Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.3348/kjr.2010.11.6.589

Supplementary Screening Sonography in Mammographically Dense Breast: Pros and Cons  

Youk, Ji-Hyun (Department of Radiology, Research Institute of Radiological Science, Yonsei University College of Medicine)
Kim, Eun-Kyung (Department of Radiology, Research Institute of Radiological Science, Yonsei University College of Medicine)
Publication Information
Korean Journal of Radiology / v.11, no.6, 2010 , pp. 589-593 More about this Journal
Abstract
Sonography is an attractive supplement to mammography in breast cancer screening because it is relatively inexpensive, requires no contrast-medium injection, is well tolerated by patients, and is widely available for equipment as compared with MRI. Sonography has been especially valuable for women with mammographically dense breast because it has consistently been able to detect a substantial number of cancers at an early stage. Despite these findings, breast sonography has known limitations as a screening tool; operator-dependence, the shortage of skilled operators, the inability to detect microcalcifications, and substantially higher false-positive rates than mammography. Further study of screening sonography is still ongoing and is expected to help establish the role of screening sonography.
Keywords
Breast screening; Screening ultrasound; Breast cancer;
Citations & Related Records

Times Cited By Web Of Science : 2  (Related Records In Web of Science)
연도 인용수 순위
1 Kelly KM, Dean J, Comulada WS, Lee SJ. Breast cancer detection using automated whole breast ultrasound and mammography in radiographically dense breasts. Eur Radiol 2010;20:734-742   DOI   ScienceOn
2 Smith RA, Saslow D, Sawyer KA, Burke W, Costanza ME, Evans WP 3rd, et al. American Cancer Society guidelines for breast cancer screening: update 2003. CA Cancer J Clin 2003;53:141-169   DOI   ScienceOn
3 Berg WA. Supplemental screening sonography in dense breasts. Radiol Clin North Am 2004;42:845-851   DOI   ScienceOn
4 Bassett LW, Jackson VP, Fu KL, Fu YS. The medical audit. In: Ross A, Pontee E, eds. Diagnosis of diseases of the breast, 2nd ed. Philadelphia, PA: Elsevier Saunders, 2005:135-148
5 Gordon PB. Ultrasound for breast cancer screening and staging. Radiol Clin North Am 2002;40:431-441   DOI   ScienceOn
6 Berg WA, Blume JD, Cormack JB, Mendelson EB. Operator dependence of physician-performed whole-breast US: lesion detection and characterization. Radiology 2006;241:355-365   DOI   ScienceOn
7 Kuhl CK. The "coming of age" of nonmammographic screening for breast cancer. JAMA 2008;299:2203-2205   DOI   ScienceOn
8 Berg WA. Tailored supplemental screening for breast cancer: what now and what next? AJR Am J Roentgenol 2009;192:390- 399   DOI   ScienceOn
9 Philpotts LE, Smith RA. Screening for breast cancer. Semin Roentgenol 2003;38:19-33   DOI   ScienceOn
10 Buchberger W, Niehoff A, Obrist P, DeKoekkoek-Doll P, Dunser M. Clinically and mammographically occult breast lesions: detection and classification with high-resolution sonography. Semin Ultrasound CT MR 2000;21:325-336   DOI   ScienceOn
11 Crystal P, Strano SD, Shcharynski S, Koretz MJ. Using sonography to screen women with mammographically dense breasts. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2003;181:177-182   DOI   ScienceOn
12 Tabar L, Gad A, Parsons WC, Neeland DB. Mammographic appearances of in situ carcinomas. In: Silverstein MJ, Recht A, Lagios MD, eds. Ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast, 2nd ed. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, 2002:87-104
13 Stavros AT. Breast anatomy: the basis for understanding sonography. In: McAllister L, Donnellan K, Martin SP, Rothschild R, eds. Breast ultrasound. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, 2004:56-108
14 Berg WA, Blume JD, Cormack JB, Mendelson EB, Lehrer D, Bohm-Ve′lez M, et al. Combined screening with ultrasound and mammography vs mammography alone in women at elevated risk of breast cancer. JAMA 2008;299:2151-2163   DOI   ScienceOn
15 Bevers TB. Ultrasound for the screening of breast cancer. Curr Oncol Rep 2008;10:527-528   DOI   ScienceOn
16 Merritt CR. Future directions in breast ultrasonography. Semin Breast Dis 1999;2:89-96
17 Soo MS, Baker JA, Rosen EL. Sonographic detection and sonographically guided biopsy of breast microcalcifications. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2003;180:941-948   DOI   ScienceOn
18 Leconte I, Feger C, Galant C, Berlie`re M, Berg BV, D'Hoore W, et al. Mammography and subsequent whole-breast sonography of nonpalpable breast cancers: the importance of radiologic breast density. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2003;180:1675-1679   DOI   ScienceOn
19 Feig SA. Current status of screening US. In: Feig SA, ed. 2005 Syllabus: categorical course in diagnostic radiology-breast imaging. Oak Brook, IL: Radiological Society of North America, 2005:143-154
20 Gordon PB, Goldenberg SL. Malignant breast masses detected only by ultrasound. A retrospective review. Cancer 1995;76:626-630   DOI   ScienceOn
21 Kaplan SS. Clinical utility of bilateral whole-breast US in the evaluation of women with dense breast tissue. Radiology 2001;221:641-649   DOI   ScienceOn
22 Corsetti V, Houssami N, Ferrari A, Ghirardi M, Bellarosa S, Angelini O, et al. Breast screening with ultrasound in women with mammography-negative dense breasts: evidence on incremental cancer detection and false positives, and associated cost. Eur J Cancer 2008;44:539-544   DOI   ScienceOn
23 Nothacker M, Duda V, Hahn M, Warm M, Degenhardt F, Madjar H, et al. 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 2009;9:335   DOI   ScienceOn
24 Houssami N, Lord SJ, Ciatto S. Breast cancer screening: emerging role of new imaging techniques as adjuncts to mammography. Med J Aust 2009;190:493-497
25 Mandelson MT, Oestreicher N, Porter PL, White D, Finder CA, Taplin SH, et al. Breast density as a predictor of mammographic detection: comparison of interval- and screen-detected cancers. J Natl Cancer Inst 2000;92:1081-1087   DOI   ScienceOn
26 Kolb TM, Lichy J, Newhouse JH. Comparison of the performance of screening mammography, physical examination, and breast US and evaluation of factors that influence them: an analysis of 27,825 patient evaluations. Radiology 2002;225:165-175   DOI   ScienceOn
27 Carney PA, Miglioretti DL, Yankaskas BC, Kerlikowske K, Rosenberg R, Rutter CM, et al. Individual and combined effects of age, breast density, and hormone replacement therapy use on the accuracy of screening mammography. Ann Intern Med 2003;138:168-175   DOI   ScienceOn
28 Kolb TM. Breast US for screening diagnosing, and staging breast cancer: issues and controversies. In: Karellas A, ed. RSNA Categorical course in diagnostic radiology physics: advances in breast imaging-physics, technology, and clinical applications. Oakbrook, IL: Radiological Society of North America, 2004:247-257
29 Berg WA. Beyond standard mammographic screening: mammography at age extremes, ultrasound, and MR imaging. Radiol Clin North Am 2007;45:895-906   DOI   ScienceOn
30 Berg WA. Rationale for a trial of screening breast ultrasound: American College of Radiology Imaging Network (ACRIN) 6666. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2003;180:1225-1228   DOI   ScienceOn
31 Kolb TM, Lichy J, Newhouse JH. Occult cancer in women with dense breasts: detection with screening US--diagnostic yield and tumor characteristics. Radiology 1998;207:191-199
32 Ciatto S, Visioli C, Paci E, Zappa M. Breast density as a determinant of interval cancer at mammographic screening. Br J Cancer 2004;90:393-396   DOI   ScienceOn