BI-RADS 3 on dense breast screening ultrasound after digital mammography versus digital breast tomosynthesis.

OBJECTIVE: Compare the BI-RADS 3 rate and follow-up of dense breast ultrasound (US) screening following digital mammography (DM) versus digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT). METHODS: IRB-approved, HIPAA compliant retrospective search was performed of databases at two tertiary breast centers and an office practice for BI-RADS 3 screening US examinations performed 10/1/14-9/30/16. Prior DM versus DBT, downgrade and upgrade rate, and timing and pathology results were recorded. Differences were compared using the two-sample proportions test. RESULTS: 3183 screening US examinations were performed, 1434/3183 (45.1%) after DM and 1668/3183 (52%) after DBT (2.5% (81/3183) no prior mammogram available). 13.9% (199/1434) had BI-RADS 3 results after DM and 10.6% (177/1668) after DBT (p < 0.01). Median imaging follow-up after DM was 12 months (IQR 6, 24) versus 18 after DBT (IQR 11, 25), p = 0.02. 19.5% (73/375) of patients were lost to follow-up (19.2% (38/198) after DM (68.4% (26/38) no follow-up after initial exam) versus 19.8% (35/177) after DBT (54.3% (19/35) no follow-up after initial exam). 1.3% (5/375) of patients elected biopsy (1.5% (3/198) after DM and 1.1% (2/177) after DBT). 75.2% (282/375) of patients were downgraded (75.3% (149/198) after DM and 75.1% (133/177) after DBT). 2.5% (5/198) were upgraded after DM and 0.6% (1/177) after DBT. Median time to upgrade was 6 months after both DM and DBT. 0.3% (1/375) of patients with BI-RADS 3 results had cancer on follow-up. CONCLUSION: Patients with prior DBT had a lower risk of encountering BI-RADS 3 findings on screening ultrasound. BI-RADS 3 findings on screening ultrasound had an extremely low rate of being cancer.

Dense Breast Ultrasound Screening After Digital Mammography Versus After Digital Breast Tomosynthesis.

OBJECTIVE. The objective of this study was to compare the yield of dense breast ultrasound (US) screening after digital mammography (DM) versus after digital breast tomosyn-thesis (DBT). MATERIALS AND METHODS. For this institutional review board-approved, HIPAA-compliant study, we retrospectively searched databases at two tertiary breast imaging centers and an office practice staffed by the same fellowship-trained breast radiologists for screening US examinations from October 1, 2014, to September 30, 2016. Prior DM versus DBT and screening US and pathology results were recorded. Mammographically occult cancers detected with US and additional benign lesions requiring biopsy were calculated. Differences between DM and DBT were compared using the two-sample proportions z test. RESULTS. A total of 3183 screening breast US examinations were performed, 1434 (45.1%) after DM and 1668 (52.4%) after DBT. Of the 3183 examinations, 81 (2.5%) had no prior mammogram available. Of the 122 DM and DBT patients for whom biopsy or cyst aspiration was recommended (all BI-RADS assessment category 4 or BI-RADS assessment category 5 studies), 118 (96.7%) had biopsy or cyst aspiration results available. Of the 36 biopsies or aspirations after DM, 6 (16.7%) were malignant and 30 (83.3%) were benign; of the 82 biopsies or aspirations after DBT, 11 (13.4%) were malignant and 71 (86.6%) were benign (p = 0.8583). The additional cancer detection rate by US after DM was 5/1434 or 3.5 per 1000 women screened and after DBT was 5/1668 or 3.0 per 1000 women screened (p = 0.9999). CONCLUSION. No significant difference in additional cancer detection rate was found with screening US after DM versus after DBT.

Cholesteroloma of the breast: A 10 year retrospective review of 79 cases with radiology correlation.

A cholesteroloma or cholesterol granuloma of the breast is an uncommon lesion representing an inflammatory/reactive process with unclear etiology. In this study, we reviewed our 10-year experience with cholesteroloma of the breast with clinical, radiologic, and histopathological correlation. Seventy-nine cases were selected. The mean patient age was 57.7 (range 25-90) years old. Patients had hypercholesterolemia with mean blood cholesterol level of 201 mg/dL (P < 0.001). The mean body mass index (BMI) was 26.7 kg/m2 (P = 0.1976). The indications for the breast biopsies were mass lesion on radiology (85.5%, n = 65) and microcalcifications (10.5%, n = 8). Of the 65 cases of the mass lesions, 52 presented as solid masses and 13 were cystic. On the diagnostic mammogram or ultrasound, 81.9% were BI-RADS 4% and 6.9% were BI-RADS 5. Macrocysts were the most common pathological finding associated with cholesteroloma suggesting the etiology of cholesteroloma may be the result of repair process from obstruction and rupture of the macrocysts. Six cases (9.2%) of cholesterolomas had persistent masses during follow-up. The recognition of this lesion and radio-pathological correlation can help us better understand this entity and distinguish it from its mimickers.