Skip to main content

Microcalcifications of the Breast: An Approach to Radiologic Classification

  • Chapter
Musculoskeletal Diseases 2013–2016

Abstract

Microcalcifications in the breast are common. A vast majority of microcalcifications are benign and can be clearly recognized as such without resort to biopsy [1]. A small proportion are obviously malignant, but there is a significant proportion of breast microcalcifications that cannot be accurately determined on the basis of imaging alone and require further assessment and often image-guided biopsy [1, 2]. The recognition and biopsy of suspicious microcalcifications is important, as the detection of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) and small invasive cancers associated with microcalcification provides the opportunity to positively influence the outcome of these breast cancers through early treatment before the disease has spread beyond the breast [3–5]. The challenge is to detect and diagnose the microcalcifications that matter, and differentiate them from those that are benign.

This is an updated version of the chapter by Müller-Schimpfle M (2012) Microcalcifications of the Breast: An Approach to Radiologic Classification. In: Hodler J, von Schulthess GK, Zollikofer ChL (eds) Diseases of the Brain, Head & Neck, Spine 2012–2015. Springer-Verlag Italia, Milano, pp. 307–310.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Evans AJ, Pinder SE, Wilson ARM, Ellis IO (2002) Breast calcifications. Greenwich Medical Media

    Google Scholar 

  2. Wilson ARM, Evans AJ (2000) Surgery — Practical problems: diagnosis of microcalcifications demonstrated on mammography. In: Corson JD, Williamson RCN (Eds) Surgery. Mosby, London

    Google Scholar 

  3. Evans AJ, Pinder SE, Ellis IO, Wilson ARM (2001) Screen detected Ductal Carcinoma in Situ (DCIS): Over-diagnosis or an obligate precursor of invasive disease? Journal of Medical Screening 8:149–151

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. 4. Evans AJ, Pinder SE, Wilson ARM et al (1997) The detection of ductal carcinoma in situ at mammographic screening enables the diagnosis of small, grade 3 invasive tumours. British Journal of Cancer 75:542–544

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Evans AJ, Pinder S, Ellis IO et al (1994) Screening-detected and symptomatic ductal carcinoma in situ: mammographic features with pathologic correlation. Radiology 191:237–240

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Salomon A (1913) Beiträge zu Pathologie der Mammacarci-nome. Arch Klin Chir 101:573–668

    Google Scholar 

  7. Lanyi M (1986) Diagnostik und Differentialdiagnostik der Mamma-Verkalkungen. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  8. Leborgne R (1951) Diagnosis of tumors of the breast by simple roentgenography: calcifications in carcinomas. AJR Am J Roentgenol 65:1–11

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Le Gal M, Durand JC, Laurent M, Pellier D (1976) Management following mammography revealing grouped microcalcifications without palpable tumor. Nouv Presse Med 5:1623–1627

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. de Lafontan B, Daures JP, Salicru B et al (1994) Isolated clustered microcalcifications: Diagnostic value of mammography — Series of 400 cases with surgical verification. Radiology 190:479–483

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. American College of Radiology (ACR) (1998) Illustrated Breast Imaging Reporting And Data System (BI-RAD-STM), 3rd edn. American College of Radiology, Reston, pp 53–181

    Google Scholar 

  12. American College of Radiology (ACR) (2003) ACR BI-RADS® — Mammography, 4th edn. In: ACR Breast Imaging Reporting And Data System, Breast Imaging Atlas. American College of Radiology, Reston, pp 61–259

    Google Scholar 

  13. Sickles EA (1991) Periodic mammographic follow-up of probably benign lesions: results in 3,184 consecutive cases. Radiology 179:463–468

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Orel SG, Kay N, Reynolds C, Sullivan DC (1999) BI-RADS categorization as a predictor of malignancy. Radiology 211:845–850

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Siegmann KC, Wersebe A, Fischmann A et al (2003) Stereotactic vacuum-assisted breast biopsy—success, histologic accuracy, patient acceptance and optimizing the BI-RADSTM-cor-related indication. Rofo 175:99–104

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Hall FM, Storella JM, Silverstone DZ, Wyshak G (1998) Non palpable breast lesions: recommendations for biopsy based on suspicion of carcinoma at mammography. Radiology 167:353–358

    Google Scholar 

  17. Kopans DB (1989) Breast imaging. JB Lippincott, Philadelphia, pp 118–122

    Google Scholar 

  18. Müller-Schimpfle M, Wersebe A, Xydeas T et al (2005) Microcalcifications of the breast: how does radiologic classification correlate with histology? Acta Radiol 46:774–781

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Müller-Schimpfle M (2008) Consensus meeting of course experts in breast diagnosis 5 May 2007 in Frankfurt am Main-topic: microcalcinosis. Rofo 180:66–68

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Fondrinier E, Lorimier G, Guerin-Boblet V et al (2002) Breast microcalcifications: Multivariate analysis of radiologic and clinical factors for carcinoma. World J Surg 26:290–296

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Liberman L, Abramson AF, Squires FB et al (1998) The Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System: positive predictive value of mammographic features and final assesment categories. AJR Am J Roentgenol 171:35–40

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Berg WA, Campassi C, Langenberg P, Sexton M (2000) Breast imaging reporting and data system: inter-and intraobserver variability in feature analysis and final assessment. AJR Am J Roentgenol 174:1769–1777

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Wilson ARM, Kavia S (2009) Comparison of large-core vacuum-assisted breast biopsy excision systems. In: Renzo Brun del Re (Ed) Minimally invasive breast biopsies, recent results in cancer. Research 173. Springer Verlag, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  24. O’Flynn EAM, Wilson ARM, Michell MJ (2010) Breast biopsy: state of the art. Clinical Radiology 65:259–270

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Wilson ARM, Evan AJ (2006) Percutaneous breast biopsy. In: Bocker W (Ed) Preneoplasia of the breast — a conceptual approach to proliferative breast disease. Elsevier, Munich

    Google Scholar 

  26. Evans AJ, Wilson ARM, Burrell HC et al (1999) Mammographic features of Ductal Carcinoma in situ (DCIS) present on previous mammography. Clinical Radiology 54:644–646

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2013 Springer-Verlag Italia

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Müller-Schimpfle, M., Wilson, R. (2013). Microcalcifications of the Breast: An Approach to Radiologic Classification. In: Hodler, J., von Schulthess, G.K., Zollikofer, C.L. (eds) Musculoskeletal Diseases 2013–2016. Springer, Milano. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-88-470-5292-5_41

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-88-470-5292-5_41

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Milano

  • Print ISBN: 978-88-470-5291-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-88-470-5292-5

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics