No abstract available.
Breast Neoplasms* ; Breast* ; Ultrasonography*

No abstract available in English.
Breast Neoplasms* ; Breast* ; Ultrasonography*

We analyzed the mammographic (n=21) findings (location, margin, shape, cluster microcalcifications, size, multiplicity) and ultrasonographic (n=12) findings (shape, border, internal echo, boundary echo, posterior echo, lateral echo, width/depth ratio) to evaluate specific radiologic findings of histopathologically proved uncommon breast cancer. The mammographic findings (n=21) are as follow; 1) single; 16, multiple; 5 2) margin (smooth; 13, irregular; 4, spiculated; 4) 3) shape (round and ovoid; 9, lobulated; 8, irregular; 4) 4) cluster microcalcifications (abscent; 20, present; 1) 5) size (1-3cm; 18, 3-5cm; 2, 5cm> ; 1) 6) location (UOQ; 13, UIQ; 4, LIQ; 3, LOQ; 1). The ultrasonographic findings (n=12) are as follow; 1) shape (round to oval; 5, lobulated; 5, irregular; 2) 2) border (smooth even; 9, rough uneven; 3) 3) internal echo (fine homogeneous; 5, coarse heterogeneous; 7) 4) boundary echo (regular fine; 4, irregular thick; 8) 5) posterior echo (enhanced; 11, no change; 1) 6) lateral echo (marked; 7, nonexistent; 5) 7) width/depth ratio (1.5> 1, 1.0-1.5; 7, 1.0< ; 4). Uncommon breast cancer show benign nature on mammogram, but malignant nature on ultrasonogram (especially boundary echo, internal echo, width/depth ratio)
Breast Neoplasms* ; Breast* ; Radiography ; Ultrasonography

We encountered a patient with a breast mass which had metastasized from gastric carcinoma representing as aninflammatory carcinoma on ultrasonography. We described the radiologic and clinical features, and review theliterature. The patient had advanced gastric carcinoma and breast ultrasonography demonstrated the presence ofvery ill-defined, infiltrating, and mixed echoic lesions indistinguishable from findings of primary inflammatorybreast carcinoma. Metastatic gastric adenocarcinoma was confirmed pathologically.
Adenocarcinoma ; Breast Neoplasms* ; Breast* ; Humans ; Stomach Neoplasms* ; Ultrasonography ; Ultrasonography, Mammary

PURPOSE: To compare 3D ultrasound (3D-US) with 2D ultrasound (2D-US) in terms of their usefulness and limitations in the diagnosis of breast masses. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We obtained 2D and 3D US images of 37 breast lesions present in 20 cases of fibroadenoma, nine of cancer, and eight of fibrocystic disease proven in a total of 26 cases [fibroadenoma (n=13), breast cancer (n=9), fibrocystic disease (n=4)] by histologic examination, and by clinical evaluation and clinical evaluation with sonographic imaging in eleven. When comparing 3D and 2D-US images we had no prior information regarding detection rate according to the size of lesions, whether or not internal and boundary echo patterns could be interpreted, accurate differentiation between tumorous and non-tumorous lesions, or the accuracy with which benign and malignant tumors could be differentiated. RESULTS: For lesions of 1 cm or less in diameter the detection rate of 3D-US was lower than that of 2D-US, but for lesions over 1 cm there was no difference between the two modalities. In fibroadenoma and breast cancer, 3D-US was more useful than 2D-US for the evaluation of both internal and boundary echo, but with fibrocystic disease and in the diagnosis of tumor/non-tumor, there was no significant difference. In breast cancer, however, 3D-US more accurately determined malignancy, and in fibroadenoma, because of the pseudospicule revealed by 3D-US, this modality was less exact in determining benignancy. CONCLUSION: In the evaluation of internal and boundary echo in breast mass diagnosis, 3D-US was more useful than its 2D counterpart. For lesions of 1 cm or less in diameter, however, the detection rate of 3D-US was low, and since in some benign cases a pseudospicule was apparent, the possibiliy of confusion with malignancy arose. For these reasons, the usefulness of 3D-US was limited.
Breast Neoplasms ; Breast* ; Diagnosis* ; Fibroadenoma ; Ultrasonography

One hundred and fifty two patients presenting with palpable primary breast cancer were studied to evaluate accuracy of clinical assessment, mammography, and ultrasonography in measuring tumor size. The clinical, mammographic, and ultasonographic diameter of tumor size was compared to histological diameters. The histological diameter of tumors was 27.9+/-12.7mm. The average diameter of tumor on clinical assessment was 33.8+/-13.1mm and its correlation coefficient to the histological size was 0.73. The average size on the mammography was 21.4+/-9.0m and its correlation coefficient to the histological size is 0.71. The tumor size on the ultrasonography in 22 patients was is 22.3+/-10.4mm. The sonographic measurement dimonstrated the highest correlation coefficient (0.83). The clinical assessment overstimated the tumor size, but the mammogaphic and sonographic measurement understimated it compared with histological size. The combined measurement with clinical and ultrasonography could be useful method to estimate tumor size preoperatively. And when it is combined with clinical assessment, it is the most reliable and accurate technique.
Breast Neoplasms* ; Breast* ; Humans ; Mammography ; Ultrasonography

No abstract available.
Breast Neoplasms* ; Mass Screening* ; Ultrasonography*

Irregular hypoechoic masses in the breast do not always indicate malignancies. Many benign breast diseases present with irregular hypoechoic masses that can mimic carcinoma on ultrasonography. Some of these diseases such as inflammation and trauma-related breast lesions could be suspected from a patient's symptoms and personal history. Careful ultrasonographic examination and biopsy could help to differentiate these from malignancies.
Abscess/ultrasonography ; Breast Diseases/pathology ; Breast Neoplasms/pathology/*ultrasonography ; Carcinoma/pathology/ultrasonography ; Female ; Fibroadenoma/pathology/ultrasonography ; Fibrocystic Breast Disease/pathology/ultrasonography ; Granulomatous Mastitis/pathology/ultrasonography ; Humans ; Ultrasonography, Mammary

OBJECTICE: To compare the use of conventional, real-time compound, and pulse-inversion harmonic imaging in the evaluation of breast nodules. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifty-two breast nodules were included in this study, conducted between May and December 2000, in which conventional, real-time compound, and pulse-inversion harmonic images were obtained in the same plane. Three radiologists, each blinded to the interpretations of the other two, evaluated the findings, characterizing the lesions and ranking the three techniques from grade 1, the worst, to grade 3, the best. Lesion conspicuity was assessed, and lesions were also characterized in terms of their margin, clarity of internal echotexture, and clarity of posterior echo pattern. The three techniques were compared using Friedman's test, and interobserver agreement in image interpretation was assessed by means of the intraclass correlation coefficient. RESULTS: With regard to lesion conspicuity, margin, and internal echotexture of the nodules, real-time compound imaging was the best technique (p < 0.05); in terms of posterior echo pattern, the best was pulse-inversion harmonic imaging (p < 0.05). Real-time compound and pulse inversion harmonic imaging were better than conventional sonography in all evaluative aspects. Interobserver agreement was greater than moderate. CONCLUSION: Real-time compound and pulse-inversion harmonic imaging procedures are superior to conventional sonography in terms of both lesion conspicuity and the further characterization of breast nodules. Real-time compound imaging is the best technique for evaluation of the margin and internal echotexture of nodules, while pulse-inversion harmonic imaging is very effective for the evaluation of the posterior echo patterns.
Breast Neoplasms/*ultrasonography ; Comparative Study ; Female ; Fibrocystic Disease of Breast/*ultrasonography ; Human ; Middle Age ; Ultrasonography, Mammary/*methods

PURPOSE: To evaluate the results of mammography and ultrasound-guided localization biopsy of nonpalpable lesions, and the differences between them. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between January 1999 and December 2000, localization biopsies of 441 nonpalpable breast lesions were performed immediately after preoperative localization using a wire hook. Localization was mammography guided in 241 cases and ultrasound guided in 200. The former group included clustered microcalcifications( 195/241, 80.9%), mass (22/241,9.1%) and mass with microcalcifications (24/241, 10.0%), while the latter were almost all mass, or mass with microcalcifications (198/200, 99%). Only two lesions (1%) showed clustered microcalcifications only, and these were previously demonstrated at mammography. RESULTS: Overall, 68 lesions (15.4%) were confirmed as malignancy. Forty-six of 241 mammography guided localization biopsies indicated malignancy: there were 28 noninvasive carcinomas (60.9%), 25 ductal cancers in situ (DCIS), one DCIS combined with lobular cancer in situ (LCIS), and two DCIS combined with microinvasion. Twenty-two of 200 ultrasound-guided localization biopsies revealed malignancy; five such lesions (22.7%) were noninvasive carcinomas. CONCLUSION: The malignancy rate and proportion of noninvasive breast cancers indicated by mammography and ultrasound-guided localization biopsy differed, and this was because the former involved mainly microcalcifications and the latter, masses.
Biopsy* ; Breast Neoplasms ; Breast* ; Carcinoma, Intraductal, Noninfiltrating ; Mammography* ; Ultrasonography