nach oben

Erschienen in:

2025 | OriginalPaper | Buchkapitel

38. Mammasonographie

verfasst von : Prof. Dr. med. Bernhard-Joachim Hackelöer, Dr. med. Hans Heino Hille, Priv.-Doz. Dr. med. André Farrokh

Erschienen in: Ultraschalldiagnostik in Geburtshilfe und Gynäkologie

Verlag: Springer Berlin Heidelberg

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Zusammenfassung

Die Mammasonographie stellt ein sowohl komplementäres, zu anderen bildgebenden Methoden ergänzendes als auch ein eigenständiges diagnostisches Verfahren dar. Durch ihre den anatomischen Gegebenheiten nahen Darstellung des Drüsengewebes besitzt die Mammasonographie Vorteile in der diagnostischen Differenzierung gegenüber Methoden wie der Mammographie, die Überlagerungen der Bildebenen anwendet und die Diagnose mehr aus Sekundärphänomenen der Tumorentwicklung ableitet. Da der diagnostische Prozess „real time“ abläuft, hängt die Leistungsfähigkeit der Mammasonographie – neben der technischen Ausrüstung – entscheidend von der Kompetenz des Untersuchers ab. Sind diese Voraussetzungen erfüllt, erreicht die Mammasonografie sowohl bei der symptomatischen Patientin (mit Tastbefund) als auch bei der asymptomatischen Patientin (Früherkennung) eine hohe diagnostische Treffsicherheit (Sensitivität). Zur definitiven (histologischen) Diagnosesicherung bedarf es der ultraschallgesteuerten Stanzbiopsie. Aufgefundene Herdbefunde werden nach den Kriterien der DEGUM (analog dem ACR BI-RADS Atlas) nach Merkmalen beschrieben und einer Kategorie analog BI-RADS 1–6 entsprechend von benigne bis hochsuspekt, bzw. histologisch gesichert maligne, zugeordnet.

Vorheriges Kapitel Reproduktionsmedizin

Nächstes Kapitel Point-of-Care-Ultraschall in Geburtshilfe und Gynäkologie

ACR – BI-RADS – Atlas der Mammadiagnostik (2016), Springer

Ali RMK, England A, McEntee et al (2018) Effective lifetime risk for a number of national mammography screening programs. Radiography 24:240–246CrossRef

Alunni JP (2012) Imaging inflammatory breast cancer. Diagn Interv Imaging 93:95–103PubMedCrossRef

American College of Radiology (ACR) (2013) ACR BI-RADS Atlas, 5. Aufl. American College of Radiology, Reston

Autier P, Boniol M (2018) Mammographic screening: a major issue in medicine. Eur J Canc 90:34–62CrossRef

Azim HA Jr, Santoro L, Russell-Edu W et al (2012) Prognosis of pregnancy-associated breast cancers: a meta-analysis of 30 studies. Breast Cancer 38:843–842

Bae MS, Moon WK, Chang JM et al (2014) Breast cancer detected with screening US: Reasons for nondetection at mammography. Radiology 270:369–377PubMedCrossRef

Bader W, Vogel-Minea CM, Blohmer JU et al (2022) Best practice guideline – DEGUM recommendations on breast ultrasound. Ultraschall Med 43:570–582PubMedCrossRef

Bakhuis CFJ, Suelmann BMB, van Dooijeweert C et al (2021) Receptor status of breast cancer diagnosed during pregnancy: a literatur review. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol 168:103494PubMedCrossRef

Banys-Paluchowski M, Rubio IT, Cakmak GK et al (2022) Intraoperative ultrasound-guided excision of non-palpable and palpable breast cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis. Ultraschall Med 43:367–379PubMedCrossRef

Barr RG, Destounis S, Lackey LB 2nd et al (2012) Evaluation of breast lesions using sonographic elasticity imaging: a multicenter trial. J Ultrasound Med 31:281–287PubMedCrossRef

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 299:2151–2163PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef

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 262:435–449PubMedCrossRef

Berg WA, Bandos AI, Mendelson EB et al (2015) Ultrasound as the primary screening test for breast cancer: analysis from ACRIN 6666. J Natl Cancer Inst 108:djv367PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef

Bleyer A, Baines C, Miller AB (2016) Impact of screening mammography on breast cancer mortality. J Cancer 138:2003–2012

Brem F, Tabar L, Duffy WS et al (2015a) Assessing improvement of breast cancer with three dimensional automated breast US in women with dense breast tissue: The SonoInsight Study. Radiology 274:663–673PubMedCrossRef

Brem RF, Lenihan MJ, Liebermann J, Torrente J (2015b) Screening breast ultrasound: past, present, and future. AJR 204:234–240PubMedCrossRef

Butler RS, Hooley RJ (2020) Screening breast ultrasound: update after 10years of breast notification laws. AJR 214:1424–1435PubMedCrossRef

Canelo-Aybar C, Ferreira DS, Ballesteros M et al (2021) Benefits and harms of breast cancer mammography screening for women at average risk of breast cancer: a systematic review for the European Commission Initiative on breast cancer. J Med Screen 28:398–404CrossRef

Cha H, Chang YW, Lee EJ et al (2018) Ultrasonographic features of pure ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast: correlations with pathologic features and biological markers. Ultrasonography 37:307–314PubMedCrossRef

Chen HI, Zhou L, Chen Q et al (2021) Comparison oft the sensitivity of mammography, ultrasound, magnetic resonance imaging and combinations of these imaging modalities for the detection of small (≤ 2cm) breast cancer. Medicine 100:26

Chen SC, Cheung YC, Lo YF et al (2003) Sonographic differentiation of invasive and intraductal carcinomas of the breast. BJR 76:600–604PubMedCrossRef

Chen YL, Chen JJ, Chang C et al (2017) Sclerosing adenosis: ultrasonographic and mammographic findings and correlation with histopathology. Mol Clin Oncol 6:157–162PubMedCrossRef

Cho N, Han W, Han BK et al (2017) Breast cancer screening with mammography plus ultrasonography or magnetic resonance imaging in women 50 years or younger at diagnosis and treated with breast conservation therapy. JAMA Oncol 3:1495–1502PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef

Choi YJ, Seong MH, Choi SH, Kook SH et al (2011) Ultrasound and clinicopathological characteristics of tripel receptor-negative breast cancers. J Breast Cancer 14:119–123PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef

Choi WJ, Joo HC, Kim HH, Shin HJ et al (2014) Comparison of automated breast volume scanning and hand-held ultrasound in the detection of breast cancer: an analysis of 5,566 patient evaluations. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev 15:9101–9105PubMedCrossRef

Dawson SJ, Rueda OM, Aparicio S et al (2013) A new genome-driven integrated classification of breast cancer and its implications. EMBO J 32:617–628PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef

Dominkovic MD, Ivanac G, Kelava T et al (2016) Elastographic features of triple negative breast cancers. Eur Radiol 26:1090–1097CrossRef

Du HY, Lin BR, Huang DP (2015) Ultrasonographic findings of tripel-negative breast cancer. Int J Clin Exp Med 8:10040–10043PubMedPubMedCentral

Duffy SW, Smith RA, Gabe R et al (2005) Screening for breast cancer. Surg Oncol Clin N Am 14:671–697PubMedCrossRef

Farrokh A, Wojcinski S, Degenhardt F (2011) Diagnostische Aussagekraft der Strain-Ratio-Messung zur Unterscheidung zwischen malignen und benignen Brusttumoren. Ultraschall Med 32:400–405PubMedCrossRef

Farrokh A, Wojinski S, Degenhardt F (2013) Evaluation of real-time tissue sono-elastography in the assessment of 214 breast lesions: limitations of this method resulting from different histologic subtypes, tumor size and tumor localization. Ultrasound Med Biol 39:2264–2271PubMedCrossRef

Farrokh A, Erdönmez H, Schäfer F et al (2018) A novel automated breast ultrasound system used on patients in the prone position: a pilot study on lesion detection in comparison to handheld grayscale ultrasound. Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd 78:499–505PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef

Fischer T, Grigoryew M, Bossenz S et al (2012) Sonographische Mikrokalkdetection – Potenzial einer neuen Methode. Ultraschall Med 33:357–365PubMedCrossRef

Foxcroft LM, Evans EB, Porter AJ (2004) The diagnosis of breast cancer in women younger than 40. Breast 13:297–306PubMedCrossRef

Giger ML, Inciardi MF, Edwards A, Papaioannou J, Drukker K, Jiang Y, Brem R, Brown JB (2016) Automated breast ultrasound in breast cancer screening of women with dense breasts: reader study of mammography-negative and mammography-positive cancers. AJR 206:1341–1350PubMedCrossRef

Gilbert F, Hickman SE, Baxter GC et al (2021) Opportunities in cancer imaging: risk-adapted breast imaging in screening. Clin Radiol 76:763–773PubMedCrossRef

Golatta M, Pfob A, Büsch C et al (2023) The potential of shear wave elastography to reduce unnecessary biopsies in breast cancer diagnosis: an international, diagnostic, multicenter trial. Ultraschall Med 44:162–168PubMedCrossRef

Gøtzsche PC, Jørgensen KJ (2013) Screening for breast cancer with mammography. Cochrane Database Syst Rev2013:CD001877

Groen EJ, Elshof L, Visser LL et al (2017) Finding the balance between over- and under-treatment of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). Breast 31:274-283.PubMedCrossRef

Gwak H, Woo SS, Lee ES et al (2022) Survival of women with pregnancy-associated breast cancer according to clinical characteristics: a propensity score matching study. Medicine 101:e30831PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef

Ha SM, Chae EY, Cha JH et al (2017) Association of BRCA mutation types, imaging features, and pathologic findings in patients with breast cancer with BRCA1 and BRCA 2 mutations. AJR Am J Roentgenol 209:920–928PubMedCrossRef

Harada-Shoji N, Suzuki A, Takanori T et al (2021) Evaluation of adjunctive ultrasonography for breast cancer detection among women aged 40–49 years with varying breast density undergoing screening mammography. JAMA Netw Open 4:e2121505PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef

Hille H (2011) Advances in breast ultrasound. In: Thoirs K (Hrsg) Sonography, S 73–92

Hille H, Vetter M, Hackelöer BJ (2007) Die Eignung der hochfrequenten Sonographie zur Diagnostik des DCIS. Ultraschall Med 28:307–312PubMedCrossRef

Hille H, Vetter M, Hackelöer BJ (2012) The accuracy of BI-RADS classification of breast ultrasound as a first-line imaging method. Ultraschall Med 33:160–163PubMedCrossRef

Houssami N, Chariya C (2018) Screening women with a personal history of breast cancer: overview of the evidence on breast imaging surveillance. Ultrasonography 37:277–287PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef

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 180:935–940PubMedCrossRef

Ionescu S, Nicolescu AC, Marincas M et al (2022) An update on the general features of breast cancer in male patients – a literature review. Diagnostics (Basel) 12:1554PubMedCrossRef

Itoh A, Ueno E, Tohno E et al (2006) Breast disease: clinical application of US elastography for diagnosis. Radiology 239:341–350PubMedCrossRef

Jagsi R, Mason G, Overmoyer BA et al (2022) Inflammatory breast cancer defined: proposed common diagnostic criteria to guide treatment and research. Breast Cancer Res Treat 192:235–243PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef

Jellins J, Kossof G, Buddee FW, Reeve TS (1971) Ultrasonic visualization of the breast. Med J Aust 1:305307CrossRef

Jo H, Park S, Kim HR et al (2022) Long-term breast cancer outcomes of pregnancy-associated breast cancer (PABC) in a prospective cohort. Cancers (Basel) 14:4839PubMedCrossRef

Johnson K, Sarma D, Hwang ES (2015) Lobular breast cancer series: imaging. Breast Cancer Res 17:94PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef

Kalager M, Zelen M, Langmark F, Adami HO (2010) Effect of screening mammography on breast-cancer mortality in Norway. N Engl J Med 363:1203-1210PubMedCrossRef

Khuri FR (2015) What we know and what we think we know: an editor’s perspective on a charged debate. Cancer 121:4–5PubMedCrossRef

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 52:15–20PubMedCrossRef

Kim SJ, Park YM, Jung HK (2014) Nonmass like lesions on breast sonography: comparison between benign and malignant lesions. J Ultrasound Med 33:421–430PubMedCrossRef

Kobayashi T (1975) Ultrasonic diagnosis of breast cancer. Ultrasound Med Biol Vol 1:383-391PubMedCrossRef

Kobayashi T, Takatani O, Hattori N et al (1974) Differential diagnosis of breast tumors. The sensitivity graded method ultrasonography and clinical evaluation of its diagnostic accuracy. Cancer 33:940–951PubMedCrossRef

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 225:165–175PubMedCrossRef

Kooperations Gemeinschaft Mammographie (2020) Jahresbericht Evaluation. https://fachservice.mammo-programm.de/publikationen-und-stellungnahmen

Kopraphong P, Tritanon O, Tangcharoensathien W et al (2012) Ultrasonographic characteristics of mammographically occult small breast cancer. J Breast Cancer 15:344–349CrossRef

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 65:526–529CrossRef

Kuhl CK, Schrading S, Bieling HB et al (2007) MRI for diagnosis of pure ductal carcinoma in situ: a prospective observational study. Lancet 370:485–492PubMedCrossRef

Kwon HY, Cha ES, Lee JE et al (2019) Small breast cancer (≤ 5mm): Ultrasonographic features and clinical and pathological characteristics. J Korean Soc Radiol 80:728–739CrossRef

Langer A, Mohallem M, Stevens D et al (2014) A single-institution study of 117 pregnancy-associated breast cancers (PABC): presentation, imaging, clinicopathological data and outcome. Diagn Interv Imaging 95:435–441PubMedCrossRef

Langer A, Mohallem M, Berment H et al (2015) Breast lumps in pregnant women. Diagn Interv Imaging 96:1077–1087PubMedCrossRef

Leclere B, Molinie F, Tretarre B, Stracci F, Daubisse-Marliac L, Colonna M, GRELL Working Group (2013) Trends in incidence of breast cancer among women under 40 in seven European countries: a GRELL cooperative study. Cancer Epidemiol 37:544–549PubMedCrossRef

Lee J, Lee JH, Baik S et al (2016) Non-mass lesions on screening breast ultrasound. Med Ultrason 18:446–451PubMedCrossRef

Lee SH, Chang JM, Cho N et al (2014) Practice guideline fort the performance of breast ultrasound elastography. Ultrasonography 33:3–10PubMedCrossRef

Lee YY, Roberts CL, Dobbins T, Stavrou E, Black K, Morris J, Young J (2012) Incidence and outcomes of pregnancy-associated cancer in Australia: a population-based linkage study. BJOG 119:1572–1582PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef

Lenz S (2011) Breast ultrasound in office gynecology – Ten years of experience. Ultraschall Med 32:S3–S7PubMedCrossRef

Leong WP, Chotai NC, Kulkarni S (2018) Imaging features of inflammatory breast disorders. A pictural essay. Korean J Radiol 19:5–14PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef

Le-Petross HT, Balema W, Woodward WA (2021) Why diagnosing inflammatory breast cancer is hard and how to overcome the challenges: a narrative review. Chin Clin Oncol 10:58PubMedCrossRef

Li B, Zhao X, Dai SC, Cheng W (2014) Associations between mammography and ultrasound imaging features and molecular characteristics of triple negative breast cancer. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev 15:3555–3559PubMedCrossRef

Li JK, Wang HF, He Y et al (2020) Ultrasonographic features of ductal carcinoma in situ: analysis of 219 lesions. Gland Surg 9:1945–1954PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef

Li JW, Zhang K, Shi ZT et al (2018) Tripel-negative invasive breast carcinoma: the association between the sonographic appearances with clinicopathological feature. Sci Rep 8:9040PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef

Lin M, Wu S (2022) Ultrasound classification of non-mass breast lesions following BI-RADS presents high predictive value. PLoS One 17:e278299PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef

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 Med 27:374–379PubMedCrossRef

Madjar H, Becker S, Doubek K et al (2010) Bedeutung der Mammasonographie für die Brustkrebsfrüherkennung in der gynäkologischen Praxis. Ultraschall Med 31:289–229PubMedCrossRef

Malherbe K, Bresser P (2019) Association between ultrasound morphologic features and histopathological findings of lobular carcinoma. J Med Radiat Sci 66:177–183PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef

Maturo VG, Zusmer NR, Gilson AJ et al (1980) Ultrasound of the whole breast utilizing a dedicated automated breast scanner. Radiology 137:457–463PubMedCrossRef

Merlo DF, Ceppi M, Filiberti R, Bocchini V, Znaor A, Gamulin M, Primic-Zakeli M, Bruzzi P, Bouchardy C, Fucic A, AIRTUM WG (2012) Breast cancer incidence trends in European women aged 20–39 years at diagnosis. Breast Cancer Res Treat 134:363–370PubMedCrossRef

Merz E, Oberstein A (2007) 3D and 4D breast ultrasound. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2:266–296

Merz E (2025) Atlas of 3D/4D ultrasound in obstetrics, gynecology and breast imaging. Thieme (in Druck)

Moon WK, Im JG, Koh YH et al (2000) US of mammographically detected clustered microcalcifications. Radiology 217:849–854PubMedCrossRef

Moschetta M, Sardaro A, Nitti A et al (2022) Ultrasound evaluation of ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. J Ultrasound 25:41–45PubMedCrossRef

Mühlberger N, Scroczynski G, Gogollari A et al (2021) Cost effectiveness of breast cancer screening and prevention: a systematic review with a focus on risk-adapted strategies. Eur J Health Econ 22:1311–1344PubMedCrossRef

Neumann JL (2014) Brustkrebs des Mannes. Frauenarzt 55:582–586

Ohnuki K, Tohnu E, Tsunoda H et al (2021) Overall assessment system of combined mammography and ultrasound for breast cancer screening in Japan. Breast Cancer 28:254–262PubMedCrossRef

Ohuchi N, Suzuki A, Masaaki K et al (2016) Sensitivity and specificity of mammography and adjunctive ultrasonography to screen for breast cancer in the Japan Strategic Anti-Cancer Randomized Trial (J-Start): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet 387:341–348PubMedCrossRef

Oliveira TMG, Elias JE Jr, Melo AF, Teixeira SR, Salomao CF, Goncalves LM, Fria FM, Tiezzi DG, Andrade JM, Muglia V (2014) Evolving concepts in breast lobular neoplasia and invasive lobular carcinoma, and their impact on imaging methods. Insights Imaging 5:183–194PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef

Parikh U, Chhor CM, Mercado CL (2018) Ductal carcinoma in situ: the whole truth. AJR 210:246–255PubMedCrossRef

Park KW, Park S, Shon I et al (2021) Non-mass lesions detected by breast US: stratification of cancer risk for clinical management. Eur Radiol 31:1693–1170PubMedCrossRef

Pisano ED, Hendrick RE, Yaffe MJ et al (2008) Diagnostic accuracy of digital versus film mammography: exploratory analysis of selected population subgroups in DMIST. Radiology 246:376–383PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef

Prat A, Perou CM (2009) Mammary development meets cancer genomics. Nat Med 15:842–844PubMedCrossRef

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 30:1199–1213PubMedCrossRef

Rebolj M, Assi V, Brentnall A et al (2018) Addition of ultrasound to mammography in the case of dense breast tissue: systematic review and mertaanalysis. Br J Cancer 118:1559–1570PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef

Saadatman S, Bretveld R, Siesling S et al (2015) Influence of tumor stage at breast cancer detection on survival in modern times: population based study in 173797 patients. BMJ 351:h4910

Samani A, Zubovits J, Plewes D (2007) Elastic moduli of normal and pathological human breast tissues: an inversion-technique-based investigation of 169 samples. PhysMedBiol 52:1565–1576

Scoggins ME, Fox PS, Kuerer HM et al (2015) Correlation between sonographic findings and clinicopathological and biologic features of pure ductal carcinoma in situ in 691 patients. AJR 204:878–888PubMedCrossRef

Scheel JR, Lee JM, Spraque BL et al (2015) Screening ultrasound as an adjunct to mammography in women with mammographically dense breasts. A J Obstet Gynecol 212:9–17CrossRef

Schmachtenberg C, Fischer T, Hamm B, Bick U (2017) Diagnostic performance of automated breast volume scanning (ABVS) compared to handheld ultrasonography with breast MRI as the gold standard. Acad Radiol 24:954–961PubMedCrossRef

Schmadeka R, Harmon BE, Singh M (2014) Triple-negative breast carcinoma: current and emerging concepts. Am J Clin Pathol 141:462–477PubMedCrossRef

Selinko VL, Middleton LP, Dempsey PJ (2004) Role of sonography in diagnosing and staging invasive lobular carcinoma. J Clin Ultrasound 32:323–332PubMedCrossRef

Shao C, Yu Z, Xiao J et al (2020) Prognosis of pregnancy-associated breast cancer: a meta-analysis. BMC Cancer 20:746PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef

Shen S, Zhou Y, Xu Y et al (2015) A multi-centre randomised trial comparing ultrasound vs mammography for screening breast cancer in high-risk Chinese women. BJC 112:998–1004PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef

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 190:516–525PubMedCrossRef

Shin HJ, Kim HH, Joo HC (2015) Current status of automated breast ultrasonography. Ultrasonography 34:165–172PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef

Sohn YM, Kim MJ, Kim EK (2013) Impact of preoperative bilateral whole breast sonography in patients with invasive lobular carcinoma: results from two medical centers. Ultraschall Med 34:359–367PubMed

Soto-Trujillo D, Aragon SLN, Kimura Y (2020) Pregnancy-associated breast cancer: what radiologist must know. Cureus 12:e10343PubMedPubMedCentral

Stavros AT (2004) Breast ultrasound. Lippincott Williams, Philadelphia, S 448

Suelmann BBM, Bakhuis CFJK, Van Dooijeweert C et al (2022) Prognosis of pregnancy-associated breast cancer: inferior outcome in patients diagnosed during second and third gestational trimesters and lactation. Breast Cancer Res Treat 192:175–189PubMedCrossRef

Tabar L, Dean PB (2020) Recommendations for breast cancer screening. Lancet Oncol 21:e511PubMedCrossRef

Tabar L, Dean PB, Chen SL et al (2014) Invasive lobular carcinoma of the breast: the use of radiological appearance to classify tumor subtypes for better prediction of long-term outcome. J Clin Exp Pathol 4:179

Tabar L, Dean PB, Tucker FL et al (2022) A new approach to breast cancer terminology based on the anatomic site of tumour origin: the importance of radiologic biomarkers. Eur J Radiol 149:110189PubMedCrossRef

Thigpen D, Kappler A, Brem R (2018) The role of ultrasound in screening dense breasts - a review of the literature and practical solutions for implementation. Diagnostics (Basel) 8:20PubMedCrossRef

Thomas A, Degenhardt F, Farrokh A et al (2010) Significant differentiation of focdal breast lesions: calculation of strain ratio in breast sonoelastography. Acad Radiol 17:558–563PubMedCrossRef

Wang K, Zou Z, Shen H et al (2022a) Calcificatrion, posterior acoustic, and blood flow: ultrasonic characteristics of triple-negative breast cancer. J Healthc Eng 2022:9336185PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef

Wang Y, Li Y, Song XY et al (2022b) Comparison of ultrasound and mammography for early diagnosis of breast cancer among Chinese women with suspected breast lesions: A prospective trial. Thorac Cancer 13:3145–3151PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef

Wang ZL, Li N, Li M, Wan BW (2015) Non-mass-like lesions on breast ultrasound: classification and correlation with histology. Radiol Med 120:905–910PubMedCrossRef

Wang ZL, Li Y, Wan WB et al (2017) Shear-wave-elastography: could it be helpful for the diagnosis of non-mass-like breast lesions? Ultrasound Med Biol 43:83–90PubMedCrossRef

Watanabe T, Yamaguchi T, Tsunoda H et al (2017) Ultrasound image classification of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) of the breast: analysis of 705 DCIS Lesions. Ultrasound Med Biol 43:918–925PubMedCrossRef

Watermann OD, Temper C, Hefler LA et al (2004) Ultrasound morphology of invasive lobular breast cancer is different compared with other types of breast cancer. Ultrasound Med Biol 31:176–174

Weismann C, Hergan K (2007) Current status of 3D/4D volume ultrasound of the breast. Ultraschall Med 28:273–282PubMedCrossRef

Wen X, Yu Y, Yu X et al (2019) Correlations between ultrasonographic findings of invasive lobular carcinoma of the breast and intrinsic subtypes. Ultraschall Med 40:764–770CrossRef

Wilczek B, Wilczek HE, Rasoulivan L, Leifland K (2016) Adding 3D automated breast ultrasound to mammography screening in women with heterogeneously and extremely dense breasts: report from a hospital-based, high-volume, single-center breast cancer screening program. Eur J Radiol 85:1554–1563PubMedCrossRef

Wild JJ, Reid JM (1952) Further pilot echographic studies on the histological structure of tumors of the human breast. Am J Pathol 28:839–861PubMedPubMedCentral

Wojcinski S, Farrokh A, Weber S et al (2010) Multicenter study of ultrasound real-time tissue elastography in 779 cases for the assessment of breast lesions: improved diagnostic performance by combining the BI-RADS - US classification system with sonoelastography. Ultraschall Med 32:484–491CrossRef

Wojcinski S, Solimann AA, Schmidt J, Makowski L, Degenhardt F (2012) Sonographic features of tripel-negative and non-tripel-negative breast cancer. J Ultrasound Med 31:1531–1541PubMedCrossRef

Wojcinski S, Boehme E, Farrokh A et al (2013a) Ultrasound real-time elastography can predict malignancy in BI-RADS-US 3 lesions. BMC Med Imaging 13:159

Yang L, Wang S, Zhang L et al (2020) Performance of ultrasonography screening for breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Cancer 20:499PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef

Yang WT, Tse GMK (2004) Sonographic, mammographic, and histopathologic correlation of symptomatic ductal carcinoma in situ. AJR 182:101–110PubMedCrossRef

Yang Q, Liu HY, Liu D, Song YQ (2015) Ultrasonographic features of tripel-negative breast cancer: a comparison with other breast cancer subtypes. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev 16:3229–3232PubMedCrossRef

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):130–138PubMedCrossRef

Zhang J, Zhang Y, Li L et al (2022) Pregnancy-associated plasma protein-A (PAPPA) promotes breast cancer progression. Bioengineered 113:291–307CrossRef

Zhu K, Wang D, Li Z et al (2020) Heterogeneity of triple-negative breast cancer: differences in clinicopathologic and ultrasound features between premenopausal and postmenopausal patients. J Ultrasound Med 39:919–927PubMedCrossRef

Zouzoulas D, Tsolakidis D, Gitas G et al (2020) Breast cancer in women younger than 35 years old. Arch Gynecol Obstet 302:721–730PubMedCrossRef

Titel: Mammasonographie
verfasst von: Prof. Dr. med. Bernhard-Joachim Hackelöer
Dr. med. Hans Heino Hille
Priv.-Doz. Dr. med. André Farrokh
Verlag: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Buch: Ultraschalldiagnostik in Geburtshilfe und Gynäkologie
Print ISBN: 978-3-662-67372-0

Electronic ISBN: 978-3-662-67373-7

Copyright-Jahr: 2025
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-67373-7_38

Springerpflege

Zusammenfassung

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten