Advertisement

Mammasonografie

  • Bernhard-Joachim HackelöerEmail author
  • Hans-Heino Hille
Chapter

Zusammenfassung

Vor mittlerweile 60 Jahren legten Wild und Reid den Grundstein zur Entwicklung der Mammasonografie (Wild u. Reid 1952). Bald wurde die Methode auch zur Brustkrebsdiagnose Anfang der Siebziger Jahre des letzten Jahrhunderts eingesetzt (Jellins et al. 1971, Kobayashi 1974). Die Bilder waren mit sehr groben Pixeln und geringer Grauwertabstufung aufgebaut (Abb. 35.1a). Eine der basalen Fähigkeiten des Brustultraschalls, nämlich die Unterscheidung zwischen zystischen und soliden Tumore in der Brust wurde etabliert.

Literatur

  1. American College of Radiology (ACR) (2003) ACR BI-RADS: Breast imaging reporting and data system. Breast imaging atlas. American College of Radiology, Reston, VAGoogle Scholar
  2. Baez E, Strathmann K, Vetter M et al (2005) Likelihood of malignancies in breast lesions described by ultrasound with a combined diagnostic score. Ultrasound Med Biol 31:179–184CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Baldwin P (2011) Breast ultrasound elastography. Radiologic Technology 82:347M–365MPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Barr RG, Destounis S, Lackey LB et al (2012) Evaluation of breast lesions using sonographic elasticity imaging: a multicenter trial. J Ultrasound Med 31:281–287CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Berg WA, Blume JD, Cormack JB et al (2008) Combined screening with ultrasound and mammography vs. mammography alone in women at elevated risk of breast cancer. JAMA 299:2151–2163CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  6. Berg WA, Cosgrove DO, Doré CJ et al (2012) Shear-wave elastography improves the specificity of breast US: the BE1 multinational study of 939 masses. Radiology 262:435–449CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Buchberger W, Niehoff A, Obrist P et al (2000) Clinically and mammographically occult breast lesions: detection and classification with high resolution sonography. Semin Ultrasound CT MR 21:325–336CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Chan SW, Cheung PS, Chan S, Lau SS et al (2008) Benefit of ultrasonography in the detection of clinically and mammographically occult breast cancer. World J Surg 32:2593–2598CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Checka CM, Chun JE, Schnabel FR, Lee J, Toth H (2012) The relationship of mammographic density and age: implications for breast cancer screening. AJR 198:292–295CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Chen SC, Cheung YC, Lo YF et al (2003) Sonographic differentiation of invasive and intraductal carcinomas of the breast. BJR 76:600–604CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Corsetti V, Houssami N, Aurora F et al (2008) 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 44:539–544CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Corsetti V, Houssami N, Ghirardi M et al (2011) Evidence of the effect of adjunct ultrasound screening in women with mammography-negative dense breasts: interval breast cancers at one year follow-up. Eur J Cancer 47:1021–1026CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Cosgrove DO, Kedar RP, Bamber JC et al (1993) Breast diseases: color Doppler US in differential diagnoses. Radiology 189:99–104CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Fischer T, Grigoryew M, Bossenz S et al. (2012) Sonografische Mikrokalkdetection – Potenzial einer neuen Methode. Ultraschall in Med. http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/s-0031-1299128Google Scholar
  15. Hackelöer BJ, Duda V, Lauth G (1986) Ultraschall-Mammographie. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York TokioCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hackelöer BJ, Lauth G, Duda V et al (1980) Neue Möglichkeiten der Ultraschallmammographie. Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd 40:301–312CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hille H, Vetter M, Hackelöer BJ (2007) Die Eignung der hochfrequenten Sonografie zur Diagnostik des DCIS. Ultraschall in Med 28:307–312CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hille H, Vetter M, Hackelöer BJ (2012) The accuracy of BI-RADS classification of breast ultrasound as a first-line imaging method. Ultraschall in Med http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/s-0031-1281667. Zugriff 01.03.2012Google Scholar
  19. Hille H (2011) Advances in breast ultrasound. In: Thoirs K (Hrsg) Sonography. Intech web.org, , S. 73–92Google Scholar
  20. Houssami N, Irwig L, Simpson JM, McKessar M, Blome S, Noakes J (2003) Sydney breast imaging accuracy study: comparative sensitivity and specificity of mammography and sonography in young women with symptoms. AJR 180:935–940CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Jellins J, Kossof G, Buddee FW, Reeve TS (1971) Ultrasonic visualization of the breast. Med Journ of Australia 1:305–307Google Scholar
  22. Jørgensen KJ (2012) Is the tide turning against breast screening? Breast Cancer Research 14(4):107CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  23. Kelly KM, Richwald GA (2011) Automated whole-breast ultrasound: advancing the performance of breast cancer screening. Semin Ultrasound CT MR 32:273–280CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Kim SJ, Moon WK, Cho N et al (2011) The detection of recurrent breast cancer in patients with a history of breast cancer surgery: comparison of clinical breast examination, mammography and ultrasonography. Acta Radiol 52:15–20CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Kobayashi T (1974) Clinical evaluation of Ultrasound techniques in breast tumors and malignant abdominal tumors. Excerpta medica :191–198Google Scholar
  26. Kolb T, Lichy J, Jeffrey H (2002) Comparison of the performance of screening mammography, physical examination, and breast ultrasound and evaluation of factors that influence them: An analysis of 27.825 patient evaluations. Radiology 225:165–175CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Krainick-Strobel U, Hahn M, Duda VF et al (2005) Arbeitsgemeinschaft Minimalinvasive Mammainterventionen (AG MiMi) der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Senologie: Onkologie. Konsensusempfehlung zu Anwendung und Indikationen der Vakuumbiopsie der Brust unter Ultraschallsicht. Geburtsh Frauenheilk 65:526–529CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Lenz S (2011) Breast ultrasound in office gynecology – Ten years of experience. Ultraschall in Med 32:3SCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Madjar H, Becker S, Doubek K et al (2010) Bedeutung der Mammasonografie für die Brustkrebsfrüherkennung in der gynäkologischen Praxis. Ultraschall in Med 31:289–229CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Madjar H, Ohlinger R, Mundinger A et al (2006) BI-RADS analoge DEGUM Kriterien von Ultraschallbefunden der Brust – Konsens des Arbeitskreises Mammasonographie der DEGUM. Ultraschall in Med 27:374–379CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Moon WK, Im JG, Koh YH et al (2000) US of mammographically detected clustered microcalcifications. Radiology 217:849–854CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Raza S, Goldkamp AL, Chikarmane SA et al (2010) US of breast masses categorized as BI-RADS 3, 4, and 5: pictorial review of factors influencing clinical management. RadioGraphics 30:1199–1213CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. Schulz KD, Albert US (Hrsg.) (2008) Stufe-3-Leitlinie, Brustkrebsfrüherkennung. Zuckschwerdt, München WienGoogle Scholar
  34. Shin HJ, Kim HH, Cha JH et al (2011) Automated ultrasound of the breast for diagnosis: interobserver agreement on lesion detection and characterization. AJR 197:747–754CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. Shin HJ, Kim HH, Kim SM et al (2008) Screening-detected and symptomatic ductal carcinoma in situ: Differences in the sonographic and pathologic features. AJR 190:516–525CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. Stavros AT (2004) Breast ultrasound. Lippincott Williams, Philadelphia Baltimore, New York, London, S. 448Google Scholar
  37. Wild JJ, Reid JM (1952) Further pilot echographic studies on the histological structure of tumors of the human breast. Am J Pathol 28:839–861PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  38. Wojcinski S, Farrokh A, Hille U et al (2011) The Automated Breast Volume Scanner (ABVS): initial experiences in lesion detection compared with conventional handheld B-mode ultrasound: a pilot study of 50 cases. Int J Womens Health 3:337–346CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  39. Yang WT, Tse GMK (2004) Sonographic, mammographic, and histopathologic correlation of symptomatic ductal carcinoma in situ. AJR 182:101–110CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Ying X, Lin Y, Xia X, Hu B, Zhu Z, He P (2012) A comparison of mammography and ultrasound in women with breast disease: a receiver operating characteristic analysis. Breast J 18(2):130–138CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Facharzt-Zentrum für Kinderwunsch, pränatale Medizin, Endokrinologie und Osteologie Hamburg GmbHamedes expertsHamburgDeutschland
  2. 2.HamburgDeutschland

Personalised recommendations