EVALUATION OF FOLLOW-UP RESULTS OF BI-RADS (Breast Imaging Report and Data System) CATEGORY 3 LESIONS

Abstract

Purpose: To evaluate the results of the BI-RADS Category 3 lesions that are determined to mammography or US examinations and had a two-year, short-interval follow up in our hospital and the pathology findings of those within the same group that required biopsy. Materials and Methods: Cases that have been consulted in our hospital are assessed to the cathegories as defined in the BI-RADS lexicon after mammography and ultrasound examinations. The follow up results of 168 BI-RADS Category 3 cases between 35 and 76 years of age have been evaluated. Findings: 82 patients that were classified as Category 3, probably benign, have had no interval changes detected at the 6th, 12th and 24th months follow up while 60 of the other 86 patients(%35.7) have undergone biopsy due to physician's decision and 26 patients(%15.4) due to radiological progression. All of the biopsies that are requested by the physicians have shown benign histopathology. On the other hand, three of the 26 cases that had radiological progression at their 6th month follw up have undergone biopsy. Two of these three cases with masses and one with calcifications have shown to be malignant. Results: Although short interval follow up is recommended for the probably benign lesions classified as Category 3 in BI-RADS with a malignancy risk less than %2, we found out that biopsy is preferred in our hospital. The benign histopathological outcomes of the biopsies that were performed upon the request of the physicians and the patients have showed out that in our hospital, physicians have not yet settled satisfactory confidence and respect to the BI-RADS classification and it has to be better introduced to them.

Keywords

• Ultrasound
• breast
• cancer
• mammography

Supporting Institution

No

Ethical Statement

Institutional approval received. No documents

Thanks

I would like to thank my esteemed professors.

BI-RADS Kategori 3 Lezyonların Takip Sonuçlarının Değerlendirilmesi

Abstract

Amaç: Hastanemizde mammografi ya da ultrasonografi ile tespit edilen ve BI-RADS kılavuzluğunda kategori 3 olarak sınıflandırılan lezyonların kısa aralıklı 2 yıllık takip sonuçları ile görüntüleme eşliğinde tel lokalizasyonu sonrasında biyopsi yapılan kategori 3 lezyonların patoloji sonuçlarını değerlendirmek. Gereç ve Yöntem: Hastanemiz Radyoloji kliniğine başvuran hastalar mammografik ve ultrasonografik incelemeden sonra BI-RADS kılavuzluğunda kategorilere ayrıldı.BI-RADS kategori 3 olarak sınıflandırılan ve yaşları 35-76 arasında değişen 168 hastanın takip sonuçları değerlendirildi. Bulgular: BI-RADS kategori 3 'muhtemelen benign' lezyona sahip 82 hasta 6. ay, 12. ay ve 24. ay takiplerinde stabilite gösterirken, 86 hastaya görüntüleme eşliğinde biyopsi yapıldı. Klinisyen isteği ile yapılan biyopsilerin hepsi benign histopatoloji ile sonuçlandı. Çalışmamızda saptanan malignensilerin hepsinde 6. ay takip sonrasında progresyon olması nedeniyle biyopsi yapılmıştı. Malign sonuçlanan 3 olgunun 2'sinde kitle, 1'inde mikrokalsifikasyon mevcuttu. Sonuç: Çalışmamızda, BI-RADS'a göre kategori 3 olarak sınıflandırılan, malignite riski %2'den az olarak belirtilen ve kısa dönem takip önerilen 'muhtemelen benign'lezyonlara yaklaşımda takipten çok biyopsinin tercih edildiği gösterilmiştir. Yapılan biyopsilerin önemli bir kısmının da klinisyenin ya da hastanın isteği ile olması ve hepsinin benign histopatoloji ile sonuçlanması hastanemizde BI-RADS'a yeterinde güven oluşmadığı ve sistemin klinisyenlere tanıtılması gerektiğini göstermektedir.

Keywords

• mammografi
• ultrasonografi
• meme
• kanser

Supporting Institution

yok

Ethical Statement

Kurum onayı alındı. Belge yok

Thanks

Saygıdeğer hocalarıma teşekkür ederim

References

1. 1. Kelsey JL, Gammon MD. The epidemiology of breast cancer. CA Cancer J Clin 1991; 41(3):146-165.
2. 2. Kopans D B. The positive predictive value of mammography. AJR Am J Roentgenol.1992; 158(3):521-526.
3. 3. Bird R, Wallace TW, Yankaskes BC. Analysis of cancer missed at screening mammography. Radiology 1992; 184(3):613-617.
4. 4. Jackson VP, Hendrick RE, Feig SA, Kopans D B. Imaging of radiographically dense breast. Radiology 1993; 188(2):297-301.
5. 5. Homer MJ, Smith TJ, Safaii H. Prebiopsy needle localization. Methods, problems and expected results. Radiol Clin North Am 1992; 30(1):139-153.
6. 6. Liberman L, Menell JH. Breast imaging reporting and data system (BI-RADS). Radiol Clin North Am. 2002;40(3):409-430.
7. 7. Sickles EA. Probably benign breast lesions: When should follow- up be recomended and what is the optimal follow-up protocol? Radiology 1999; 213(1):11-14.
8. 8. American College of Radiology. Illustraed BI-RADS 4th ed. Reston, VA:American College of Radiology, 2003.

9. 9. Sickles EA. Periodic mammographic follow-up probably benign lesions: Results in 3184 consecutive cases. Radiology 1991;179(2):463-468.
10. 10. Viscaino I, Gadea L, Andreo L, Salas D, Ruia-Perales D, Cuevas D, et all. Short term follow-up results in 795 nonpalpbale probably benign lesions detected at screening mammography. Radiology 2001; 219(2):475-483.
11. 11. Zonderland HM, Pope T, Nieborg AJ. The positive predictive value of the breast imaging reporting and data system as a method of quality assesment in breast imaging in a hospital population. Eur Radiol. 2004 Oct; 14(10):1743-1750.
12. 12. Hong AS, Rosen EL, Soo MS, Baker JA. BI-RADS for sonography: Positive and negative predictive values of sonographic features. AJR 2005; 184(4):1260-1265.
13. 13. Roubidoux MA, Bailey JE, Wray LA, Helvie MA. Invasive cancers detected after breast cancer screening yielded a negative result: relationship of mammographic density to tumor prognostic factors. Radiology 2004; 1(230):42-48.
14. 14. Harvey JA, Bovbjerg VE. Quantitative assesment of mammographiv breast density: relationship with breast cancer risk. Radiology 2004;1(230): 230:29-41.
15. 15. Sickles EA. Management of probably benign breast lesions. Radiol Clin North Am 1995 Nov;33(6):1123-1130.
16. 16. Varas X, Leborgne F, Leborgne JH. Nonpalpable, probably benign lesions: role of follow-up mammography. Radiology 1992 Aug;184(2):409-414.
17. 17. Helvie MA, Pennes DR, Rebner M, Adler DD. Mammographic follow-up of low suspicion lesions: compliance rate and diagnostic yield. Radiology 1991 Jan;178(1):155-158.
18. 18. Wolfe JN, Buck KA, Salane M, Parekh NJ. Xeroradiography of the breast: overview of 21.057 consecutive cases. Radiology 1987 Nov;165(2):305-311.
19. 19. Ünal S, Gürsoy M, Pasin Ö, İkizceli T, Çetin Tunçez H. Retrospective evaluation of coaxial core needle biopsy results performed on mammographic suspicious microcalcifications of the breast. Anatol J Gen Med Res. 2026;36(1):45-52.