RSS-Feed abonnieren
DOI: 10.1055/s-0042-1742641
Breast Imaging: Past and Present
Abstract
Breast imaging has evolved over several decades; however, a significant leap has happened in the past couple of decades. Multiple modalities are available for the evaluation of breast diseases; Mammography, Digital Breast Tomosynthesis, Ultrasound, Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI), and Contrast Enhanced Mammography (CEM) are a few of the frequently used ones. Image-guided interventions have further evolved, core needle biopsy, vacuum-assisted biopsy, clip placements, and wire localization to name a few. At times, it is difficult to choose between the modalities for disease evaluation and intervention. In this article, we have tried to cover in brief the evolution of breast imaging over years and have discussed the imaging approach to some frequent clinical presentations along with the approach to the evaluation of mammography.
Publikationsverlauf
Artikel online veröffentlicht:
15. Februar 2022
© 2022. Indian Society of Medical and Paediatric Oncology. This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
Thieme Medical and Scientific Publishers Pvt. Ltd.
A-12, 2nd Floor, Sector 2, Noida-201301 UP, India
-
References
- 1 Egan RL. Mammography. IL: Springfield “Mammography Springfield”; 1964
- 2 Egan RL. Experience with mammography in a tumor institution. Evaluation of 1,000 studies. Radiology 1960; 75: 894-900
- 3 Ostrum BJ, Becker W, Isard HJ. Low-dose mammography. Radiology 1973; 109 (02) 323-326
- 4 Shapiro S. Periodic screening for breast cancer: the HIP Randomized Controlled Trial. Health Insurance Plan. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr 1997; (22) 27-30
- 5 Food and Drug Administration. Accessed on January 24, 2022 at: https://www.fda.gov/Radiation-Emitting-Products/Mqsa-Insights/Dbt-Accreditation-Its-Here
- 6 Chong A, Weinstein SP, McDonald ES, Conant EF. Digital breast tomosynthesis: concepts and clinical practice. Radiology 2019; 292 (01) 1-14
- 7 Conant EF, Barlow WE, Herschorn SD. et al; Population-based Research Optimizing Screening Through Personalized Regimen (PROSPR) Consortium. Association of digital breast tomosynthesis vs digital mammography with cancer detection and recall rates by age and breast density. JAMA Oncol 2019; 5 (05) 635-642
- 8 Ghaderi KF, Phillips J, Perry H, Lotfi P, Mehta TS. Contrast-enhanced mammography: current applications and future directions. Radiographics 2019; 39 (07) 1907-1920
- 9 Dempsey PJ. The history of breast ultrasound. J Ultrasound Med 2004; 23 (07) 887-894
- 10 Chang JM, Won JK, Lee KB, Park IA, Yi A, Moon WK. Comparison of shear-wave and strain ultrasound elastography in the differentiation of benign and malignant breast lesions. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2013; 201 (02) W347-56
- 11 Chen PH, Ghosh ET, Slanetz PJ, Eisenberg RL. Segmental breast calcifications. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2012; 199 (05) W532-42
- 12 Breast Imaging Reporting & Data System | American College of Radiology. Published 2013. Accessed September 29, 2021 at: https://www.acr.org/Clinical-Resources/Reporting-and-Data-Systems/Bi-Rads