRI of the breast— overview after 1250 patient examinations. Electromedica 2:43, 1993.

142. Heywang-Kobrunner SH, et al: Contrast-material enhanced MRI of the breast in patients with postoperative scarring and silicon implants. J Comput Assist Tomogr 14:348, 1990.

143. Heywang-Kobrunner SH, et al: Contrast-enhanced MRI of the breast after limited surgery and radiation therapy. J Comput Assist Tomogr 17:891, 1993.

144.  Kaiser WA: MRM promises earlier breast cancer diagnosis. Diagn Imaging Int 11:44, 1992.

145.  Merchant TE, et al: Clinical magnetic resonance spectroscopy of human breast disease. Invest Radiol 26:1053, 1991.

146.  Murphy WA, Gohagan JK: Breast. In Stark DD, Bradley WG Jr (eds): Magnetic resonance imaging. St. Louis, MO, Mosby, 1987,

Pp 861-886.

147.  Partain CL, et al: Magnetic resonance imaging of the breast: Functional T1 and three-dimensional imaging. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 8:292, 1986.

148.  Pierce WB, et al: Three-dimensional gadolinium-enhanced MR imaging of the breast: Pulse sequence with fat suppression and magnetization transfer contrast. Radiology 181:757, 1991.

149.  Revel D, et al: Gd-DTPA contrast enhancement and tissue differentiation in MR imaging of experimental breast carcinoma. Radiology 158:319, 1986.

150.  Rubens D, et al: Gadopentetate dimeglumin-enhanced chemical-Shift MR imaging of the breast. AJR 157:267, 1991.

151.  Stelling CB, et al: Prototype coil for magnetic resonance imaging of the female breast. Radiology 154:457, 1985.

152.  Hochman, MG, et al: Fibroadenomas: MR imaging appearances with radiologic-histopathologic correlation. Radiology 204:123,


153.  Nunes LW, Schnall MD, Orel SG: Update of breast MR imaging architectural interpretation model. Radiology 219:484, 2001.

154.  Sherif H, Mahfouz AE, Oellinger H, et al: Peripheral washout sign on contrast-enhanced MR images of the breast. Radiology 205:209, 1997.

155.  Matsubayashi R, Matsuo Y, Edakuni G, et al: Breast masses with peripheral rim enhancement on dynamic contrast-enhanced MR images: Correlation of MR findings with histologic features and expression of growth factors. Radiology 217:841, 2000.

156.  Harms SE, et al: Technical report of the International Working Group on Breast MRI. J Magn Reson Imaging 10:979, 1999.

157.  Kneeshaw PJ, Turnbull LW, Drew PJ: Current applications and future direction of MR mammography. Br J Cancer 88:4, 2003.

158.  Saslow D, et al: American Cancer Society guidelines for breast screening with MRI as an adjunct to mammography. CA Cancer J Clin 57:75, 2007.

159.  Tabar L, Dean PB, P<;ntekZ: Galactography: The diagnostic procedure of choice for nipple discharge. Radiology 149:31, 1983.

160.  Threatt B, Appleman HD: Mammary duct injection. Radiology 108:71, 1973.

161.  Cardenosa H, Doudna C, Eklund GW: Ductography of the breast: Technique and findings. AJR Am J Roentgenol 162:1081, 1994.

162.  Adler LP, et al: Evaluation of breast masses and axillary lymph nodes with (F-18) 2-deoxy-2-fluoro-D-glucose PET. Radiology 187:743 1993.

163.  Khalkhali I, et al: Scintimammography: The complementary role of Tc-99m sestamibi prone breast imaging for the diagnosis of breast carcinoma. Radiology 196:421, 1995.

164.  Khalkhali I, et al: Prone scintimammography in patients with suspicion of carcinoma of the breast. J Am Coll Surg 178:491, 1994.

165.  Threatt B, et al: Percutaneous needle localization of clustered microcalcifications prior to biopsy. AJR Am J Roentgenol 121: 829, 1974.

166.  Egan JF, Sayler CB, Goodman MJ: A technique for localizing occult breast lesions. CA Cancer J Clin 26:32, 1976.

167.  Homer MJ: Nonpalpable breast lesion localization using a curved-end retractable wire. Radiology 157:259, 1985.

168.  Kopans DB, Meyer JE: Versatile spring hookwire breast lesion localizer. AJR Am J Roentgenol 138:586, 1982.

169.  Kwasnik EM, Sadowsky NL, Vollman RW: An improved system for surgical excision of needle-localized nonpalpable breast lesions. Am J Surg 154:476, 1987.

170.  Bauermeister DE, Hall MH: Specimen radiography: A mandatory adjunct to mammography. Am J Clin Pathol 59:782, 1973.

171.  Gallager HS: Breast specimen radiography: Obligatory, adjuvant and investigative. Am J Clin Pathol 64:759, 1975.

172.  Stomper PC, et al: Efficacy of specimen radiography of clinically occultnoncalcifiedbreastlesions. AJR Am J Roentgenol 151:43,1988.

173.  D'Orsi CJ: Management of the breast specimen. Radiology 194:297, 1995.

174.  Surratt JT, Monsees BS, Mazoujian G: Calcium oxalate microcalcifications in the breast. Radiology 181:141, 1991.

175.  Rebner M, et al: Paraffin tissue block radiography: Adjunct to breast specimen radiography. Radiology 173:695, 1989.

176.  D'Orsi CJ, et al: Breast specimen microcalcification: Radiographic validation and pathologic-radiologic correlation. Radiology 280: 396, 1991.

177.  Azevado E, Svane G, Aver G: Stereotactic fine needle biopsy in 2594 mammographically-detected nonpalpable lesions. Lancet 1:1033, 1989.

178.  Hendrick RE, Parker SH: Stereotaxic imaging in syllabus: RSNA categorical course in physics. Chicago, Radiological Society of North America, 1993.

179.  Gordon PB, Goldenberg SL, Chan NH: Solid breast lesions: Diagnosis with US-guided fine-needle aspiration biopsy. Radiology 189:573, 1993.

180.  Mitnick J, et al: Stereotaxic localization for fine-needle aspiration breast biopsy. Arch Surg 126:1137, 1991.

181.  Hayes MK, et al: Mammographically-guided fine-needle aspiration cytology of the breast: Reducing the rate of insufficient specimens. AJR Am J Roentgenol 167:381, 1996.

182.  Masood S: Occult breast lesions and aspiration biopsy: A new challenge. Diagn Cytopathol 9:613, 1993.

183.  Helvie MA, et al: Radiographically guided fine-needle aspiration of nonpalpable breast lesions. Radiology 174:657, 1990.

184.  Jackson VP: The status of mammographically-guided fine needle aspiration biopsy of nonpalpable breast lesions. Radiol Clin North Am 30:139, 1992.

185.  Layfield L, et al: Mammographically guided fine-needle aspiration biopsy of nonpalpable breast lesions. Cancer 68:2007, 1991.

186.  Lcifgren M, Andersson I, Lindholm K: Stereotactic fine-needle Aspiration for cytologic diagnosis of nonpalpable breast lesions. AJR Am J Roentgenol 154:1191, 1990.

187.  Elvecrog EL, Lechner MC, Nelson MJ: Nonpalpable breast lesions: Correlation of stereotaxic large-core needle biopsy and surgical Biopsy results. Radiology 188:453, 1993.

188.  Bassett LW, et al: Stereotactic breast CNB: Report of the Joint Task Force of ACT, ACS, COAP. CA Cancer J Clin 166:341, 1997.

189.  Brenner RJ, et al: Percutaneous CNB: Effect of operator experience And number of samples on accuracy. AJR Am J Roentgenol 166: 341, 1996.

190.  Dershaw DD, et al: Nondiagnostic stereo CNB: Results of rebiopsy. Radiology 204:485, 1996.

191.  Jackman RJ, et al: Atypical ductal hyperplasia diagnosed at stereotactic breast biopsy: Improved reliability with 14-guage, directional, vacuum-assisted biopsy. Radiology 204:485, 1997.

192.  Parker SH, Klaus AJ: Performing CNB with a directional, vacuum-Assisted biopsy instrument. Radiographics 17:1233, 1997.

193.  Philpotts LE, et al: Comparison of rebiopsy rates after stereotactic core needle biopsy of the breast with 11 - G vacuum suction probe vs. 14-G automatic gun. AJR Am J Roentgenol 172:683, 1999.

194.  Parker SH: When is core biopsy really core? Radiology 185:641,


195.  Lindfors KK, Rosenquist CJ: Needle core biopsy guided with mammography: A study of cost-Effectiveness. Radiology 190:217, 1994.

196.  Scanlon EF: The case for and against two-step procedures for the Surgical treatment of breast cancer. Cancer 53:677, 1984.

197.  Reynolds HE: Core needle biopsy of challenging benign breast conditions: A comprehensive literature review. AJR Am J RoentGenol 174:1245, 2000.

198.  Jackman RJ, et al: Stereotaxic large-core needle biopsy of450 nonpalpable breast lesions with surgical correlation in lesions with Cancer or atypical hyperplasia. Radiology 193:91, 1994.

199.  Liberman L, et al: Atypical ductal hyperplasia diagnosed at stereotaxic core biopsy of breast lesions: An indication for surgical Biopsy. AJR Am J Roentgenol 164:1111, 1995.

200.  Love SM, McGuigan KA, Chap L: The Revlon/UCLA Breast Center Practice guidelines for the treatment of breast disease. Cancer J 2:2, 1996.

201.  Winchester DP, Cox JD: Standards for breast-conservation treatment. CA Cancer J Clin 42:134, 1992.

202.  Orel SG, et al: Breast cancer recurrence after lumpectomy and irradiation: Role of mammography in detection. Radiology 183:201,


203.  Fajardo LL, Roberts CC, Hunt KR: Mammographic surveillance of breast cancer patients: Should the mastectomy site be imaged? AJR Am J Roengentol 161:953, 1993.

204.  Jain S, et al: Patterns of metastatic breast cancer in relation to hisTologic type, Eur J Cancer 29:2155, 1993.

205.  Patanaphan V, Salazar OM, Risco R: Breast cancer: Metastatic patterns and their prognosis. South Med J 81:1109, 1988.

206.  Muss HB, et al: Perceptions of follow-up care in women with Breast cancer. Am J Clin Oncol 14:55, 1991.

207.  Loomer L, et al: Postoperative follow-up of patients with early Breast cancer. Cancer 67:55, 1991.

208.  American Joint Committee on Cancer: Manual for staging cancer. Philadelphia, JB Lippincott, 1992.

209.  Del Turco MR, et al: Intensive diagnostic follow-up after treatment of primary breast cancer. JAMA 271:1593, 1994.

210.  Impact of follow-up testing on survival and health-related quality of life in breast cancer patients: A multicenter randomized controlled trial—The GIVIO investigators, JAMA 271:1587, 1994.

211.  O'Mara RE: Bone scanning in osseous metastatic disease. JAMA 229:1915, 1974.

212.  Khansur T, et al: Evaluation of bone scan as a screening work-up in primary and local-regional recurrence of breast cancer. Am J Clin Oncol 10:167, 1987.

213.  Ciatto S, et al: Preoperative staging of primary breast cancer: A multicenter study. Cancer 61:1038, 1988.

214.  Coleman RE, Rubens RD, Fogelman I: Reappraisal of the baseline bone scan in breast cancer. J Nucl Med 29:1045, 1988.

215.  Kunkler IH, Merick MV, Rodger A: Bone scintigraphy in breast cancer: A nine-year follow-up, Clin Radiol 36:279, 1985.

216.  McNeill BJ, et al: Preoperative and follow-up bone scans in patients with primary carcinoma of the breast, Surg Gynecol Obstet 147:745, 1978.

217.  Bassett LW, Giuliano AE, Gold RH: Staging for breast carcinoma. Am J Surg 157:250, 1989.

218.  Loprinzi CL: It is now the age to define the appropriate follow-up of primary breast cancer patients. J Clin Oncol 12:881, 1994.

219.  Schaner EG, et al: Comparison of computed tomography and conventional whole lung tomography in detecting pulmonary nodules: A prospective radiologic-pathologic study. AJR Am J Roentgenol 131:51, 1978.

220.  Didolkar MS, et al: Accuracy of roentgenograms of the chest in metastases to the lungs. Surg Gynecol Obstet 144:903, 1977.

221.  Vestergaard A et al: The value of yearly chest x-ray in patients with stage I breast cancer. Eur J Cancer Clin Oncol 25:687, 1989.

222.  Bernardino ME, et al: Diagnostic approaches to liver and spleen metastases. Radiol Clin North Am 20:469, 1982.

223.  Friedman ML, Esposito FS: Comparison of CT scanning and radionuclide imaging in liver disease. CRC Crit Rev Diagn Imaging 14:143, 1980.

224.  Yeh H, Rabinowitz JG: Ultrasonography and computed tomography of the liver. Radiol Clin North Am 18:321, 1980.

225.  Weiner SN, Sachs SH: An assessment of positive liver scanning in patients with breast cancer. Arch Surg 113:126, 1978.

226.  Ferrucci JT: Leo G. Rigler lecture: MR imaging of the liver. AJR Am J Roentgenol 147:1103, 1986.

227.  Russell EJ, et al: Multiple cerebral metastases: Detectability with Gd-DTPA-enhanced MR imaging. Radiology 165:609, 1987.

228.  Weisberg LA: The computed tomographic findings in intracranial metastases due to breast carcinoma. Comput Radiol 10:297,


229.  Bentson JR, Steckel RJ, Kagan AR: Diagnostic imaging in clinical cancer management: Brain metastases. Invest Radiol 23:335, 1988.

230.  Khansur T, et al: Preoperative evaluation with radionuclide brain scanning and computerized axial tomography of the brain in patients with breast cancer. Am J Surg 155:232, 1988.

231.  Brant-Zawadzski M: MR imaging of the brain. Radiology 166:1, 1988.

232.  Davis PC, et al: Diagnosis of cerebral metastases. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 12:293, 1991.

  • Contact
  • Category: Women's diseases