Imaging Breast Disease: Mammography and Breast Ultrasound

  • E. A. Sickles
  • R. A. Kubik-Huch


The gold standard among breast imaging techniques is mammography, which is a plain-film X-ray examination. The routine use of mammographic screening for clinically occult breast cancer is widespread, primarily due to favorable results from multiple randomized controlled trials and the development of improved methods of preoperative needle biopsy and localization. A large percentage of radiologists interpret mammograms, and daily caseloads in many practices involve 50 or more such examinations per day. Screening examinations comprise more than 75% of all mammography performed in most developed countries. As a result, the majority of detected lesions, both benign and malignant, are small and nonpalpable. In most general radiology practices, mammography accounts for at least 10% (sometimes as much as 20%) of all examinations performed.


Mammographic Screening Architectural Distortion Breast Ultrasound Simple Cyst Dense Breast Tissue 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Suggested Reading

  1. American College of Radiology (2003) Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS), 4th edn. American College of Radiology, Reston, VAGoogle Scholar
  2. Azavedo E, Svane G, Auer G (1989) Stereotactic fine-needle biopsy in 2594 mammographically detected nonpalpable lesions. Lancet 1:1033–1036PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Jackson VP (1995) The current role of ultrasonography in breast imaging. Radiol Clin North Am 33:1161–1170PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Kopans DB (1989) Preoperative imaging-guided needle placement and localization of clinically occult breast lesions. AJR Am J Roentgenol 152:1–9PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Kubik-Huch RA (2006) Imaging the young breast. Breast J Suppl S:35-S40Google Scholar
  6. Liberman L, Feng TL, Dershaw DD et al (1998) US-guided core breast biopsy: use and cost effectiveness. Radiology 208:717–723PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Parker SH, Burbank F, Jackman RJ et al (1994) Percutaneous largecore breast biopsy: a multi-institutional study. Radiology 193:359–364PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Sickles EA (1980) Further experience with microfocal spot magnification mammography in the assessment of clustered microcalcifications. Radiology 137:9–14PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Sickles EA, Filly RA, Callen PW (1984) Benign breast lesions: ultrasound detection and diagnosis. Radiology 151:467–470PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Sickles EA (1986) Mammographic features of 300 consecutive nonpalpable breast cancers. AJR Am J Roentgenol 146:661–663PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Sickles EA (1995) Management of probably benign lesions. Radiol Clin North Am 33:1123–1130PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Sickles EA (1998) Findings at mammographic screening on only one standard projection: outcomes analysis. Radiology 208:471–475PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Stavros AT, Thickman D, Rapp CL et al (1995) Solid breast nodules: use of sonography to distinguish between benign and malignant lesions. Radiology 196:123–134PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Steinbach BG, Hardt NS, Abbitt PL et al (1993) Breast implants, common complications, and concurrent breast disease. Radiographics 13:93–97Google Scholar
  15. Suleiman OH, Spelic DC, McCrohan JL et al (1999) Mammography in the 1990s: the United States and Canada. Radiology 210:345–351PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Italia 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • E. A. Sickles
    • 1
  • R. A. Kubik-Huch
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of RadiologyUCSF Medical CenterSan FranciscoUSA
  2. 2.Institut für RadiologieKantonsspital Baden, AGSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations