Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 20 de 43
Filtrar
2.
J Breast Imaging ; 2(3): 225-231, 2020 Jun 03.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38424979

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: The Food and Drug Administration is currently creating national standards for language used in letters sent to women after mammography concerning dense breasts. The purpose of the current study is to survey breast radiologists on their opinions about language to be included in dense breast notification (DBN) letters. METHODS: An anonymous survey (17 questions and 10 open-ended response fields) was sent to Society of Breast Imaging members between May 2019 and June 2019. Analyses were conducted using a chi-square test and the generalized linear model. RESULTS: A total of 262 surveys were completed (25% response rate). The majority of breast radiologists believe letters should be sent to patients (91%), with most (66%) believing that patients should receive DBN letters regardless of having dense breasts or not. The majority of breast radiologists believe DBNs should be sent to referring physicians (69%), include statements that define masking (89%), inform patients that dense breasts are associated with cancer risk (77%), inform patients about the possible benefits of supplemental screening (86%), be written at the sixth- or eighth-grade reading level (92%), and should be provided in other languages in addition to English (89%); half of the respondents (51%) believe the letters should contain BI-RADS density descriptors. CONCLUSION: There is consensus that patients and referring physicians should receive DBN letters and that those letters should address masking, increased cancer risk, and supplemental screening. Respondents believe the letters should be written at a sixth- or eighth-grade reading level.

3.
J Breast Imaging ; 2(1): 61-66, 2020 Feb 04.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38425003

RESUMEN

Breast cryoablation is becoming more commonplace as a minimally invasive percutaneous procedure that utilizes extreme cold to destroy targeted tissue and has been used to treat symptomatic fibroadenomas and early-stage breast cancer for over a decade with promising results. The practical considerations for implementing a breast cryoablation service include developing and communicating strategic and operational plans, training and privileging the proceduralist, selecting equipment, collaborating with referring clinicians, recruiting and navigating patients, and understanding billing considerations.

5.
AJR Am J Roentgenol ; 213(3): 716-722, 2019 09.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31120790

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE. Percutaneous ultrasound-guided breast cryoablation is a minimally invasive technique that kills targeted tissue with extreme cold, requires only local anesthesia, and takes less than 45 minutes to complete. CONCLUSION. We discuss the indications for breast cryoablation, the mechanism of cell death, and types of commercially available devices; illustrate procedural technique; and review expected follow-up imaging findings in treated primary breast cancer.


Asunto(s)
Neoplasias de la Mama/cirugía , Criocirugía/métodos , Ultrasonografía Intervencional , Adulto , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Neoplasias de la Mama/diagnóstico por imagen , Femenino , Humanos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Ultrasonografía Mamaria
6.
J Breast Imaging ; 1(4): 338-341, 2019 Dec 05.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38424814

RESUMEN

Teaching ultrasound-guided percutaneous breast interventions to a trainee may be a challenge, given the often high-anxiety environment in the subspecialty of breast imaging. This article aims to teach an organized approach, including simulation practice with an emphasis on consistent feedback and role modeling, as well as practical and relevant physics, to help trainees accelerate acquisition of these important skills during their training.

7.
J Breast Imaging ; 1(1): 32-36, 2019 Mar 13.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38424876

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate radiologists' supplemental screening recommendations for women with dense breasts, at average, intermediate, or high risk of breast cancer, and to determine if there are differences between their recommendations for their patients, their friends and family, and themselves. METHODS: This is an anonymous survey of Society of Breast Imaging (SBI) members. Demographics, knowledge of breast density as a risk factor, and recommendations for screening with digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT), ultrasound (US), and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in women with dense breasts, at average, intermediate, or high- risk of breast cancer were assessed. The likelihood of their recommending the screening test for their patients, their family and friends, and themselves was assessed on a Likert scale from 0 to 4 (0 = "not at all likely" to 4 = "extremely likely"). RESULTS: There were 295 responses: 67% were women, and breast imaging comprised 95% of their practice. Among participants, 53% correctly answered the question on relative risk of breast cancer when comparing extremely dense versus fatty breasts, and 57% when comparing heterogeneously dense versus scattered breasts. US is recommended at a relatively low rate (1.0-1.4 on the 0-4 scale), regardless of risk. DBT is recommended at a relatively high rate (2.5-3.0 on the 0-4 scale), regardless of risk status. MR is recommended mainly for those at high risk (3.6 on the 0-4 scale). Radiologists were more likely to recommend additional imaging for themselves than for their patients and their family and friends. CONCLUSION: For women with dense breasts, radiologists are "somewhat likely" to recommend US and "likely" to "very likely" to recommend DBT regardless of risk group. They are "very likely" to recommend MRI for high-risk groups.

8.
Radiology ; 286(3): 838-844, 2018 03.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29173123

RESUMEN

Purpose To compare screening mammography recall rate, cancer detection rate (CDR), and positive predictive values (PPVs) for digital mammography before and after radiologist experience with digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT). Materials and Methods This retrospective study was approved by the institutional review board and compliant with HIPAA. The authors reviewed screening mammography audit data obtained from 2009 to 2014, during which 108 276 digital mammographic examinations were performed (50 062 before and 58 214 after experience with DBT). Recall rate, CDR, PPV of positive screening result (PPV1), PPV of biopsy recommendation (PPV2), and PPV of biopsies performed (PPV3) of digital mammography for six radiologists were compared before (2009-2011) and after (2012-2014) experience with DBT. Radiologists worked in both a community setting, in which only digital mammography was available, and in two tertiary breast imaging centers, where they interpreted DBT images starting in 2012. Data were examined by using generalized linear mixed modeling wherein observations were nested for each radiologist over time. P < .05 was considered indicative of a statistically significant difference; 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. Results The average recall rate was 6.8% (range, 3.6%-9.7%) before experience with DBT and 7.9% (range, 5.5%-9.5%) after (P = .0316). Before experience with DBT, the recall rate increased only 0.01% for each year from 2009 to 2011 (P = .9727). After experience with DBT, the recall rate increased 0.65% for each year from 2012 to 2014 (P < .0127). CDR increased from 2.5 per 1000 examinations (95% CI: 2.2, 2.9) to 3.5 per 1000 examinations (95% CI: 3.0, 4.0; P = .0203). PPV2 and PPV3 increased significantly after experience with DBT, from 26.9% (95% CI: 19.9%, 35.3%) to 36.1% (95% CI: 31.7%, 40.7%; P = .0212) for PPV2 and from 31.2% (95% CI: 24.0%, 39.3%) to 40.0% (95% CI: 35.5%, 44.6%; P = .0290) for PPV3. Conclusion Recall rate, CDR, PPV2, and PPV3 of digital mammography increased after radiologist experience with DBT. © RSNA, 2017.


Asunto(s)
Neoplasias de la Mama/diagnóstico por imagen , Detección Precoz del Cáncer/métodos , Mamografía/métodos , Biopsia con Aguja , Neoplasias de la Mama/patología , Competencia Clínica , Detección Precoz del Cáncer/normas , Detección Precoz del Cáncer/estadística & datos numéricos , Femenino , Humanos , Mamografía/normas , Mamografía/estadística & datos numéricos , Auditoría Médica , Valor Predictivo de las Pruebas , Estudios Retrospectivos , Rhode Island
9.
Eur Radiol ; 28(1): 3-10, 2018 Jan.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28710582

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVES: To compare interobserver variability (IOV), reader confidence, and sensitivity/specificity in detecting architectural distortion (AD) on digital mammography (DM) versus digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT). METHODS: This IRB-approved, HIPAA-compliant reader study used a counterbalanced experimental design. We searched radiology reports for AD on screening mammograms from 5 March 2012-27 November 2013. Cases were consensus-reviewed. Controls were selected from demographically matched non-AD examinations. Two radiologists and two fellows blinded to outcomes independently reviewed images from two patient groups in two sessions. Readers recorded presence/absence of AD and confidence level. Agreement and differences in confidence and sensitivity/specificity between DBT versus DM and attendings versus fellows were examined using weighted Kappa and generalised mixed modeling, respectively. RESULTS: There were 59 AD patients and 59 controls for 1,888 observations (59 × 2 (cases and controls) × 2 breasts × 2 imaging techniques × 4 readers). For all readers, agreement improved with DBT versus DM (0.61 vs. 0.37). Confidence was higher with DBT, p = .001. DBT achieved higher sensitivity (.59 vs. .32), p < .001; specificity remained high (>.90). DBT achieved higher positive likelihood ratio values, smaller negative likelihood ratio values, and larger ROC values. CONCLUSIONS: DBT decreases IOV, increases confidence, and improves sensitivity while maintaining high specificity in detecting AD. KEY POINTS: • Digital breast tomosynthesis decreases interobserver variability in the detection of architectural distortion. • Digital breast tomosynthesis increases reader confidence in the detection of architectural distortion. • Digital breast tomosynthesis improves sensitivity in the detection of architectural distortion.


Asunto(s)
Neoplasias de la Mama/diagnóstico , Mama/diagnóstico por imagen , Detección Precoz del Cáncer/métodos , Mamografía/métodos , Adulto , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Femenino , Humanos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Curva ROC , Intensificación de Imagen Radiográfica/métodos
11.
J Am Coll Radiol ; 14(11S): S383-S390, 2017 Nov.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29101979

RESUMEN

Breast cancer screening recommendations are based on risk factors. For average-risk women, screening mammography and/or digital breast tomosynthesis is recommended beginning at age 40. Ultrasound (US) may be useful as an adjunct to mammography for incremental cancer detection in women with dense breasts, but the balance between increased cancer detection and the increased risk of a false-positive examination should be considered in the decision. For intermediate-risk women, US or MRI may be indicated as an adjunct to mammography depending upon specific risk factors. For women at high risk due to prior mantle radiation between the ages of 10 to 30, mammography is recommended starting 8 years after radiation therapy but not before age 25. For women with a genetic predisposition, annual screening mammography is recommended beginning 10 years earlier than the affected relative at the time of diagnosis but not before age 30. Annual screening MRI is recommended in high-risk women as an adjunct to mammography. The American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed annually by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and revision include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer reviewed journals and the application of well-established methodologies (RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation or GRADE) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures for specific clinical scenarios. In those instances where evidence is lacking or equivocal, expert opinion may supplement the available evidence to recommend imaging or treatment.


Asunto(s)
Neoplasias de la Mama/diagnóstico por imagen , Diagnóstico por Imagen/métodos , Factores de Edad , Detección Precoz del Cáncer , Medicina Basada en la Evidencia , Femenino , Humanos , Factores de Riesgo , Sociedades Médicas , Estados Unidos
12.
J Am Coll Radiol ; 14(5S): S203-S224, 2017 May.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28473077

RESUMEN

Breast cancer is the most common female malignancy and the second leading cause of female cancer death in the United States. Although the majority of palpable breast lumps are benign, a new palpable breast mass is a common presenting sign of breast cancer. Any woman presenting with a palpable lesion should have a thorough clinical breast examination, but because many breast masses may not exhibit distinctive physical findings, imaging evaluation is necessary in almost all cases to characterize the palpable lesion. Recommended imaging options in the context of a palpable mass include diagnostic mammography and targeted-breast ultrasound and are dependent on patient age and degree of radiologic suspicion as detailed in the document Variants. There is little role for advanced technologies such as MRI, positron emission mammography, or molecular breast imaging in the evaluation of a palpable mass. When a suspicious finding is identified, biopsy is indicated. The American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed annually by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and revision include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer reviewed journals and the application of well-established methodologies (RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation or GRADE) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures for specific clinical scenarios. In those instances where evidence is lacking or equivocal, expert opinion may supplement the available evidence to recommend imaging or treatment.


Asunto(s)
Neoplasias de la Mama/diagnóstico por imagen , Medicina Basada en la Evidencia , Femenino , Humanos , Imagen por Resonancia Magnética , Mamografía , Radiología , Sociedades Médicas , Ultrasonografía Mamaria , Estados Unidos
13.
J Am Coll Radiol ; 14(5S): S25-S33, 2017 May.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28473081

RESUMEN

Breast pain (or tenderness) is a common symptom, experienced by up to 80% of women at some point in their lives. Fortunately, it is rarely associated with breast cancer. However, breast pain remains a common cause of referral for diagnostic breast imaging evaluation. Appropriate workup depends on the nature and focality of the pain, as well as the age of the patient. Imaging evaluation is usually not indicated if the pain is cyclic or nonfocal. For focal, noncyclic pain, imaging may be appropriate, mainly for reassurance and to identify treatable causes. Ultrasound can be the initial examination used to evaluate women under 30 with focal, noncyclic breast pain; for women 30 and older, diagnostic mammography, digital breast tomosynthesis, and ultrasound may all serve as appropriate initial examinations. However, even in the setting of focal, noncyclic pain, cancer as an etiology is rare. The American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed annually by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and revision include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer-reviewed journals and the application of well-established methodologies (RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation or GRADE) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures for specific clinical scenarios. In those instances where evidence is lacking or equivocal, expert opinion may supplement the available evidence to recommend imaging or treatment.


Asunto(s)
Mastodinia/diagnóstico por imagen , Factores de Edad , Neoplasias de la Mama/complicaciones , Neoplasias de la Mama/diagnóstico por imagen , Diagnóstico por Imagen/métodos , Medicina Basada en la Evidencia , Femenino , Humanos , Mamografía , Mastodinia/etiología , Radiología , Sociedades Médicas , Ultrasonografía Mamaria , Estados Unidos
14.
J Am Coll Radiol ; 14(5S): S282-S292, 2017 May.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28473085

RESUMEN

Women and health care professionals generally prefer intensive follow-up after a diagnosis of breast cancer. However, there are no survival differences between women who obtain intensive surveillance with imaging and laboratory studies compared with women who only undergo testing because of the development of symptoms or findings on clinical examinations. American Society of Clinical Oncology and National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines state that annual mammography is the only imaging examination that should be performed to detect a localized breast recurrence in asymptomatic patients; more imaging may be needed if the patient has locoregional symptoms (eg, palpable abnormality). Women with other risk factors that increase their lifetime risk for breast cancer may warrant evaluation with breast MRI. Furthermore, the quality of life is similar for women who undergo intensive surveillance compared with those who do not. There is little justification for imaging to detect or rule out metastasis in asymptomatic women with newly diagnosed stage I breast cancer. The American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed annually by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and revision include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer reviewed journals and the application of well-established methodologies (RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation or GRADE) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures for specific clinical scenarios. In those instances where evidence is lacking or equivocal, expert opinion may supplement the available evidence to recommend imaging or treatment.


Asunto(s)
Enfermedades Asintomáticas , Neoplasias de la Mama/diagnóstico por imagen , Mamografía , Recurrencia Local de Neoplasia/diagnóstico por imagen , Femenino , Humanos , Imagen por Resonancia Magnética/métodos , Tomografía Computarizada por Tomografía de Emisión de Positrones/métodos , Calidad de Vida , Radiología , Factores de Riesgo , Sociedades Médicas , Tomografía Computarizada por Rayos X/métodos , Estados Unidos
15.
J Am Coll Radiol ; 13(11S): R45-R49, 2016 Nov.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27814813

RESUMEN

Mammography is the recommended method for breast cancer screening of women in the general population. However, mammography alone does not perform as well as mammography plus supplemental screening in high-risk women. Therefore, supplemental screening with MRI or ultrasound is recommended in selected high-risk populations. Screening breast MRI is recommended in women at high risk for breast cancer on the basis of family history or genetic predisposition. Ultrasound is an option for those high-risk women who cannot undergo MRI. Recent literature also supports the use of breast MRI in some women of intermediate risk, and ultrasound may be an option for intermediate-risk women with dense breasts. There is insufficient evidence to support the use of other imaging modalities, such as thermography, breast-specific gamma imaging, positron emission mammography, and optical imaging, for breast cancer screening. The ACR Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed every 2 years by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and review includes an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer-reviewed journals and the application of a well-established consensus methodology (modified Delphi) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures by the panel. In those instances in which evidence is lacking or not definitive, expert opinion may be used to recommend imaging or treatment.


Asunto(s)
Neoplasias de la Mama/diagnóstico por imagen , Detección Precoz del Cáncer/normas , Imagen por Resonancia Magnética/normas , Guías de Práctica Clínica como Asunto , Ultrasonografía Mamaria/normas , Neoplasias de la Mama/patología , Medicina Basada en la Evidencia , Femenino , Humanos , Oncología Médica/normas , Radiología/normas , Reproducibilidad de los Resultados , Sensibilidad y Especificidad , Estados Unidos
16.
J Am Coll Radiol ; 13(11S): e43-e52, 2016 Nov.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27814823

RESUMEN

Women newly diagnosed with stage 1 breast cancer have an early-stage disease that can be effectively treated. Evidence provides little justification for performing imaging to exclude metastasis in asymptomatic women with stage I breast cancer. No differences have been found in survival or quality of life in women regardless of whether they underwent initial workup for metastatic disease. These women generally prefer intensive follow-up to detect an early recurrence. However, survival rates do not differ between women who obtain intensive screening and surveillance, with imaging and laboratory studies, and women who undergo testing only as a result of development of symptoms or findings on clinical examinations. In addition, quality of life is similar for women who undergo intensive surveillance compared with those who do not. American Society of Clinical Oncology and National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines state that annual mammography is the only imaging examination that should be performed to detect a localized breast recurrence in asymptomatic patients. Additional imaging may be needed if the patient has locoregional symptoms. The ACR Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed every 3 years by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and review by the panel include extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer-reviewed journals and application of a well-established consensus methodology (modified Delphi) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures. When evidence is lacking or not definitive, expert opinion may be used to recommend imaging or treatment.


Asunto(s)
Neoplasias de la Mama/diagnóstico por imagen , Neoplasias de la Mama/patología , Detección Precoz del Cáncer/normas , Mamografía/normas , Metástasis de la Neoplasia/diagnóstico por imagen , Recurrencia Local de Neoplasia/diagnóstico por imagen , Enfermedades Asintomáticas , Medicina Basada en la Evidencia , Femenino , Humanos , Oncología Médica/normas , Metástasis de la Neoplasia/patología , Recurrencia Local de Neoplasia/patología , Estadificación de Neoplasias , Guías de Práctica Clínica como Asunto , Radiología/normas , Reproducibilidad de los Resultados , Sensibilidad y Especificidad , Vigilancia de Guardia , Estados Unidos
17.
J Am Coll Radiol ; 13(11S): e53-e57, 2016 Nov.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27814824

RESUMEN

Stage I breast carcinoma is classified when an invasive breast carcinoma is ≤2 cm in diameter (T1), with no regional (axillary) lymph node metastases (N0) and no distant metastases (M0). The most common sites for metastases from breast cancer are the skeleton, lung, liver, and brain. In general, women and health care professionals prefer intensive screening and surveillance after a diagnosis of breast cancer. Screening protocols include conventional imaging such as chest radiography, bone scan, ultrasound of the liver, and MRI of brain. It is uncertain whether PET/CT will serve as a replacement for current imaging technologies. However, there are no survival or quality-of-life differences for women who undergo intensive screening and surveillance after a diagnosis of stage I breast carcinoma compared with those who do not. The ACR Appropriateness Criteria® are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed every 2 years by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and review include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer-reviewed journals and the application of a well-established consensus methodology (modified Delphi) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures by the panel. In those instances in which evidence is lacking or not definitive, expert opinion may be used to recommend imaging or treatment.


Asunto(s)
Neoplasias de la Mama/diagnóstico por imagen , Neoplasias de la Mama/patología , Detección Precoz del Cáncer/normas , Mamografía/normas , Metástasis de la Neoplasia/diagnóstico por imagen , Recurrencia Local de Neoplasia/diagnóstico por imagen , Guías de Práctica Clínica como Asunto , Medicina Basada en la Evidencia , Femenino , Humanos , Oncología Médica/normas , Metástasis de la Neoplasia/patología , Recurrencia Local de Neoplasia/patología , Estadificación de Neoplasias , Radiología/normas , Reproducibilidad de los Resultados , Sensibilidad y Especificidad , Vigilancia de Guardia , Estados Unidos
18.
J Am Coll Radiol ; 13(11S): e31-e42, 2016 Nov.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27814822

RESUMEN

A palpable breast mass is one of the most common presenting features of breast carcinoma. However, the clinical features are frequently nonspecific. Imaging performed before biopsy is helpful in characterizing the nature of the mass. For women with clinically detected breast masses, the vast majority will require evaluation with ultrasound. Diagnostic mammography is the initial imaging modality of choice for women aged ≥ 40 years; ultrasound is typically necessary unless a definitively benign mass is identified as the etiology of the clinical finding. For evaluating women aged <30 years and women who are pregnant or lactating, ultrasound is used for initial evaluation. For women aged 30 to 39 years, either ultrasound or diagnostic mammography may be used for initial evaluation. MRI is rarely indicated to evaluate a clinically detected finding. Biopsy is indicated for masses with suspicious features. Short-term follow-up is a reasonable alternative to biopsy for solid masses with probably benign features suggesting fibroadenoma. Correlation between imaging and the clinical finding is essential. The ACR Appropriateness Criteria® are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed every 2 years by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and review include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer-reviewed journals and the application of a well established consensus methodology (modified Delphi) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures by the panel. In those instances in which evidence is lacking or not definitive, expert opinion may be used to recommend imaging or treatment.


Asunto(s)
Neoplasias de la Mama/diagnóstico por imagen , Detección Precoz del Cáncer/normas , Mamografía/normas , Oncología Médica/normas , Palpación/normas , Guías de Práctica Clínica como Asunto , Radiología/normas , Neoplasias de la Mama/patología , Medicina Basada en la Evidencia , Femenino , Humanos , Reproducibilidad de los Resultados , Sensibilidad y Especificidad , Estados Unidos
19.
Semin Radiat Oncol ; 26(1): 17-24, 2016 Jan.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26617206

RESUMEN

Although some breast cancers present as palpable masses or with other clinical findings, many are detected at screening. Most screening is currently done with digital mammography, but high-risk patients or those with dense breast tissue may undergo additional screening examinations with magnetic resonance imaging or ultrasound. Additionally, digital breast tomosynthesis, contrast-enhanced mammography, and molecular breast imaging are newer technologies available at some sites. Optimal usage of breast imaging technologies remains controversial, both in screening and diagnostic settings following a new diagnosis of breast cancer. This article will review well established and newer, alternative breast imaging technologies as well as recent data regarding their role in optimizing patient care.


Asunto(s)
Neoplasias de la Mama/diagnóstico , Imagen por Resonancia Magnética , Mamografía/métodos , Ultrasonografía Mamaria , Mama/patología , Manejo de la Enfermedad , Femenino , Humanos , Imagenología Tridimensional
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA