Breast Ultrasound: Pitfalls, Tricks, and Tips. An Approximation for Radiologists in Training

Article Sidebar

PDF Download
Published Jun 20, 2022
DOI: https://doi.org/10.18103/mra.v10i6.2830

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Submit your own article

Register as an author to reserve your spot in the next issue of the Medical Research Archives.

Author Registration

Join the Society

The European Society of Medicine is more than a professional association. We are a community. Our members work in countries across the globe, yet are united by a common goal: to promote health and health equity, around the world.

Join Europe’s leading medical society and discover the many advantages of membership, including free article publication.

Membership

Main Article Content

Maria Jose Chico
Radiology Service, Hospital Italiano de Buenos Aires, Argentina
Maria Paz Swiecicki
Radiology Service, Hospital Italiano de Buenos Aires, Argentina
Karina Alejandra Pesce
Radiology Service, Hospital Italiano de Buenos Aires, Argentina
Pamela Causa Andrieu
Radiology Department, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, United States

Abstract

Breast ultrasound diagnostic performance depends not only on the operator's experience but also on the correlation of the results with other modalities. Therefore, a strong understanding of the acquisition technique and imaging optimization and the potential pitfalls in interpreting these studies is essential for achieving an adequate diagnosis.  However, the trainees’ exposure to image optimization and ultrasound physics may be limited, impacting the quality of the examinations. Therefore, this review aims to provide an approach to breast US acquisition and interpretation, highlighting and illustrating tips for avoiding misinterpretations, mainly for trainees.

Keywords: Ultrasonography, Mammary, Breast Neoplasms, Radiology

Article Details

How to Cite
CHICO, Maria Jose et al. Breast Ultrasound: Pitfalls, Tricks, and Tips. An Approximation for Radiologists in Training. Medical Research Archives, [S.l.], v. 10, n. 6, june 2022. ISSN 2375-1924. Available at: <https://esmed.org/MRA/mra/article/view/2830>. Date accessed: 26 apr. 2024. doi: https://doi.org/10.18103/mra.v10i6.2830.
ABNT APA BibTeX CBE EndNote - EndNote format (Macintosh & Windows) MLA ProCite - RIS format (Macintosh & Windows) RefWorks Reference Manager - RIS format (Windows only) Turabian
Issue
Vol 10 No 6 (2022): Vol.10 Issue 6 June 2022
Section
Review Articles

The Medical Research Archives grants authors the right to publish and reproduce the unrevised contribution in whole or in part at any time and in any form for any scholarly non-commercial purpose with the condition that all publications of the contribution include a full citation to the journal as published by the Medical Research Archives.

 

References

1. Athanasiou A, Tardivon A, Ollivier L, Thibault F, El Khoury C, Neuenschwander S. How to optimize breast ultrasound. Eur J Radiol. Jan 2009;69(1):6-13. doi:10.1016/j.ejrad.2008.07.034
2. Carpentier B, Hayward J, Strachowski L. Enhancing Your Acoustics: Ultrasound Image Optimization of Breast Lesions. J Ultrasound Med. Jul 2017;36(7):1479-1485. doi:10.7863/ultra.16.09018
3. Hooley RJ, Scoutt LM, Philpotts LE. Breast ultrasonography: state of the art. Radiology. Sep 2013;268(3):642-59. doi:10.1148/radiol.13121606
4. Baker JA, Soo MS, Rosen EL. Artifacts and pitfalls in sonographic imaging of the breast. AJR Am J Roentgenol. May 2001;176(5):1261-6. doi:10.2214/ajr.176.5.1761261
5. Uematsu T. Ultrasonographic findings of missed breast cancer: pitfalls and pearls. Breast Cancer. Jan 2014;21(1):10-9. doi:10.1007/s12282-013-0498-7
6. Wang LC, Sullivan M, Du H, Feldman MI, Mendelson EB. US appearance of ductal carcinoma in situ. Radiographics. Jan-Feb 2013;33(1):213-28. doi:10.1148/rg.331125092
7. Kim MJ, Kim JY, Yoon JH, et al. How to find an isoechoic lesion with breast US. Radiographics. May-Jun 2011;31(3):663-76. doi:10.1148/rg.313105038
8. Anvari A, Forsberg F, Samir AE. A Primer on the Physical Principles of Tissue Harmonic Imaging. Radiographics. Nov-Dec 2015;35(7):1955-64. doi:10.1148/rg.2015140338
9. Mendelson EB B-VM, Berg WA, Whitman GJ, Feldman MI, Madjar H, et al. ACR BI-RADS ultrasound. In: D'Orsi CJ SE, Mendelson EB, Morris EA, ed. ACR BI-RADS Atlas: Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System. 2013.
10. Vilagran M, Del Riego J, Palaña P, et al. Parallel vessels as a predictor of benignity in solid breast masses. Breast J. Mar 2019;25(2):257-261. doi:10.1111/tbj.13190
11. Park JM, Franken EA, Jr. Triangulation of breast lesions: review and clinical applications. Curr Probl Diagn Radiol. Jan-Feb 2008;37(1):1-14. doi:10.1067/j.cpradiol.2007.09.001
12. Park JM, Yang L, Laroia A, Franken EA, Jr., Fajardo LL. Missed and/or misinterpreted lesions in breast ultrasound: reasons and solutions. Can Assoc Radiol J. Feb 2011;62(1):41-9. doi:10.1016/j.carj.2010.09.002
13. Candelaria R, Fornage BD. Second-look US examination of MR-detected breast lesions. J Clin Ultrasound. Mar-Apr 2011;39(3):115-21. doi:10.1002/jcu.20784
14. Leung JW. Utility of second-look ultrasound in the evaluation of MRI-detected breast lesions. Semin Roentgenol. Oct 2011;46(4):260-74. doi:10.1053/j.ro.2011.08.002
15. Spick C, Baltzer PA. Diagnostic utility of second-look US for breast lesions identified at MR imaging: systematic review and meta-analysis. Radiology. Nov 2014;273(2):401-9. doi:10.1148/radiol.14140474
16. Ando T, Ito Y, Ido M, et al. Pre-Operative Planning Using Real-Time Virtual Sonography, an MRI/Ultrasound Image Fusion Technique, for Breast-Conserving Surgery in Patients with Non-Mass Enhancement on Breast MRI: A Preliminary Study. Ultrasound Med Biol. Jul 2018;44(7):1364-1370. doi:10.1016/j.ultrasmedbio.2018.03.001
17. Choe J, Chikarmane SA, Giess CS. Nonmass Findings at Breast US: Definition, Classifications, and Differential Diagnosis. Radiographics. Mar-Apr 2020;40(2):326-335. doi:10.1148/rg.2020190125
18. Seiler SJ, Sharma PB, Hayes JC, et al. Multimodality Imaging-based Evaluation of Single-Lumen Silicone Breast Implants for Rupture. Radiographics. Mar-Apr 2017;37(2):366-382. doi:10.1148/rg.2017160086