Signs in MR-Mammography

Werner A. Kaiser

Signs in MR-Mammography

Werner A. Kaiser

Signs in MR-Mammography

123

Werner Alois Kaiser, M.D., M.S. Professor and Chairman Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology Friedrich-Schiller University Hospital Erlanger Allee 101 07740 Jena Germany www.mediteach.de www.uni-jena.de/med/idir [email protected] Received: 8 May 2007; Corrected: 27 September 2007

ISBN  978-3-540-73292-1  Springer Berlin Heidelberg New York Library of Congress Control Number: 2007933374 This work is subject to copyright. All rights are reserved, wether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broad-casting, reproduction on microfilm or any other way, and storage in data banks. Duplication of this publication or parts thereof is permitted only under the provisions of the German Copyright Law of September 9, 1965, in it current version, and permission for use must always be obtained from Springer. Violations are liable to prosecution under the German Copyright Law. Springer-Verlag is a part of Springer Science+Business Media springer.com © Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2008 The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use. Product liability: the publishers cannot guarantee the accuracy of any information about dosage and application contained in this book. In every individual case the user must check such information by consulting the relevant literature. Editor: Dr. Ute Heilmann, Heidelberg, Germany Desk Editor: Wilma McHugh, Heidelberg, Germany Reproduction, typesetting and production: LE-TEX Jelonek, Schmidt & Vöckler GbR, Leipzig, Germany Cover design: Frido Steinen-Broo, eStudio, Calamar, Spain Printed on acid-free paper  21/3180/YL  5 4 3 2 1 0  SPIN 12078301

Preface A teacher of mine once said, “If we had a diagnostic method that enabled us to detect and remove all breast cancers 5 to 10 mm in size, we could practically eliminate breast cancer deaths.” Large screening studies in Scandinavia and other countries have documented the truth of this statement. The 20-year survival rate is very high (over 95%) when the initial tumor size is less than 1 cm. We are faced with a major medical problem. Breast cancer is the leading cause of cancer-related deaths in women, and its incidence and prevalence have been steadily rising in recent decades. It commonly affects young women and the mothers of small children – a segment of the population that “ought not to die.” The medical problem becomes even more tragic when we consider the relatively slow growth rates of most breast carcinomas. As a rule, breast cancers are very slow-growing tumors that take years or decades to reach a size of 1 cm. Nature has actually given us a very large time window for detecting and treating breast cancer. This is quite different from pancreatic cancer or glioblastoma, where almost all patients die within a year after diagnosis. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the breast, known also as magnetic resonance mammography (MRM), can solve the problem of high breast cancer mortality. MRM is sensitive enough to detect breast tumors as small as 3 mm in diameter. The problem with MRM is its long learning curve. The method is still relatively new, somewhat complicated, has numerous pitfalls, and requires experience in analyzing more than 1000 images per breast. Benjamin Franklin once said, “Beware of young doctors and old barbers.” I have had to learn a great deal since 1983. It has been like a long trek through the jungle, where you first hack out a path with a machete, then make a road, and finally build a highway. Sometimes I wonder why it took me so long to make these discoveries. But today I understand the many mistakes that have been made in the past, and I know that we are still making mistakes that will have to be understood and corrected in the future. Albert Salomon first described the x-ray appearance of breast cancer in 1913. When I consider how far modern x-ray mammography has come with special x-ray tubes, compression, digital technology, very high spatial resolution, computer postprocessing, etc., I realize that even after 20 years, MRM is still in its infancy. There is still a long way to go before MRM becomes an established, routine imaging procedure throughout the world. I wrote my first book (MR Mammography, Springer, 1993) 10 years after I began working with this modality, but even then it was much too soon. Scarcely any book was criticized as harshly as mine: “By the time readers buy this book, probably all of the material will prove to be obsolete” (Radiology 191,1:148 1994). In the years since then, however, MRI has become widely utilized in the diagnosis of breast cancer. More than 3000 publications on breast MRI are listed in PubMed, and I know of no publication during the past 5 years that has not documented the substantial value of MRM relative to conventional mammograms or even the combination of mammograms and breast ultrasound. Nevertheless, I am struck by the problem that there are still no recognized international standards for performing MRM, and that much of the morphologic and dynamic information contained in breast MR images has not yet been adequately explored or utilized. Too many women today are still  



a  Preface undergoing unnecessary breast biopsies and excisions that may cause significant disfigurement and distress, not to mention the tremendous costs. The experience of the past 20 years has shown that when the information supplied by MRM is fully utilized, this modality can detect even small lesions and can reliably discriminate between benign and malignant tumors. The goal of this book is to describe and qualitatively interpret all previously known morphologic and kinetic signs in breast MRI. I am well aware that some indications are well evaluated through numerous investigations and studies, while others are based on observations of relatively small numbers of patients. Most of these indications should have been published by now, so many diagnosticians can find them on the images, and thus a faster global evaluation can ensue. There is a saying: „You only see what you know“. The quantitative accuracy of these signs will be addressed in future publications, with the object of making our interpretations as accurate as possible and minimizing the rates of false-negative and false-positive diagnoses. Unnecessary biopsies, with their attendant costs, complications and distress, should be reduced to an absolute minimum. Basically, MRM images a breast with the highest possible spatial and temporal resolution following the injection of a contrast agent so that early morphologic and pathophysiologic signs of malignancy, such as tumor angiogenesis, can be recognized and identified. A consistent scheme is used throughout this book for describing the morphologic and kinetic signs of a breast lesion: 1. Definition of the sign 2. Explanatory diagram 3. Clinical example 4. Medical interpretation The sequence in which the signs are described is purely arbitrary and is simply based on the methodology that I have followed over the years when reading breast images. MR mammography is still evolving, but at a relatively slow pace – typical of any evolutionary process in medicine. Yet women deserve a better and more expeditious application of this technology so that they can live longer, happier lives free of breast cancer. This book is intended to help broaden and expedite the clinical application of MRM so that as many physicians as possible can make more accurate and confident diagnoses. In the future, the results of MRM will be subjected to a computerbased data analysis to further improve its accuracy. I have to express sincere thanks to: – my wife Ursula for her love and patience during the past 34 years and for her constant support and discussions both as a partner and as a patient, even at times when I was heavily engaged in scientific debates. – my children Clemens, Simon, Daniel, Birgit, and Ulrich for our wonderful family life, past and present. – I especially received many valuable suggestions from my son Clemens, who studies medicine with utmost interest. All of my former and present colleagues at the Nuremberg Hospital, Bonn University Hospital, Würzburg University Hospital, and Jena University Hospital.  

VI

– my secretary Mrs. Maren Mihlan for her valuable help in typing this manuscript. – Springer Publishers for their support in the publication and layout of this book. I hope that my readers will enjoy this book and that as many patients as possible will benefit from its use. Jena, May 2007 Werner Alois Kaiser, M.D., M.S.

 

VII

Contents

General Information  .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   1 Sign  1 Sign  2 Sign  3 Sign  4 Sign  5 Sign  6 Sign  7 Sign  8 Sign  9 Sign  10 Sign  11 Sign  12 Sign  13 Sign  14 Sign  15 Sign  16 Sign  17 Sign  18 Sign  19 Sign  20 Sign  21 Sign  22 Sign  23 Sign  24 Sign  25 Sign  26 Sign  27 Sign  28 Sign  29 Sign  30

No enhancement  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Slow wash-in  .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Medium wash-in  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Fast wash-in  .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Plateau curve  .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Rising curve  .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Washout curve  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Round shape  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Oval shape  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Lobulated shape  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Irregular shape  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Well-circumscribed margins  .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Irregular margins  .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Blooming sign  .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Constant sharpness sign  .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Homogeneous enhancement  .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Heterogeneous enhancement  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Centrifugal enhancement  .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Centripetal enhancement  .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Dark internal septations  .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Enhancing internal septations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Segmental enhancement  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Inflow enhancement  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Regional unilateral enhancement  .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Multiple unilateral regional enhancement  .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Multiple bilateral regional enhancement  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Diffuse unilateral enhancement  .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Diffuse bilateral enhancement  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Stippled enhancement  .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Cobblestone enhancement  .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

                                                           

6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 50 52 54 56 58 60 62 64

 

IX

a  Contents Sign  31 Sign  32 Sign  33 Sign  34 Sign  35 Sign  36 Sign  37 Sign  38 Sign  39 Sign  40 Sign  41 Sign  42 Sign  43 Sign  44 Sign  45 Sign  46 Sign  47 Sign  48 Sign  49 Sign  50 Sign  51 Sign  52 Sign  53 Sign  54 Sign  55 Sign  56 Sign  57 Sign  58 Sign  59 Sign  60 Sign  61 Sign  62 Sign  63 Sign  64 Sign  65 Sign  66 Sign  67 Sign  68 Sign  69 Sign  70  



Reticular (dendritic) enhancement  .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Hypointensity on T2-weighted TSE images  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Isointensity on T2-weighted TSE images  .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Hyperintensity on T2-weighted TSE images  .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Hook sign  .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Root sign  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Pectoralis muscle invasion  .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Unilateral perifocal edema  .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Unilateral edema  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Intact ligament sign  .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Disrupted ligament sign  .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Prepectoral unilateral edema  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Intact nipple line  .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Disrupted nipple line  .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Unilateral precontrast high intraductal signal on T1-weighted images  .. . . . . . . . . Bilateral precontrast high intraductal signal on T1-weighted images  .. . . . . . . . . . . Nipple retraction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Asymmetric nipple enhancement  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Diffuse unilateral skin thickening  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Normal lymph nodes  .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Small round lymph nodes  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Large lymph nodes  .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Pleural effusion  7 mm  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Eclipse sign  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Signet ring sign  .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Shot-through sign  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Unchanged enhancement curve  .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Changed enhancement curve  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . “Taller than wide” sign  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . “Wider than tall” sign  .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Punched-out sign  .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Bilateral symmetric edema  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Skin retraction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Increased choline  .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ADC < 1.4 × 10–3 mm2/s  .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ADC > 1.4 × 10–3 mm2/s  .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Half-moon sign  .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Shrinking star sign  .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Clustered ring enhancement  .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

  66   68   70   72   74   76   78   80   82   84   86   88   90   92   94   96   98   100   102   104   106   108   110   112   114   116   118   120   122   124   126   128   130   132   134   136   138   140   142   144

Sign  71 Sign  72 Sign  73 Sign  74 Sign  75 Sign  76 Sign  77 Sign  78 Sign  79 Sign  80 Sign  81 Sign  82 Sign  83 Sign  84 Sign  85 Sign  86 Sign  87 Sign  88 Sign  89 Sign  90 Sign  91 Sign  92 Sign  93 Sign  94 Sign  95 Sign  96 Sign  97 Sign  98 Sign  99 Sign  100 Sign  101 Sign  102 Sign  103 Sign  104 Sign  105 Sign  106 Sign  107 Sign  108 Sign  109 Sign  110

Decrescendo sign  .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Crescendo sign  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Staccato sign  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Interrupted retroglandular fat layer  .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Continuous vessel sign  .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Antibiotic response sign  .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Antibiotic nonresponse sign  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Vessel sign  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Comet sign  .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Focal skin thickening  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Permanent asymmetry of the breasts  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Increasing asymmetry of the breasts  .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Precontrast signal too low  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Precontrast signal too high  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Maximum initial signal increase lower than the malignant threshold  .. . . . . . . . . . Maximum initial signal increase within the malignant range  .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Maximum initial signal increase above the malignant threshold  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Pseudocentric enhancement  .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Clip sign  .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Fat-water cyst  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Unilateral hormone reversal sign  .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Bilateral hormone reversal sign  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Hormone nonreversal sign  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Intravascular contrast sign  .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Pectoralis pseudolesion  .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Tumor recovery sign  .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Incorrect shimming sign  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Patchwork sign  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Increased unilateral subcutaneous vascular density  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Increased bilateral subcutaneous veins  .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Special STIR signal intensity pattern  .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Linguine sign  .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Pull-away sign  .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Keyhole sign  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Extracapsular silicone sign  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Pouch sign  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Wavy line sign  .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Gel bleed sign  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Focal ductal fluid sign  .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Two-chamber sign  .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

                                                                               

146 148 150 152 154 156 160 162 164 166 168 170 172 174 176 178 180 182 184 186 188 190 192 194 196 198 200 202 204 206 208 210 212 214 216 218 220 222 224 226

 

XI

a  Contents Sign  111 Sign  112 Sign  113 Sign  114 Sign  115 Sign  116 Sign  117 Sign  118 Sign  119 Sign  120 Sign  121 Sign  122 Sign  123 Sign  124 Sign  125 Sign  126 Sign  127 Sign  128 Sign  129 Sign  130 Sign  131 Sign  132 Sign  133 Sign  134 Sign  135 Sign  136 Sign  137 Sign  138 Sign  139 Sign  140 Sign  141 Sign  142 Sign  143 Sign  144 Sign  145 Sign  146 Sign  147

Blood-water cyst  .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Blackberry sign  .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Tram lines  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Fat separation sign  .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Bilateral pectoralis degeneration sign  .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Unilateral pectoralis atrophy sign  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Intact retroglandular fat layer  .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . STIR-selective perifocal edema  .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Border sign  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Cross-talk sign  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Unilateral subcutaneous rim enhancement  .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Intense peripheral rim on postcontrast STIR  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Increased unilateral nipple enhancement  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Small perifocal enhancement  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Large perifocal enhancement  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Dark heart sign  .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Unilateral subcutaneous edema  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Stacked beads sign  .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Corona sign  .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Drapery sign  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Crossing edema sign  .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Duct obstruction sign  .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Duct nonobstruction sign  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Donut sign  .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Camouflage sign  .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Dissolving cancer sign  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Melting candies sign  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Constant candies sign  .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Bright T2w cancer  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Enhancing pectoralis  .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Resolving edema sign  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Recurrent border cancer  .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Bright round lymph nodes on T2-weighted TSE images  .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Normal cardiac and aortic enhancement  .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Increasing unilateral vessel sign  .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Increasing bilateral vessel sign  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Lesion with high precontrast signal intensity  .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

                                                                         

228 230 232 234 236 238 240 242 244 246 248 250 252 254 256 258 260 262 264 266 268 270 272 274 276 278 280 282 284 286 288 290 292 294 296 298 300

References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   302  

XII

General Information This book describes morphologic and kinetic signs that are important in the analysis of breast MR images before and after contrast administration and in various pulse sequences. During the period from 1985 to 2006, many authors repeated the almost mantra-like claim that “MR mammography has high sensitivity but low specificity.” But it is quite possible – and by that I mean very probable – that by utilizing all the information contained in MR data sets, we can greatly increase the specificity of MRM. This would give MRM a very high overall accuracy in the diagnosis and differential diagnosis of breast lesions, making it possible to detect cancers as small as 3 mm with a high degree of confidence. Based on all available scientific information, it is even reasonable to expect that the use of MRM can significantly reduce mortality rates from breast cancer while also reducing the extent of surgical procedures and the use of costly chemotherapeutic agents. If the quality of the diagnostic information can be increased, this will also justify the higher costs of MRM compared with x-ray mammography and breast ultrasound. Most of the signs described in this book were identified by analyzing numerous images and correlating the findings with the “gold standards” of histology and follow-up. Some of the signs have been gleaned from the literature. The importance of an individual sign in the overall interpretation – that is, the “weight” of a particular sign – is highly variable. Some signs are seen very often, and some are seen very rarely. Some signs are found both in benign and malignant lesions, some are usually found in malignant or benign lesions, and some are found only in malignant or benign lesions. The “power” of a sign depends on how well the sign can discriminate between benign and malignant lesions and how frequently the sign is encountered. In order to make a quantitative mathematical description, we must introduce a “weighting factor” (WF), which is defined as the logarithm of the ratio of the prevalence of a sign in malignant lesions and in benign lesions. A positive weighting factor is strongly suggestive of a malignant lesion, while a negative weighting factor is strongly suggestive of a benign lesion. For example, if a sign is 100 times more prevalent in malignant lesions than in benign lesions, the weighting factor would be the logarithm of 100, which is +2. If a sign is 100 times more prevalent in benign lesions than in malignant lesions, the weighting factor would be the logarithm of 1 over 100, which is –2. The weighting factor correlates quantitatively with the likelihood of malignancy. The “sign factor” (SF) was introduced to express the presence or absence of a sign in a quantitative way. It simply indicates whether or not a sign is present. A sign factor of 1 means that the sign is present and can therefore be detected in images. SF = 0 means that the sign is not present and is not detectable in images. The overall analysis of a lesion is quantified with an “identification factor” (IDF), which represents the sum of the products of all the weighting factors and sign factors. The IDF takes into account all the signs that can be identified in a patient and their relative contribution to the diagnosis. It is conceivable that, by broad international consensus, an IDF with a value less than minus x would be considered to have no therapeutic implications. There could also be other ranges of IDF values that would warrant long-term follow-up, short-term follow-up, or breast biopsy.  



Fig. 1  Definition of the weighting factor of a sign. The weighting factor is the logarithm of the ratio of the percentage prevalence of a sign in malignant lesions to the prevalence of that sign in benign lesions

Above a certain IDF of plus y, it would be appropriate to proceed with chemotherapy, surgical excision, or radiotherapy or a combination of treatment modalities (see Fig. 3). At present, it is still too early to establish a definitive, quantitative scheme for lesion analysis. Nevertheless, it would definitely be helpful to have a “number” instead of a descriptive diagnosis – one that would encompass all available signs and take into account the relative impact of those signs. Of course, this still leaves open the possibility that other signs may be discovered in the future that will factor into the interpretation, and indeed this would be a welcome development. The advantage of using the IDF is that its numerical value correlates with malignancy. Because the prevalence ratio of benign and malignant lesions in a patient population enters into the IDF, this factor is independent of technical parameters over a broad range of values. The IDF can also be applied to other modalities such as serologic and clinical parameters. All aspects of the image data, history, and clinical and serologic information contribute to the overall diagnosis. It is highly relevant, for example, to determine whether a patient with a unilateral enhancing breast lesion also has a fever or elevated inflammatory serologic markers. The IDF could be expanded in accordance with future medical advances to encompass all signs relating to the patient’s history, imaging findings, clinical findings, and serology. Because it is based on quantitative standards, which ideally correlate with solid objective standards (histology, longterm follow-up), it has high validity and is examiner-independent. The IDF could be used as a basis for therapeutic decisions, standardization, guidelines, and computer-based systems (CAD).  



Fig. 2  Definition of the identification factor (IDF)

These goals are still a long way off, however. We need to establish a data base for this analytical scheme covering large numbers of patients whose diagnoses have been validated either by histologic correlation or by long-term follow-up. During the initial phase, the data for the IDF will probably underestimate benign lesions because they cannot be histologically classified with the same degree of certainty as malignancies. Ideally, the signs should be evaluated within a screening population consisting of asymptomatic “clinically healthy” women. In the past, all of these signs have been interpreted independently of one another. It is quite likely, however, that a combination of multiple signs will improve diagnostic accuracy. For example, a lesion that displays irregular margins, malignant wash-in, washout, low T2w signal intensity, perifocal edema, a hook sign, a blooming sign, elevated choline, and a low ADC is almost certainly a carcinoma. Significant advances have been made in the molecular genetic research of breast cancer in recent years, and striking differences have been noted among different types of carcinoma. “Genomics,” “microchips,” and “proteomics” are buzzwords for new discoveries suggesting that, in the future, we will be able to analyze molecular subgroups in order to obtain specific information about an individual cancer. More than 600 genes are over- or underregulated in a tumor. A carcinoma is like a “new life in a living patient.” This genetic information determines the aggressiveness of the tumor, the likelihood of metastasis, and the organs to which the tumor will metastasize (bone, liver, brain, lung, etc.), thus critically influencing the prognosis. Breast cancers are not all the same. They are a  



Fig. 3  Possible therapeutic implications of an identification factor for a breast lesion

very heterogeneous group of diseases that vary greatly in their aggressiveness and prognosis. In the future, we will probably be able to custom-design a “drug cocktail” for each patient that is optimum for that patient’s tumor. I think it is quite possible that the MRI signs described in this book will correlate with the molecular genetics of tumors; this hypothesis will need to be tested in the future. Several years from now, perhaps a carcinoma with a blooming sign will be treated differently from a carcinoma with a hook sign or perifocal edema – who knows? In the future, the importance of these signs in MRM should be tested in a multicenter study. It would also be prudent to include additional measuring techniques that are not currently in routine use, and to take into account other modalities such as ultrasound, PET, and clinical parameters. The influence of medications, hormones, and chemotherapies should also be considered. In the general analysis of breast diseases, a basic distinction is drawn between the description of focal breast lesions, called “mass lesions,” and regional or infiltrative lesions, called “non-mass lesions”. In this book we will use a consistent scheme for describing the morphologic and kinetic signs of a breast lesion: (1) definition of the sign, (2) an explanatory diagram, (3) an example, and (4) an explanation of how the sign is interpreted. The sequence of the signs is arbitrary. For a comprehensive diagnosis, the morphologic and kinetic signs should always be interpreted together. They should never be analyzed separately.  



Fig. 4  Explanation of the images (an orange colour in the diagrams means “enhancement”, a blue colour reflects “water”, e.g. in cysts, ducts etc.

 



Sign

 1

a  No enhancement

1. Definition MRI signal intensity increases by less than 2% after the injection of 0.1 mmol/kg body weight gadolinium-DTPA or a similar contrast agent during the first 90 seconds after contrast injection and also within the first 7 minutes.

2. Diagram

 



3. Examples

4. Interpretation Sign 1 basically describes the response of normal, nonstimulated breast parenchyma to intravenous contrast administration. It can also be seen in scar tissue that is more than 6 months old. Basically this sign is a very strong indicator of a benign condition (adenosis, fibrous fibroadenoma, scar, fat necrosis, etc.). It should be noted, however, that this sign may also occur in malignant lesions following a technically flawed or inadequate contrast injection or if the patient has received chemotherapy in the recent past (i.e., weeks or months before the examination). It should be easy to identify these mitigating factors, however, and therefore sign 1 is considered a very strong indicator of benignancy.

 



Sign

 2

a  Slow wash-in

1. Definition (“Wash-in” describes the maximum rise of signal intensity that occurs during the first 90 seconds after the injection of 0.1 mmol/kg body weight gadolinium-DTPA or a similar contrast agent.) In cases with slow wash-in, the MRI signal intensity increases by less than 50% over the precontrast signal intensity within 90 seconds after injection of the contrast agent.

2. Diagram

 



3. Examples

4. Interpretation Sign 2 basically describes a slow rate of initial contrast enhancement. This pattern is typically seen in fibrous fibroadenomas, scars, and foci of adenosis. Hormonal effects relating to the normal menstrual cycle may cause a 10% to 20% change in this sign, with less enhancement occurring during the initial phase of the cycle and greater enhancement occurring during the second half of the cycle. The presence of sign 2 in a mass lesion most likely indicates a fibrous fibroadenoma or a scar. The presence of this sign in a non-mass lesion indicates either normal parenchyma, fibrosis, or mild inflammation (mastitis). Very rarely, carcinoma in situ may also display this sign, in which case the enhancement is asymmetrical and unilateral. It should be noted, however, that gradual enhancement may occur in carcinomas as a result of incomplete contrast injection, excessive compression, or chemotherapy in the recent past. It should also be noted that sign 2 depends strongly on the type of contrast agent that is used. An intravascular macromolecular contrast agent will have different wash-in characteristics than a smaller amount of extravascular contrast agent that can enter the interstitial space. Basically, however, sign 2 is considered a strong indicator of a benign lesion.  



Sign

 3

a  Medium wash-in

1. Definition (“Wash-in” describes the maximum rise of signal intensity that occurs during the first 90 seconds after the injection of 0.1 mmol/kg body weight gadolinium-DTPA or a similar contrast agent.) Signal intensity increases by 50% to 90% over the precontrast level within 90 seconds after injection of the contrast agent.

2. Diagram

 

10

3. Examples

4. Interpretation The moderately intense initial enhancement of a mass lesion is most commonly seen in a fibroadenoma or papilloma. Less frequently it occurs in carcinomas after chemotherapy. Medium wash-in occurring in a non-mass lesion may indicate mastitis, a fresh scar, or a hormonal effect. If sign 3 is combined with a unilateral reticular dendritic pattern of enhancement, the lesion may be DCIS or an intralobular carcinoma with reticular growth.

 

11

Sign

 4

a  Fast wash-in

1. Definition A maximum signal increase of more than 90% occurs within 90 seconds after injection of the contrast agent (0.1 mmol/kg body weight gadolinium-DTPA). This sign is also known as the “90/90 rule.”

2. Diagram

 

12

3. Examples

4. Interpretation Rapid initial enhancement immediately after contrast administration is typical of invasive carcinoma but may also been seen in focal components of noninvasive carcinoma (DCIS). Approximately 20% of papillomas and myxoid fibroadenomas exhibit a fast wash-in curve. These benign tumors generally have well-circumscribed margins, a negative blooming sign, and usually have higher signal intensity than the surrounding parenchyma in T2-weighted turbo spin-echo (TSE) sequences. Sign 4 is also seen in severe inflammatory foci, but these lesions do not appear dark in T2-weighted TSE sequences. Foci of invasive carcinoma generally have irregular margins, a positive blooming sign, and appear dark on T2-weighted TSE images. On the whole, the presence of sign 4 is suggestive of malignancy, especially when combined with a plateau enhancement curve and/or a subsequent washout.

 

13

Sign

 5

a  Plateau curve

1. Definition No further rise of signal intensity occurs in the enhancement curve after 90 seconds or after the curve has started to change.

2. Diagram

3. Examples

 

14

4. Interpretation When the enhancement curve of a mass lesion plateaus after the initial upslope, a carcinoma or papilloma should be considered. This pattern is less commonly seen in myxoid fibroadenoma. Sign 5 is particularly common in papillomas, often developing from high initial precontrast signal intensities and often plateauing at any level, including levels above and below the range typical for carcinomas (see signs 85 to 87).

 

15

Sign

 6

a  Rising curve

1. Definition Progressive rise in the enhancement curve occurs after 90 seconds or after the curve has started to change.

2. Diagram

3. Examples

 

16

4. Interpretation Signal intensity that continues to increase after the initial wash-in most likely indicates a benign mass lesion such as myxoid fibroadenoma or papilloma. This sign is seen in only about 10% of carcinomas, mostly invasive lobular carcinoma or foci for DCIS.  

17

Sign

 7

a  Washout curve

1. Definition A decline in signal intensity occurs after the initial upslope during the first 90 seconds or when the curve has started to change.

2. Diagram

 

18

3. Examples

4. Interpretation Washout, defined as a decline of signal intensity occurring after an initial rise, is the main kinetic criterion for breast cancer. The rapid washout of Gd-DTPA from these lesions is most likely caused by the arteriovenous shunts that exist within the network of tumor vessels. Rarely, washout is also seen in papillomas (approximately 20%) and myxoid fibroadenomas. The latter tumors are distinguished, however, by their significantly greater initial wash-in or their higher signal intensity on T2-weighted TSE images. Generally these lesions also have well-circumscribed margins, a negative blooming sign, no hook sign, and no perifocal edema. When a washout effect is observed, the breast should be surveyed by repeatedly changing the region of interest (ROI). The entire lesion should be described as having “positive washout.” Inflammatory carcinomas show washout in only a small portion of the tumor (approximately 10% of the total tumor area), while the rest of the tumor often shows a slower wash-in with a progressive rise in signal intensity.

 

19

Sign

 8

a  Round shape

1. Definition The round or spherical shape is defined in the first postcontrast image, usually 90 seconds after injection of the contrast agent.

2. Diagram

 

20

3. Examples

4. Interpretation A round mass lesion is frequently a cyst, myxoid fibroadenoma, or papilloma. Less commonly a myxoid or medullary carcinoma may appear round, although carcinomas will show at least some evidence of peripheral infiltration into surrounding tissues (positive hook sign, see signs 35 and 36). Very small invasive carcinomas approximately 5 mm in diameter may also appear relatively round and well-circumscribed. Carcinomas usually have low signal intensity on T2-weighted TSE images, however, and display a positive blooming sign.

 

21

Sign

 9

1. Definition An elliptical or egg shape.

2. Diagram

 

22

a  Oval shape

3. Examples

4. Interpretation Elliptical or oval shapes may occur with cysts, myxoid fibroadenomas, and papillomas. Myxoid carcinomas also have relatively well-defined rounded or oval margins. Circumscribed mastitis or a small noninvasive carcinoma (DCIS, approximately 5 mm in size) may have an oval shape with ill-defined margins. Generally these lesions will have a positive blooming sign or perifocal edema.

 

23

Sign

 10

1. Definition An undulating contour.

2. Diagram

 

24

a  Lobulated shape

3. Examples

4. Interpretation A wavy, lobulated contour is generally the hallmark of a benign lesion, as malignancy generally does not allow for regular, harmonious, undulating contours. The biochemical enzyme apparatus of a malignancy enables the tumor to grow aggressively into neighboring tissues. Cancer proteinases such as matrix metalloproteinases and cathepsins would obliterate well-defined contours. Lobulated contours are a frequent sign of complex cysts, complex papillomas, or myxoid fibroadenomas, which contain various compartments filled with mucus or mucus-like fluid of variable density. Sign 10 may also occur in fat necrosis, and in rare cases it may reflect a mucinous carcinoma that has not yet invaded its surroundings.

 

25

Sign

 11

a  Irregular shape

1. Definition An uneven shape; not round, oval, or lobulated.

2. Diagram

 

26

3. Examples

4. Interpretation Irregular contours of a mass lesion are generally the hallmark of invasive cancers such as invasive ductal carcinoma, lobular carcinoma, and other types. Some noninvasive carcinomas may also have at least partially irregular margins. Benign lesions that may produce sign 11 are fibrosis or perifocal inflammation around a percutaneously aspirated cyst. Of course, carcinomas generally show rapid initial wash-in and washout in addition to other typical malignant signs (blooming sign, hook sign, etc.). It should be reemphasized that a definitive diagnosis is always based on a comprehensive analysis of all observed signs.

 

27

Sign

 12

a  Well-circumscribed margins

1. Definition Lesion margins are assessed in the first postcontrast image, usually 90 seconds after the injection of 0.1 mmol/kg body weight gadolinium-DTPA. (Should not be confused with the blooming sign described below.)

2. Diagram

 

28

3. Examples

4. Interpretation Sharp, well-circumscribed margins are the hallmark of a cyst, fibrous fibroadenoma, myxoid fibroadenoma, or papilloma. Carcinomas rarely have margins that are truly well-circumscribed (e.g., occasional mucinous, tubular or medullary carcinomas), and very fine marginal infiltration can usually be seen in high-resolution images with a 512 matrix. Other signs of benignancy or malignancy (signal intensity on the T2-weighted TSE image, hook sign, root sign, wash-in, washout, etc.) will suggest the correct diagnosis.

 

29

Sign

 13

a  Irregular margins

1. Definition Uneven margins, may be round or spiculated; characterized by thin infiltrating lines.

2. Diagram

 

30

3. Examples

4. Interpretation Irregular margins are typical of invasive carcinomas as well as fibrotic scars with adenosis. Inflammatory masses also tend to have irregular margins (mastitis, abscess), especially after percutaneous biopsy.

 

31

Sign

 14

a  Blooming sign

1. Definition The lesion margins are sharply defined in the first postcontrast image, then become increasingly unsharp just outside the lesion.

2. Diagram

3. Examples

 

32

4. Interpretation Very rare in benign lesions, the blooming sign is a typical feature of invasive carcinoma. It may be caused by closely adjacent perifocal inflammation or the activation of tumor angiogenesis. An extensive blooming sign (see signs 124 and 125) may represent a perifocal noninvasive tumor component (DCIS).

 

33

Sign

 15

a  Constant sharpness sign

1. Definition The lesion remains sharply defined throughout the dynamic study. Sharp margins are maintained until the last dynamic postcontrast image (usually 7 minutes after contrast injection).

2. Diagram

 

34

3. Examples

4. Interpretation Constant sharpness throughout the dynamic study generally signifies a benign lesion, i.e., a fibroadenoma or papilloma. Rarely, medullary carcinomas may also appear sharp throughout the dynamic scans, but in most cases they display subtle infiltrative signs and a blooming sign. Most lymphomas are sharply circumscribed initially but show increasing peripheral unsharpness by the third or fifth image.

 

35

Sign

 16

a  Homogeneous enhancement

1. Definition Complete, uniform enhancement in all portions of the mass.

2. Diagram

 

36

3. Examples

4. Interpretation Homogeneous contrast enhancement throughout a mass lesion is not characteristic of carcinomas. Some very small cancers may have this appearance, but most will show centripetal ring enhancement and fine peripheral spiculations. Homogeneous enhancement is far more common in benign lesions such as papilloma and myxoid fibroadenoma. A fibroadenoma is particularly likely if the lesion also has higher signal intensity than the rest of the parenchyma on the T2-weighted TSE image and does not exhibit a blooming sign.

 

37

Sign

 17

a  Heterogeneous enhancement

1. Definition Mixed granular enhancement within the mass; nonspecific enhancement that does not show a ring pattern.

2. Diagram

 

38

3. Examples

4. Interpretation Heterogeneous enhancement is typical of calcified macrofibroadenoma. Benign or malignant lesions may also display this sign following percutaneous biopsy or hemorrhage. A non-ring pattern of heterogeneous enhancement is generally less common in malignant lesions but may be seen in lobular carcinoma.

 

39

Sign

 18

a  Centrifugal enhancement

1. Definition The enhancement is initially more pronounced at the center of the mass and then spreads toward the periphery (“filling in from inside to outside”).

2. Diagram

 

40

3. Examples

4. Interpretation Centrifugal enhancement does not support a diagnosis of carcinoma and is much more consistent with a benign lesion. This suspicion is strengthened by noting additional benign signs such as wellcircumscribed margins, a negative blooming sign, absence of perifocal edema, a constant sharpness sign, increased signal intensity on the T2-weighted TSE image, etc.

 

41

Sign

 19

a  Centripetal enhancement

1. Definition Peripheral ring enhancement occurs initially and then spreads toward the center of the mass (“filling in from outside to inside”).

2. Diagram

 

42

3. Examples

4. Interpretation Centripetal enhancement is the classic enhancement pattern of carcinoma. The portions of the tumor that are most viable and have the best blood supply are located at the periphery of the mass and show the greatest contrast uptake. The center of the tumor, meanwhile, is an area of necrosis, fibrosis, or hemorrhage, causing a delay in contrast uptake. The diagnosis of carcinoma is supported by additional malignant signs such as fast wash-in, washout, low T2-weighted TSE signal intensity, a blooming sign, root sign, hook sign, perifocal edema, elevated choline, and a low ADC.

 

43

Sign

 20

a  Dark internal septations

1. Definition Sharp, low-intensity, nonenhancing lines visible within the mass throughout the dynamic study.

2. Diagram

 

44

3. Examples

4. Interpretation Hypointense, nonenhancing septations within a lesion are generally a benign sign, because a carcinoma wound tend to erode, infiltrate, or break down internal septa. The diagnosis of a benign lesion is further supported by additional benign signs such as high signal intensity on the T2-weighted TSE image, a negative blooming sign and root sign, absence of perifocal edema, high ADC, etc.

 

45

Sign

 21

a  Enhancing internal septations

1. Definition Lines within a mass that enhance after contrast administration.

2. Diagram

 

46

3. Examples

4. Interpretation Enhancing septations within a mass lesion are very suspicious for an inflammatory process (abscess) or a malignant tumor. Generally they do not indicate invasive ductal carcinoma, however. They are more characteristic of a metastasis, lymphoma, medullary carcinoma, lobular carcinoma, or an illdefined linear necrotic area within a carcinoma. I have seen several metastases from cervical carcinoma, ovarian carcinoma, renal carcinoma, or lymphoma that had some benign morphologic features such as sharp margins and an intact retromammary fat layer between the breast and pectoralis muscle, but also had enhancing internal septations. Some compartments in these metastases were even hyperintense on the T2-weighted image. The only malignant signs were enhancing internal septa and a washout effect in viable tumor tissue.

 

47

Sign

 22

a  Segmental enhancement

1. Definition Granular, triangular area of enhancement pointing toward the nipple. This sign may be present in one or more ducts. All types of enhancement curve may be seen. Usually limited to one breast.

2. Diagram

 

48

3. Examples

4. Interpretation A segmental, usually triangular area of enhancement pointing toward the nipple is a typical sign of noninvasive carcinoma (DCIS), particularly when it is unilateral and is relatively well demarcated from other, unaffected areas of the breast parenchyma. The segmental pattern refers to the overall collection of small foci and/or infiltrative changes, which have a granular or reticular appearance. Mastitis may appear as a triangular enhancing area, but this is uncommon. Generally the inflammatory segmental enhancement has a hazier, more confluent appearance than DCIS and is most clearly demonstrated on axial and coronal images.

 

49

Sign

 23

a  Inflow enhancement

1. Definition Segmental bilateral enhancement, usually in the upper outer quadrant, showing a continuous, synchronous, symmetrical increase of signal intensity in both breasts throughout the dynamic study.

2. Diagram

 

50

3. Examples

4. Interpretation Bilateral, symmetrical, synchronous, continuous enhancement in the upper outer quadrant reflects the bilateral, physiologic inflow of contrast material through the lateral thoracic artery, which mainly supplies the upper outer quadrant. It is almost always a benign sign. Bilateral DCIS or upper outer quadrant mastitis would be extremely unlikely, and I have never observed the inflow sign in either condition. In rare cases the breast parenchyma may be asymmetrically distributed on one side relative to the opposite side, resulting in a unilateral inflow sign. But a look at the precontrast images or T2-weighted images will quickly explain the unilateral inflow enhancement. Inflow enhancement may occur through the internal mammary artery in young women with very dense breast parenchyma, producing an inflow sign in the upper inner quadrant of both breasts.

 

51

Sign

 24

a  Regional unilateral enhancement

1. Definition Enhancement in a large tissue volume not confined to a ductal distribution. Present only in one breast, absent in the contralateral breast.

2. Diagram

 

52

3. Examples

4. Interpretation Regional unilateral enhancement may reflect an anomalous parenchymal structure in which some parenchymal areas have increased density. It may also be a sign of focal inflammation or noninvasive carcinoma (DCIS), but in rare cases it may reflect inflammatory carcinoma or lobular carcinoma. In these cases, however, additional kinetic and morphologic signs such as wash-in, washout, T2-weighted signal intensity, and other signs will suggest the correct diagnosis.

 

53

Sign

 25

a  Multiple unilateral regional enhancement

1. Definition Enhancement occurring in at least two large tissue volumes not confined to a ductal distribution. Multiple patchy, geographic areas of enhancement are present only in one breast and are absent in the contralateral breast.

2. Diagram

 

54

3. Examples

4. Interpretation Unilateral, patchy, regional enhancement patterns may occur in multifocal bacterial inflammation, usually with staphylococci (Staphylococcus aureus), as well as in inflammatory carcinoma, lobular carcinoma, and extensive areas of DCIS. Inflammatory carcinoma will also display other signs of inflammation such as diffuse edema, prepectoral edema, a punched-out sign, etc. Inflammatory carcinoma and mastitis, unlike lobular and noninvasive carcinoma, are generally associated with elevated inflammatory serologic markers (CRP, etc.). On careful questioning, the patient may give a recent history of inflammation elsewhere in the body (sinusitis, mastoiditis, bronchitis, etc.) and state that one breast is slightly tender to palpation and compression while the other is not. Pronounced clinical signs of inflammation such as skin redness, orange-peel skin, and breast enlargement are rare. In cases where sign 25 coexists with clinical and serologic parameters, anti-inflammatory therapy should be initiated (e.g., antibiotics), and a relatively short-term MRI follow-up should be scheduled in approximately 2–3 months. This is one of the few indications for short-term follow-up, due to the possibility of shortterm changes in the MRI findings. This does not occur with most breast cancers due to their relatively slow doubling rates, and hence there is no need to reexamine cancer patient at close intervals.  

55

Sign

 26

a  Multiple bilateral regional enhancement

1. Definition Patchy areas of enhancement in both breasts.

2. Diagram

 

56

3. Examples

4. Interpretation Multiple areas of regional enhancement in both breasts is the classic manifestation of hormone replacement therapy (HRT), especially if regional enhancement disappears when the therapy is discontinued. Less frequently, bilateral inflammation or bilateral lobular or inflammatory carcinoma should be considered. Generally the diagnosis is established by a positive history of HRT, and it may be confirmed if needed by the determination of serologic parameters such as CRP. I have also seen patients on HRT who additionally had bilateral breast cancer. In these cases, however, a persistence of bilateral multifocal enhancement is noted even after hormone therapy is withdrawn. (Unlike malignant signs, HRT-related effects are always reversible after the hormones are discontinued for more than 1–3 months.)

 

57

Sign

 27

a  Diffuse unilateral enhancement

1. Definition Uniform enhancement is present in one breast and is absent in the contralateral breast.

2. Diagram

 

58

3. Examples

4. Interpretation Diffuse, unilateral enhancement in one breast with absence of enhancement in the opposite breast is generally a sign of severe inflammation or diffuse tumor infiltration (e.g., by lymphoma). Advanced inflammatory carcinoma is another possibility. Rare causes are contralateral vascular anomalies (unilateral atrophy or malformation of an internal mammary artery, unilateral or contralateral vascular obstruction due to radiotherapy, scarring). I remember one case of unilateral enhancement in which the patient had received radiotherapy as an infant for puerperal mastitis, resulting in severe hypomastia with associated hypovascularity.  

59

Sign

 28

a  Diffuse bilateral enhancement

1. Definition Enhancement distributed uniformly throughout both breasts in a simultaneous, symmetrical, synchronous pattern.

2. Diagram

 

60

3. Examples

4. Interpretation Diffuse, bilateral breast enhancement that goes well beyond physiologic enhancement may result from the overadministration of contrast material (e.g., a triple dose instead of a single dose). A much less frequent cause is severe bilateral mastitis due to bilateral sepsis or bilateral tumor involvement (e.g., by lymphoma).

 

61

Sign

 29

a  Stippled enhancement

1. Definition Finely speckled or sand-like pattern of punctate enhancement.

2. Diagram

 

62

3. Examples

4. Interpretation Numerous punctate foci of enhancement often reflect a focal inflammation or postbiopsy finding at the affected site, with or without associated hemorrhage. A noninvasive carcinoma (DCIS, LCIS) may have the same appearance in rare cases. This finding is not typical of invasive carcinomas, except for occasional lobular cancers that show gradual contrast enhancement in their initial stage. Differentiation is usually accomplished by noting response to a trial of antibiotic therapy: focal inflammation will resolve with an approximately 3-month course of antibiotics, whereas carcinoma will not.  

63

Sign

 30

a  Cobblestone enhancement

1. Definition Cobblestone pattern of enhancement with occasional confluent areas.

2. Diagram

 

64

3. Examples

4. Interpretation Cobblestone-like enhancing foci are typical of lobular cancer nests that are linked together in a reticular pattern. Invasive intraductal cancer accompanied by noninvasive cancer (mixed invasive and noninvasive cancers) may also show this pattern on histologic examination, and pure nests of DCIS may have a cobblestone appearance on postcontrast images. Less likely possibilities are focal inflammation and localized infection secondary to fine-needle or core biopsy. In the absence of inflammatory serologic markers, all areas of cobblestone enhancement in the breast should be histologically investigated.

 

65

Sign

 31

a  Reticular (dendritic) enhancement

1. Definition Enhancement with finger-like or reticular projections extending toward the nipple.

2. Diagram

 

66

3. Examples

4. Interpretation Linear or branched patterns of enhancement in the breast are a hallmark of noninvasive carcinoma (DCIS, LCIS). Rarely they may also be an initial sign of lobular carcinoma, but these cases will show additional malignant signs such as malignant-type wash-in, washout, etc. In very rare cases, reticular dendritic enhancement may reflect the selective inflammation of a single duct system following biopsy or duct obstruction by an intraductal papilloma.

 

67

Sign

 32

a  Hypointensity on T2-weighted TSE images

1. Definition The signal intensity of the viable portions of the lesion on T2-weighted turbo spin-echo images is lower than the signal intensity of normal surrounding breast parenchyma.

2. Diagram

 

68

3. Examples

4. Interpretation A mass lesion whose T2-weighted signal intensity is less than or at most equal to that of the normal glandular tissue may be a carcinoma or fibrous fibroadenoma. The latter, of course, shows entirely different wash-in and washout kinetics. Carcinomas produce a classic wash-in and washout curve and display additional malignant signs such as a hook sign, root sign, perifocal edema, etc. All scars, including radial scars, also have low signal intensity on T2-weighted images.

 

69

Sign

 33

a  Isointensity on T2-weighted TSE images

1. Definition The signal intensity of the viable parts of the lesion on T2-weighted turbo spin-echo images is in the same range as that of normal surrounding breast parenchyma.

2. Diagram

 

70

3. Examples

4. Interpretation Carcinomas may have the same signal intensity as the surrounding glandular tissue on the T2weighted TSE image, but they are usually hypointense to breast parenchyma. Isointensity is typically seen in fibrous fibroadenomas and myxoid fibroadenomas that have slight intralesional hemorrhage after biopsy. Most myxoid fibroadenomas have considerably higher signal intensity on T2-weighted images. Fibroadenomas generally have well-circumscribed margins and typical wash-in and washout kinetics that distinguish them from carcinomas.

 

71

Sign

 34

a  Hyperintensity on T2-weighted TSE images

1. Definition The signal intensity of the viable parts of the lesion on T2-weighted turbo spin-echo images is higher than that of normal surrounding breast parenchyma. Areas of intratumoral necrosis, if present, are disregarded.

2. Diagram

 

72

3. Examples

4. Interpretation If a lesion is described as hyperintense or “bright” on T2-weighted images, this means that it has higher signal intensity than the surrounding breast parenchyma. It does not necessarily have extremely high signal intensity like that occurring in cysts with fluid contents of varying proton density and protein concentration. Hyperintensity is an important differentiating criterion between myxoid fibroadenomas and carcinomas. Carcinomas are dark on the T2-weighted TSE image, while myxoid fibroadenomas are generally brighter than the glandular tissue. T2-weighted hyperintensity is a very strong indicator of myxoid fibroadenoma. The mucous component of this benign tumor is responsible for the high signal intensity. Rarely, increased signal intensity is also found in papillomas and sometimes in the mucous portions of mucinous carcinoma. By contrast, the viable portions of mucinous carcinoma have low signal intensity, probably due to microhemorrhages in the network of tumor vessels. This sign is very useful in the differential diagnosis of intensely enhancing mass lesions, as more than 98% of malignant tumors are iso- or hypointense. It should be reemphasized that only the viable portions of a carcinoma are evaluated. Necrotic areas, which generally have high T2-weighted signal intensity, should be ignored.  

73

Sign

 35

a  Hook sign

1. Definition The hook sign is a fine, thread-like connection passing from the lesion to the pectoralis muscle. Usually this line shows little or no enhancement after contrast administration.

2. Diagram

 

74

3. Examples

4. Interpretation The hook sign in a lesion with a malignant-type enhancement curve strongly supports a diagnosis of carcinoma. Found in many carcinomas, the hook sign may be quite small and may even extend a considerable distance from the pectoralis muscle. We can only speculate as to the cause. It may be that even a small carcinoma has a biochemistry capable of producing all aggressive changes necessary for initiating metastasis and uses this “hook” process to establish a connection to the pectoralis. With current technology, it is not always clear whether this very thin line between the tumor and pectoralis muscle enhances after contrast administration. If it does enhance, peritumoral lymphangiosis is generally detected on subsequent histologic examination. It is difficult to confirm the hook sign histologically because the gross cutting edge of the surgeon’s scalpel tends to slice through the region between the carcinoma and pectoralis, and pathologic processing must be extremely precise to preserve and identify this sign. The hook sign is not confirmed pathologically in 50% of cases. In the other 50% the pathologist may describe either a “desmoplastic reaction” or subtle “carcinomatous lymphangiosis.” The hook sign may also result from postoperative scarring or from a healed inflammation. In these cases, however, it almost never enhances and represents a thin fibrotic line. These cases can be identified from the patient’s history and from information in the previous operative report.   75

Sign

 36

a  Root sign

1. Definition The root sign refers to a localized irregularity, usually enhancing, in the margins of a lesion.

2. Diagram

 

76

3. Examples

4. Interpretation The root sign is a small irregularity in the margins of a lesion that is otherwise sharply circumscribed. This feature may represent a fibroadenoma with localized peripheral fibrosis or a well-circumscribed carcinoma, usually of the medullary type, with an associated DCIS border. Of course, the lesion is more likely to be carcinoma if it shows ring enhancement with typical wash-in and washout kinetics.

 

77

Sign

 37

a  Pectoralis muscle invasion

1. Definition Thick, mostly enhancing connections passing from the lesion into the pectoralis muscle, much larger than the hook sign.

2. Diagram

 

78

3. Examples

4. Interpretation If a lesion already has conspicuous, enhancing connections with the pectoralis muscle, it is almost always an invasive cancer. This finding signifies carcinomatous lymphangiosis in an untreated, previously unoperated breast. If the breast was previously operated (determined from the history) and these infiltrating strands show little or no contrast enhancement, the lesion is most likely a recent or older scar, depending on the enhancement and the time that has elapsed since the operation. The intensity of the enhancement is inversely proportional to the degree of fibrosis, and thus to the time since the operation. Another possibility is the presence of residual or recurrent carcinoma combined with a fibrotic area within a scar.

 

79

Sign

 38

a  Unilateral perifocal edema

1. Definition Small, complete or incomplete ring of edema around an enhancing lesion.

2. Diagram

 

80

3. Examples

4. Interpretation An edematous area around a lesion in a previously untreated breast is a strong indicator of carcinoma. It suggests a high grade of malignancy and a relatively poor prognosis. A likely explanation is the increased activity of tumorspecific angiogenic enzymes – like matrix-metallo-proteinases – in close proximity to the tumor or in the ipsilateral breast. If the patient has had previous breast surgery or radiation to the breast, this may be another cause of unilateral edema around a lesion.

 

81

Sign

 39

a  Unilateral edema

1. Definition The presence of edema in one breast (detectable in T2w-TSE or – better – in STIR-images).

2. Diagram

 

82

3. Examples

4. Interpretation Edema that occupies practically an entire breast is typical of inflammatory carcinoma and occurs occasionally with lobular carcinoma. Generally the extent of edema is appreciated more clearly in a STIR sequence than in a T2-weighted TSE sequence. But if there has been previous surgery or radiotherapy to the breast, this might also explain unilateral edema. Edema is particularly common after radiotherapy and may persist for many years. I have seen cases of unilateral edema lasting for 12–16 years after radiotherapy. Lobular carcinoma and inflammatory carcinoma should, however, contain at least one area that displays malignant-type wash-in or washout kinetics or decreased signal intensity on T2-weighted images.

 

83

Sign

 40

a  Intact ligament sign

1. Definition Ligament continuity is not disrupted by an enhancing lesion. The lesion does not interrupt or “dissolve” the ligament. This sign is best appreciated on T2-weighted images.

2. Diagram

 

84

3. Examples

4. Interpretation The intact ligament sign generally indicates a benign lesion. This type of lesion does not have proteolytic enzymes (cathepsins, matrix metalloproteinases, etc.) that dissolve surrounding structures; instead it conforms to the parenchymal architecture. Most of these lesions are fibroadenomas or papillomas. Fibroadenomas also present the typical signs of either a fibrous fibroadenoma, which shows gradual progressive enhancement and low T2-weighted signal intensity, or a myxoid fibroadenoma, which shows very intense initial enhancement, a continuous signal rise, and high T2-weighted signal intensity.

 

85

Sign

 41

a  Disrupted ligament sign

1. Definition Ligament continuity is disrupted by an enhancing lesion. The lesion appears to have “dissolved” the ligament (opposite to the intact ligament sign). This sign is best appreciated on T1-weighted images.

2. Diagram

 

86

3. Examples

4. Interpretation If a lesion can dissolve surrounding ligaments, this generally signifies malignant tumor angiogenesis, i.e., an invasive carcinoma. A small focal abscess is extremely rare.

 

87

Sign

 42

a  Prepectoral unilateral edema

1. Definition Edema located directly in front of the pectoralis muscle.

2. Diagram

 

88

3. Examples

4. Interpretation Edema directly in front of the pectoralis muscle in an untreated breast is another reasonably strong indicator of carcinoma. The cause is probably incipient invasion and increased activity of angiogenic enzymes along the front of the pectoralis muscle. Like all edematous signs, this sign is seen more clearly in STIR sequences than in T2-weighted TSE sequences. As with other signs, prepectoral unilateral edema in a previously operated or irradiated breast is most likely iatrogenic and does not indicate a need for treatment in the absence of other enhancing breast lesions. Postirradiation edema may be detectable for a very long time (we have seen cases lasting 16 years). It remains unclear why the prepectoral location of the edema is relatively typical of tumors but extremely rare in mastitis. Like malignant wash-in and washout, centripetal ring enhancement, and the blooming, hook and root signs, sign 42 is considered very typical of breast malignancies.

 

89

Sign

 43

a  Intact nipple line

1. Definition Slowly enhancing line along the base of the nipple, usually hypointense. Any disruption of this line is abnormal.

2. Diagram

 

90

3. Examples

4. Interpretation Less enhancement is seen around the base of the nipple than at its tip. This sign most likely correl­ ates with fibrosis, but partial volume averaging may also be contributory. This zone of relatively low enhancement should always be detectable and is the criterion for a normal nipple. If carcinoma-type wash-in or washout is seen within this zone, it is reasonable to assume that tumor has invaded the nipple (Paget disease).

 

91

Sign

 44

a  Disrupted nipple line

1. Definition Focal area of enhancement within the normally hypointense, slowly enhancing line at the base of the nipple.

2. Diagram

 

92

3. Examples

4. Interpretation Any disruption of the hypointense nipple circumference by an adjacent enhancing lesion, especially one showing malignant wash-in or washout kinetics, signifies tumor involvement of the nipple, usually in the form of Paget disease or DCIS. This interpretation is supported by additional signs of malignancy.

 

93

Sign

 45

a Unilateral precontrast high intraductal signal on T1-weighted images

1. Definition Branched or unbranched lines of high signal intensity located directly behind the nipple of one breast on unenhanced T1-weighted images.

2. Diagram

 

94

3. Examples

4. Interpretation High signal intensity within a duct system on the unenhanced T1-weighted image is considered to represent milk or blood. This sign is most commonly found in a duct system obstructed by papilloma or in a lactating breast. Unilateral high intraductal signal occurs in cases where an interventional procedure (surgery or radiotherapy) has been done in the opposite breast or the patient was treated with radiation in early childhood (e.g., for puerperal mastitis). This sign may also result from residual intraductal bleeding after ductography or attempted ductography.

 

95

Sign

 46

a Bilateral precontrast high intraductal signal on T1-weighted images

1. Definition Branched or unbranched lines of high signal intensity located directly behind the nipple of both breasts on unenhanced T1-weighted images.

2. Diagram

 

96

3. Examples

4. Interpretation Bilateral increased signal intensity in both duct systems on unenhanced T1-weighted images (T1-weighted FLASH, FFE or GRASS sequences) is a normal finding in lactating women. Rare alternative causes are bilateral papillomas or a pituitary adenoma with elevated prolactin levels stimulating both duct systems and leading to engorgement.

 

97

Sign

 47

a  Nipple retraction

1. Definition The nipple is withdrawn into the retroareolar tissue. No specific nipple profile is detectable.

2. Diagram

 

98

3. Examples

4. Interpretation Retraction of the nipple is particularly suspicious in cases that show unilateral nipple enhancement or even a malignant-type enhancement pattern. A nonenhancing retracted nipple is either a normal variant or a sequel to prior inflammation (puerperal mastitis), irradiation, or postoperative scarring.

 

99

Sign

 48

a  Asymmetric nipple enhancement

1. Definition The nipple in one breast enhances more (faster or longer) than the nipple of the contralateral breast (measured at the same time after contrast injection, without breast compression).

2. Diagram

3. Examples

 

100

4. Interpretation Ordinarily both nipples enhance at the same rate and with the same intensity in any given patient. There are normal variants, however, relating to the size of the breast and possible compression of the mammary artery or lateral thoracic artery. Local inflammation may also underlie asymmetric enhancement. Today this condition is often found in athletic patients whose clothing rubs against their nipple during exercise (“jogger’s nipple”). Asymmetric enhancement, often associated with malignant-type wash-in and washout curves and low signal intensity on T2-weighted TSE images, is suggestive of malignant invasion (Paget disease or DCIS).

 

101

Sign

 49

a  Diffuse unilateral skin thickening

1. Definition The skin of one breast is thicker than the skin of the contralateral breast.

2. Diagram

 

102

3. Examples

4. Interpretation Diffuse thickening of the skin of one breast is a common sequel to radiotherapy, surgery, or previous inflammation. It may also be seen with inflammatory carcinoma, but generally this disease is associated with other enhancing lesions and edema (especially prepectoral) in the affected breast. Previous surgery or irradiation is readily determined from the history. Inflammation should be associated with elevation of CRP or other serologic markers. Inflammatory carcinoma is characterized by enhancing lesions and often displays a punched-out sign (sign 62).

 

103

Sign

 50

a  Normal lymph nodes

1. Definition Oval lymph nodes less than 1 cm in size with a detectable hilar sign.

2. Diagram

 

104

3. Examples

4. Interpretation Normal lymph nodes are generally displayed best on axial T2-weighted TSE images, which are less affected by cardiac phase-encoding artifacts than gradient-echo images from the dynamic scans. Lymph nodes can be identified in other planes as well (coronal or lateral sagittal). Today the analysis of lymph nodes is based chiefly on their morphology. Normal criteria include an oval shape, small short-axis diameter usually (less than 5 mm, but at least less than 1 cm), and a detectable hilar sign with a hyperintense center on T2-weighted TSE images. These criteria do not exclude the presence of tiny micrometastases, however. The use of specific iron-based contrast agents (USPIO = ultrasmall particles of iron oxide) may hold a future solution to this problem.

 

105

Sign

 51

a  Small round lymph nodes

1. Definition Round, enhancing lymph nodes less than or equal to 1 cm in diameter, with homogeneous signal intensity on T1- and T2-weighted images. A hilar sign is not detectable.

2. Diagram

 

106

3. Examples

4. Interpretation The interpretation of this sign depends strongly on the prior history (what was done in this breast, and when?) and on the presence of carcinoma in the ipsilateral breast. Small round lymph nodes are best appreciated on T2-weighted TSE images in axial or coronal planes of section. They may result from reactive lymphadenopathy due to surgery or radiotherapy or enlargement due to inflammation. Small inflammatory carcinomas or micrometastases are another possibility, and USPIO contrast agents may one day be used to confirm this diagnosis. If lymph nodes show malignant-type wash-in and washout kinetics after the injection of Gd-DTPA and carcinoma has been found in the ipsilateral breast, operative treatment should definitely include the removel of these nodes.

 

107

Sign

 52

a  Large lymph nodes

1. Definition Round, enhancing lymph nodes greater than 1 cm in diameter, with homogeneous signal intensity on T1- and T2-weighted images. A hilar sign is not detectable.

2. Diagram

 

108

3. Examples

4. Interpretation Large lymph nodes are almost always malignant or metastatic when they are round, have no detectable hilum, and enhance intensely after contrast administration. This diagnosis is essentially confirmed by the presence of carcinoma in the ipsilateral breast. It is my personal belief that when large enhancing lymph nodes are found in the presence of ipsilateral carcinoma and all morphologic and kinetic signs (wash-in, washout, root sign, hook sign, perifocal edema, low T2-weighted signal intensity), there is probably no need for a sentinel lymph node dissection. As it is extremely likely that the sentinel node is positive, it should be removed and histologically examined.

 

109

Sign

 53

a  Pleural effusion  7 mm

1. Definition The thickness of the pleural effusion on T1-weighted images, with the patient lying prone in the scanner, is greater than 7 mm in the anteroposterior direction.

2. Diagram

 

112

3. Examples

4. Interpretation A pleural effusion thicker than 7 mm in the anteroposterior direction is no longer considered normal. It may represent a pleural metastasis, pneumonia (with concomitant increased signal intensity in the lung), or severe congestive heart failure (especially when bilateral).

 

113

Sign

 55

a  Eclipse sign

1. Definition Sharply demarcated enhancement around a cyst, resembling a solar eclipse, following percutaneous cyst aspiration (may persist for months).

2. Diagram

 

114

3. Examples

4. Interpretation A sharply circumscribed ring of enhancement encircling a conspicuous cyst, combined with a history of previous needle biopsy, almost always indicates perifocal inflammation. We know from experience that these inflammations are much more common than was once believed (before MR mammography). They may be left alone unless postcontrast images show solitary, nodular enhancing lesions with malignant wash-in and washout kinetics. These lesions are most likely accompanying carcinomas (or, less commonly, focal abscesses) and should be extirpated. I have found that a round, thin, well-defined crescent-shaped border with a continuous enhancement curve almost always signifies a benign (lymphocytic, inflammatory) infiltrate. In patients with clinical manifestations such as tenderness to palpation, anti-inflammatory or antibiotic therapy should be initiated.

 

115

Sign

 56

a  Signet ring sign

1. Definition Sharply demarcated ring enhancement around a cyst, plus an attached enhancing nodule.

2. Diagram

 

116

3. Examples

4. Interpretation The signet ring sign is often seen following a cyst biopsy. Usually there are no clinical manifestations of infection such as fever or tenderness, but the ring enhancement, adjacent enhancing nodule, and history of cyst biopsy clearly suggest the correct diagnosis. The only other possibility to be considered is a tumor adjacent to a cyst. If a cyst biopsy has not been performed, the signet ring sign is strongly suggestive of mucinous carcinoma, as this tumor has both a solid enhancing component and a cystic component. This is an urgent indication for excision and histologic confirmation.

 

117

Sign

 57

a  Shot-through sign

1. Definition Two or more enhancing spots on opposite sides of an enhancing cyst after biopsy (may persist for months).

2. Diagram

 

118

3. Examples

4. Interpretation In patients with a history of percutaneous biopsy, this sign almost always results from penetration of a cyst by a biopsy needle at two opposing sites in the cyst wall. In the absence of clinical symptoms, the patient should be reexamined in approximately 2 years. If clinical symptoms are present (e.g., local pain and tenderness, subfebrile temperatures, inflammatory signs), anti-inflammatory or antibiotic therapy is recommended. In theory, a shot-through sign could be seen in a mucinous carcinoma with two separate solid foci on different sides of a cystic component, but I have never encountered this. This type of case would be marked by an absence of clinical inflammatory signs.

 

119

Sign

 58

a  Unchanged enhancement curve

1. Definition No change in the tumor enhancement curve after chemotherapy.

2. Diagram

 

120

3. Examples

4. Interpretation Even an initial cycle of chemotherapy should markedly reduce tumor wash-in and should round off the “cancer breakpoint” in the enhancement curve. If the breakpoint is still present even after two chemotherapy cycles, this strongly indicates that the cytostatic therapy has basically been ineffective and should be modified.

 

121

Sign

 59

a  Changed enhancement curve

1. Definition Definite change in the tumor enhancement curve after chemotherapy, resulting in decreased wash-in and rounding of the cancer breakpoint.

2. Diagram

3. Examples

 

122

4. Interpretation A significant change in the enhancement curve after one or two chemotherapy cycles is very strong evidence that initial chemotherapy has been highly effective. The rapid wash-in, cancer breakpoint, and subsequent washout seen prior to chemotherapy are transformed after chemotherapy into a gently rising curve. It should be noted that the analysis of enhancement curves is always based on the most intensely enhancing portion of a tumor. For example, 90% of the tissue in a patchy carcinoma may show a progressively rising enhancement curve. But if approximately 10% of the lesion shows malignant-type wash-in and washout, the entire tumor should be interpreted as malignant. The shape of the curve may be so radically altered that almost no enhancement is registered after the completion of chemotherapy. We know from experience, however, that this does not mean that all the tumor cells have been destroyed. It is more likely that the toxic action of the cytostatic drugs has damaged vascular structures to such a degree that there is no longer any detectable uptake of GdDTPA by the tumor. I have seen cases with a complete loss of enhancement in which at least some tumor cells were still discovered on histologic examination. Additional signs such as the “camouflage sign” and “dissolving cancer sign” (signs 135 and 136) should also be considered in these cases.  

123

Sign

 60

a  “Taller than wide” sign

1. Definition The anteroposterior (vertical) diameter of a lesion is larger than its left-right (transverse) diameter.

2. Diagram

 

124

3. Examples

4. Interpretation The “taller than wide” sign was first used in ultrasonography to describe the relationship of the anteroposterior diameter of a lesion to its transverse diameter. If the anteroposterior diameter parallel to the ductal structures is greater than the diameter antiparallel to the ductal structures, the lesion is more likely to be malignant. This orientation means that the lesion is directed toward the nipple and is growing parallel to the duct system. This sign should always be interpreted within the context of other signs, as it is relatively nonspecific; a substantial minority of carcinomas are “wider than tall.” But if additional malignant signs are present such as wash-in, washout, low T2-weighted signal, hook sign, root sign, perifocal edema, high choline, low ADC, etc., this would support the diagnosis of a malignant lesion.  

125

Sign

 61

a  “Wider than tall” sign

1. Definition The anteroposterior (vertical) diameter of a lesion is smaller than its left-to-right (transverse) diameter.

2. Diagram

 

126

3. Examples

4. Interpretation This sign, like the previous one (sign 60), originated in ultrasonography. If the left-right or transverse diameter of a lesion is larger than its anteroposterior or vertical diameter, this means that the lesion is not growing parallel to ductal structures. This pattern is more characteristic of benign lesions. As with the previous sign, however, it is important to consider additional signs of benignancy (slow wash-in, progressive enhancement, higher T2-weighted signal intensity, no blooming sign, hook sign, or root sign, constant sharpness sign, no choline, high ADC, etc.) to confirm the diagnosis.

 

127

Sign

 62

a  Punched-out sign

1. Definition Focal, circumscribed initial enhancement within thickened skin, showing a malignant-type pattern with strong initial wash-in followed by a plateau or washout curve. All other portions of the thickened skin show gradual, progressive enhancement.

2. Diagram

 

128

3. Examples

4. Interpretation Focal initial enhancement within thickened skin, usually showing all the kinetic signs of carcinoma such as strong wash-in and a plateau or washout curve, is a very strong sign of inflammatory carcinoma, especially when other malignant-type lesions are present in the breast. The initial malignanttype enhancing lesion is subsequently “absorbed” by progressive enhancement of the surrounding thickened skin, with delayed images showing high signal intensity throughout the skin. I have seen this punched-out sign in only one case of true mastitis; otherwise I have seen it only in association with inflammatory carcinoma. When present, it is highly specific for cancer.

 

129

Sign

 63

a  Bilateral symmetric edema

1. Definition Symmetric edema in both breasts.

2. Diagram

 

130

3. Examples

4. Interpretation Bilateral symmetric edema is best demonstrated in fat-saturated STIR sequences but is also appreciated in T2-weighted TSE sequences. Generally it results from a systemic underlying disease such as heart failure. Exceptions (suggested by the typical patient history) are cases that have had bilateral breast surgery and/or bilateral radiotherapy.

 

131

Sign

 64

a  Skin retraction

1. Definition Local indentation or dimpling of the skin.

2. Diagram

 

132

3. Examples

4. Interpretation The new occurrence of skin retraction is a classic sign of carcinoma, especially if a malignant-type enhancing mass is detected in the same breast. In the absence of a detectable mass and with no prior history of surgery or irradiation, skin retraction most likely represents a scar or a sequel to chemotherapy. Thin fibrotic lines are generally detectable between the lesion and skin, and sometimes the lines may show faint contrast enhancement. In rare cases with technical problems (e.g., faulty contrast injection), skin retraction may represent carcinoma in the absence of a correlative enhancing lesion. Of course, skin retraction may also occur after surgery and radiotherapy. In these cases it will be accompanied by additional signs such as generalized cutaneous edema or ipsilateral breast edema with scar formation and obliteration of the fat plane over the pectoralis muscle.

 

133

Sign

 65

a  Increased choline

1. Definition Elevated phosphocholine level (3.22 ppm by proton spectroscopy).

2. Diagram

 

134

3. Examples

4. Interpretation Elevated (phospho)choline levels that measure 3.22 ppm by proton spectroscopy are a strong indicator of a malignant tumor. Because phosphocholine is a component of cell membranes, phosphocholine levels are elevated in cancer patients due to the increase in cell turnover. Rare exceptions are mastitis and the lactating breast.

 

135

Sign

 66

a  ADC < 1.4 × 10–3 mm2/s

1. Definition Apparent diffusion coefficient in diffusion-weighted images (b = 1500 s/mm2) is less than 1.4 × 10–3 mm2/s.

2. Diagram

3. Examples

 

136

4. Interpretation A decrease in the apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) provides strong evidence of malignant-type changes in the microstructure of a tissue. Relatively few data have been published worldwide, however, and so the specificity of this sign is still uncertain.

 

137

Sign

 67

a  ADC > 1.4 × 10–3 mm2/s

1. Definition Apparent diffusion coefficient in diffusion-weighted images (b = 1500 s/mm2) is greater than 1.4 × 10-3 mm2/s.

2. Diagram

3. Examples

 

138

4. Interpretation ADC values above a threshold of 1.4 × 10-3 mm2/s are very characteristic of fibroadenoma, papilloma, and other benign mass lesions. Mucinous carcinoma is the only malignancy that may show elevated ADC values in rare cases. On the whole, however, the ADC value determined in diffusionweighted images is a very useful differentiating sign that appears to be as powerful an indicator as wash-in, washout, T2-weighted signal intensity, and morphologic signs. Further studies are needed to substantiate these initial results.

 

139

Sign

 68

a  Half-moon sign

1. Definition Crescent-shaped enhancement bordering a cystic lesion.

2. Diagram

 

140

3. Examples

4. Interpretation Crescent-shaped enhancement on one side of a cystic lesion is strongly suggestive of an aspirated cyst, especially in patients with a history of percutaneous aspiration. In rare cases it may represent a phylloides tumor or mucinous carcinoma. Not infrequently, a half-moon sign is caused by motion artifacts or surgical clip artifacts with small signal fluctuations during the dynamic scan, producing crescent-shaped areas of “pseudoenhancement” on subtraction images (as in the examples above).

 

141

Sign

 69

a  Shrinking star sign

1. Definition Shrinkage of a cancer in all directions during chemotherapy, resembling a “shrinking star” or “melting star.”

2. Diagram

 

142

3. Examples

4. Interpretation A lesion that dwindles from outside to inside during chemotherapy not only signifies an excellent response to chemotherapy. This sign is mainly seen in carcinomas with negative estrogen and/or progesterone receptors and/or a positive HER2 status and also in nuclear grade 3 tumors. Generally, then, it occurs in relatively undifferentiated carcinomas with a rapid growth rate and unfavorable prognosis. A shrinking star sign also means that the tumor must be completely removed with adequate margins. Whether the tumor has responded to chemotherapy, has recurred, or has been completely eradicated can be determined by a kinetic analysis (signs 58 and 59) and/or by noting the “camouflage sign” (no. 135) or “dissolving cancer sign” (no. 136).

 

143

Sign

 70

a  Clustered ring enhancement

1. Definition A lesion that enhances after contrast administration shows not just one “ring” but multiple combined or “clustered” rings within the whole lesion.

2. Diagram

 

144

3. Examples

4. Interpretation Clustered ring enhancement generally signifies a very aggressive (nuclear grade 3) carcinoma in which multiple richly vascularized areas of tumor angiogenesis are present around areas of central necrosis.

 

145

Sign

 71

a  Decrescendo sign

1. Definition The signal intensity in fat or parenchyma declines continuously in dynamic scans.

2. Diagram

 

146

3. Examples

4. Interpretation A steady decline in signal intensity during the dynamic study is based entirely on technical or methodologic problems (tuning of the coil, radiofrequency artifacts, etc.). No type of tissue in the breast will show fading signal intensity during dynamic scanning. It is essential to recognize this sign in dynamic scans to ensure that the kinetic and morphologic signal changes will not be misinterpreted. It is extremely important to identify these technical problems, because the fading signal intensity will affect all breast lesions equally. The decrescendo sign may lead to a false-negative cancer diagnosis if signal increases are underinterpreted or go undetected.

 

147

Sign

 72

a  Crescendo sign

1. Definition The signal intensity of fat rises continuously in dynamic scans.

2. Diagram

 

148

3. Examples

4. Interpretation It is also important to recognize technical problems (tuning problem, radiofrequency artifacts) that may cause a steady rise of signal intensity. Fat should display the same, constant signal intensity throughout the dynamic study. As with the previous sign, the crescendo sign may lead to diagnostic errors due to the masking of signal changes caused by pathophysiologic phenomena relating to tumor angiogenesis.

 

149

Sign

 73

a  Staccato sign

1. Definition The signal intensity of fat or parenchyma shows up-and-down changes in dynamic scans.

2. Diagram

 

150

3. Examples

4. Interpretation The staccato sign also refers to signal changes based on technical or methodologic problems. It should be recognized so that the morphologic and kinetic parameters of lesions can be accurately interpreted. A staccato-like pattern of up-and-down changes in the fat or parenchyma should not occur and must be considered in the evaluation of lesions. If the fat next to a lesion shows a rise or fall in signal intensity, this effect must also be considered in evaluating the adjacent lesion. For example, if a lesion shows a 70% increase in signal intensity after contrast injection while the adjacent fat shows a 30% decrease, the actual signal change in the lesion is equal to 100% (70% + 30%).

 

151

Sign

 74

a  Interrupted retroglandular fat layer

1. Definition A discontinuity is present in the thin fatty layer between the breast parenchyma and pectoralis muscle.

2. Diagram

 

152

3. Examples

4. Interpretation Normally a thin layer of fat separates the breast parenchyma from the pectoralis muscle. This fat layer is clearly displayed on T1- and T2-weighted images. Interruption of this fat layer is almost always abnormal and often represents scar tissue following surgery, irradiation, or trauma. Older scars should show very little contrast enhancement. But if the fat layer is interrupted in a previously unoperated, tumor-bearing breast or if the linear connections between the tumor and pectoralis muscle show contrast enhancement, it is reasonable to assume that the fat layer has been breached by an invading malignant tumor. This is particularly likely if there has been no prior breast surgery or postoperative scarring during the previous six months.

 

153

Sign

 75

a  Continuous vessel sign

1. Definition A hyperintense spot occupies a similar position in neighboring slices and can be tracked in its course from one slice to the next.

2. Diagram

 

154

3. Examples

4. Interpretation Small vascular sections cut by the imaging plane should not be mistaken for small mass lesions or malignancies. Vascular sections are relatively easy to identify as round, oval, or serpentine structures that enhance after contrast administration and can be tracked through neighboring slices. The course of these vessels is clearly displayed in a three-dimensional maximum-intensity projection (MIP). Moreover, vessels often show refocusing effects on T2-weighted TSE images, producing a relatively high signal intensity unlike that of malignant tumors. It is important to realize that vessels may show all types of enhancement patterns including plateau and washout effects. As a result, the continuous vessel sign and increased T2-weighted signal intensity are often the only definite signs that can distinguish vessels from a very small carcinoma.  

155

Sign

 76

a  Antibiotic response sign

1. Definition A previously enhancing lesion or group of lesions in a breast shows no enhancement or greatly decreased enhancement following antibiotic therapy.

2. Diagram

3. Examples

 

156

 

157

Sign

 

158

 76

a  Antibiotic response sign

4. Interpretation Unilateral or bilateral areas of patchy enhancement in the breast may result from a unilateral or bilateral inflammation. These cases should be managed with anti-inflammatory or antibiotic therapy and require MRI follow-up at 3 to 6 months. The loss of enhancement indicates a positive therapeutic response. It is advisable to schedule the follow-up examination during a similar phase of the menstrual cycle as in the previous examination. The disappearance of formerly enhancing lesions after antibiotic therapy essentially confirms the inflammatory nature of the lesions, eliminating the need for further surgical and histologic diagnosis. It has been my experience that subclinical, unilateral inflammatory processes are much more common in the breast than traditional textbooks would indicate. If inflammation is present anywhere in the body, apparently the breast is susceptible to inflammatory involvement even if there are no clinical manifestations of mastitis. In some cases the patient will report slight tenderness to palpation of the affected breast.

 

159

Sign

 77

a  Antibiotic nonresponse sign

1. Definition Anti-inflammatory or antibiotic therapy has no effect on previously enhancing lesions.

2. Diagram

 

160

3. Examples

4. Interpretation If one or more enhancing areas remain unchanged after antibiotic therapy, either the antibiotics were ineffective or the lesions were not inflammatory, consisting instead of multifocal DCIS or multi­ focal lobular carcinoma. If antibiotic therapy has not altered their enhancement characteristics, the enhancing lesions should be excised and histologically examined due to the very high likelihood of malignancy.

 

161

Sign

 78

a Vessel sign

1. Definition Vessels are more numerous in a breast with an enhancing lesion and may even be directed toward the lesion.

2. Diagram

 

162

3. Examples

4. Interpretation The vessel sign is present when one or more vessels are visible in a tumor-bearing breast and the number of vessels is markedly increased relative to the contralateral breast. This sign is strongly suggestive of a malignant lesion in the affected breast. The most likely explanation is increased tumor angiogenesis, which is known to be detectable even at a distance of several centimeters from the tumor. Increased vascularity is considered an early sign of carcinoma formation. Rare exceptions to this rule would be very severe infectious foci, which also are well vascularized. These foci would cause conspicuous edema throughout the breast, however, and would be accompanied by clinical or serologic signs of inflammation.

 

163

Sign

 79

a  Comet sign

1. Definition An enhancing lesion has a (usually less enhancing) “tail” extending into the parenchyma and often directed toward the nipple (like the tail of a comet).

2. Diagram

 

164

3. Examples

4. Interpretation A “comet tail” arising from an enhancing lesion is a strong indicator of early DCIS, especially when the tail is directed toward the nipple or along the ductal system. Less likely alternatives (easily identified from the history) are biopsy or surgery during the preceding months. The surgeon should be reminded to excise the entire enhancing lesion, including the tail, to ensure that all DCIS foci are removed.

 

165

Sign

 80

a  Focal skin thickening

1. Definition The skin of one breast shows focal thickening while other portions of the skin are normal.

2. Diagram

 

166

3. Examples

4. Interpretation The history is very important in the interpretation of focal skin thickening. In patients with a history of biopsy, surgery, or trauma to the breast, focal skin thickening that does not enhance is caused by a scar. If the thickened area is extensive and shows moderate enhancement, it may represent keloid formation. Focal skin thickening that enhances, especially when located near an enhancing lesion, signifies tumor invasion. Again, it is important in these cases to inform the surgeon of the associated focal skin thickening to ensure that the excision will fully encompass the tumor tissue.

 

167

Sign

 81

a  Permanent asymmetry of the breasts

1. Definition A marked size discrepancy between the breasts has been present since puberty.

2. Diagram

 

168

3. Examples

4. Interpretation A minor size discrepancy between the breasts is very common and is essentially a normal finding. Marked asymmetry, however, implies an abnormality of breast development, usually as a result of previous trauma and/or radiation during childhood (the irradiated breast is smaller). Asymmetry since puberty is almost never the result of a malignant process. Other possible causes of permanent breast asymmetry include traumatic injury and/or biopsy of the breast bud during childhood. Rare cases may result from unilateral hypertrophy of the breast in pectoral dysplasia or atrophy in the setting of Poland syndrome (see sign 116).

 

169

Sign

 82

a  Increasing asymmetry of the breasts

1. Definition A marked size discrepancy between the breasts has developed in the recent past (days or months).

2. Diagram

 

170

3. Examples

4. Interpretation Increasing asymmetry of one breast in favor of the other breast signifies either an inflammatory or neoplastic process. Thus, the cause may be a developing mastitis with its associated clinical and serologic signs or, more commonly, an inflammatory carcinoma or diffuse tumor infiltration, most likely by lymphoma. Another possibility is the relative enlargement of one breast because the other breast is “shrinking” due to tumor invasion with subsequent consolidation and skin retraction.

 

171

Sign

 83

a  Precontrast signal too low

1. Definition The signal intensity of breast parenchyma in the precontrast T1-weighted GRE sequence is lower than the usual range of breast signal intensity for this technique (same sequence, coil, magnet, etc.).

2. Diagram

3. Examples

 

172

4. Interpretation The signal intensity of the breast parenchyma in the unenhanced image varies little from one patient to the next. Only the relative proportion of fat and the architectural features of the breast show substantial variations. The signal intensity depends on the type of pulse sequence used (2D GRE sequence, 3D GRE sequence, fat-saturated sequence, VIBRANT, VIBE, etc.) and on the coil and magnet design. Once the signal intensity of the unenhanced breast parenchyma has been established for a given sequence and scanner, it should be repeated in the glandular tissue of all subsequent patients. If this is not the case and the initial signal intensity before contrast injection is too low, the cause is a technical problem relating to a tuning artifact, coil design, coil tuning, coil deformation, or a metal clip artifact. Subtle clip artifacts may occur even with “nonmagnetic” clips, especially in gradient echo sequences. If a technical problem is ruled out, the cause may be an old hemorrhage with hemosiderin deposits following biopsy, surgery, or radiotherapy. This sign is extremely important because the relative changes in signal intensity after contrast administration naturally depend on the initial signal intensity in the precontrast image. It may be the source of many false-positive or false-negative findings. It is advisable, then, to acquire a calibration sequence with an initial signal intensity that deviates toward lower or higher values (darker or lighter shades of gray). This would be an indication for the use of 2D gradient echo sequences over 3D gradient echo sequences, because most 2D GE sequences use longer repetition times (approximately 100–300 ms) than 3D sequences, in which the breast parenchyma has very low signal intensity and appears almost black due to the very short repetition time (less than 5–10 ms). Before analyzing the signal kinetics, the radiologist should check for proper calibration of signal intensity in the precontrast image since all relative signal changes are based on the precontrast signal intensity.

 

173

Sign

 84

a  Precontrast signal too high

1. Definition The signal intensity of breast parenchyma in the precontrast T1-weighted GRE sequence is higher than the usual range of breast signal intensity for this technique (same sequence, coil, magnet, etc.).

2. Diagram

 

174

3. Examples

4. Interpretation If the initial signal intensity in the precontrast image is too high, this generally indicates a technical problem relating to coil tuning, coil design, coil deformation, etc. or a relatively fresh hemorrhage several days old with associated hemoglobin formation. Another possibility would be an hormonal effect relating to pregnancy or lactation. The same principle applies here as in the previous signs: If the baseline signal intensity in the precontrast image is not within the usual range, this will cause a relative change in all postcontrast signal intensities and will alter the analysis of kinetic parameters in the enhancement curve.

 

175

Sign

 85

a Maximum initial signal increase lower than the malignant threshold

1. Definition The maximum percentage initial signal increase in a breast lesion after contrast injection is below the usual increase for invasive cancers.

2. Diagram

3. Examples

 

176

4. Interpretation Besides initial signal intensity, it is extremely important to consider the amplitude of the initial signal increase up to the breakpoint in the enhancement curve. The vascularity that is induced within a malignant tumor by angiogenesis has a very consistent structure due to the similarity of the relative enzyme changes that occur in malignancies. Indeed, this is a universal law of nature. When signal changes are detected within an area that is suspicious for cancer (see sign 86), this is considered very typical tumor behavior. But if, as in this sign, the initial signal increase is markedly below the typical range, it is likely that the lesion is benign (papilloma or fibroadenoma). The differential diagnosis should also include a technical problem related to incorrect settings (incorrect ROI that includes nonenhancing glandular tissue or fat). A biopsied carcinoma may also show a loss of initial enhancement due to microhemorrhages. A fourth possibility for this initial enhancement pattern could be a carcinoma during or after chemotherapy. This cause is easily determined from the prior history.

 

177

Sign

 86

a Maximum initial signal increase within the malignant range

1. Definition The maximum initial signal increase in a breast lesion after contrast injection is within the usual range for invasive cancers.

2. Diagram

 

178

3. Examples

4. Interpretation Invasive cancers that grow larger than 2 mm induce tumor angiogenesis leading to an increase in vascularity and the formation of tumor vessels. The latter are primitive vessels or “tubes” that lack a media and adventitia and have numerous defects in the basal membrane. This universal process of tumor angiogenesis is demonstrable in all carcinomas and in all mammals. Because the initial signal kinetics reflect this tumor angiogenesis, carcinomas typically fall within a characteristic range of initial enhancement, and a given technique can measure this range with high reproducibility. Of course, this relative increase is also influenced by the type and dosage of contrast material and especially by the selection of the pulse sequence, coil, and MR scanner. Once established, practically all viable portions of invasive cancers will enhance within this initial range. Fibroadenomas (myxoid or fibrous) and papillomas are generally below or above this range and rarely fall within this initial “malignant” zone of enhancement.

 

179

Sign

 87

a Maximum initial signal increase above the malignant threshold

1. Definition The maximum initial signal increase in a breast lesion after contrast injection is above the usual increase for invasive cancers.

2. Diagram

 

180

3. Examples

4. Interpretation Extremely intense initial enhancement during the first 1–2 minutes that is well above the usual range for invasive cancers is not typical of carcinomas. It is found in myxoid fibroadenomas, which also have a rich blood supply. Cancers are less likely to show this high initial peak unless there is an associated technical defect causing a false-low initial signal intensity (clip artifact, old hemorrhage, etc.) that alters the relative percentage increase. Nevertheless, the most likely diagnosis with this enhancement pattern is myxoid fibroadenoma.

 

181

Sign

 88

a  Pseudocentric enhancement

1. Definition A lesion with initial uniform enhancement shows decreasing peripheral signal intensity (washout) while the center maintains its high initial postcontrast signal.

2. Diagram

 

182

3. Examples

4. Interpretation There are lesions that show very rapid wash-in and equally dramatic washout at their periphery while the center remains constant after the wash-in phase. As a result, the periphery shows a rapid relative decline in percentage signal intensity while the center shows a more gradual decline or even maintains a constant intensity. This pattern indicates a well-vascularized aggressive cancer, usually a grade 3 neoplasm, that has not yet undergone central necrosis. At first glance, the center appears to show relatively greater enhancement but this is an optical illusion caused by signal washout from the tumor periphery.

 

183

Sign

 89

a  Clip sign

1. Definition Signal distortion in all sequences (T1-weighted, T2-weighted, pre- and postcontrast), stronger in GE sequences than in TSE sequences.

2. Diagram

 

184

3. Examples

4. Interpretation Surgical clips may produce signal voids in all sequences, with “nonmagnetic clips” causing less pronounced signal voids than paramagnetic clips. It is important to recognize clip artifacts and accurately describe the location and size of the signal void so that the surgeon will not conclude the absence of cancer based on a negative MRI finding. Clip artifacts are much more pronounced in gradient-echo sequences due to the lack of refocusing than in spin-echo sequences. They also depend on the orientation of the imaging plane. Clip artifacts are not only seen with properly applied clips but may sometimes result from intraoperative metallic wear debris. Hemosiderin deposits associated with bleeding or biopsy may be so massive that they create signal voids similar to clip artifacts in all sequences. Clip artifacts are relatively easy to identify from the patient’s history, however.

 

185

Sign

 90

a  Fat-water cyst

1. Definition A double fluid layer (fat and water) within a cyst.

2. Diagram

 

186

3. Examples

4. Interpretation A cystic structure in which lipid- and water-containing fluid components can be detected on preand postcontrast T1-weighted images and T2-weighted TSE images is usually a result of percutaneous biopsy and in rare cases may result from trauma (a fall down stairs, motor vehicle accident, seat belt injury), inflammation, or anticoagulant use (aspirin, etc.). Several of these causes may be operative in some patients. I have never personally seen a bilocular fat-water cyst in an “untreated” breast, nor have I encountered a cystic carcinoma following intralesional hemorrhage or biopsy.

 

187

Sign

 91

a  Unilateral hormone reversal sign

1. Definition Previous bilateral areas of enhancement disappear after the patient has stopped hormone replacement therapy (for at least 1–3 months), but only in one breast and not the other.

2. Diagram

 

188

3. Examples

4. Interpretation If bilateral areas of enhancement are found in a patient on hormone replacement therapy, and they disappear in one breast after therapy is discontinued but are still present in the other, this is considered strong evidence of residual DCIS or invasive lobular carcinoma in the enhancing breast. A far less likely explanation would be an inflammation in the enhancing breast (in which case there would be corresponding clinical and serologic findings) or the effect of a hormone patch on the skin of the enhancing breast. This is easily determined by visual inspection and from the history.

 

189

Sign

 92

a  Bilateral hormone reversal sign

1. Definition Previous bilateral areas of enhancement disappear in both breasts after the patient has stopped hormone replacement therapy (for at least 1–3 months).

2. Diagram

 

190

3. Examples

4. Interpretation Ordinarily, bilateral enhancing areas due entirely to hormonal effects will disappear in 1–3 months after the withdrawal of hormone replacement therapy. This would be a compelling sign that the previous enhancing areas were due entirely to the effects of HRT. Based on this experience, we do not order routine MR mammography for patients on HRT due to frequent problems of diagnosis and differential diagnosis (in approximately 85% of these patients).

 

191

Sign

 93

a  Hormone nonreversal sign

1. Definition Previous bilateral areas of enhancement are still present after the patient has stopped hormone replacement therapy (for at least 1–3 months).

2. Diagram

 

192

3. Examples

4. Interpretation The differential diagnosis of this sign includes bilateral DCIS and bilateral invasive lobular carcinoma. Another possibility is continued hormone exposure from a patch, ointment, etc. due to a lack of patient cooperation or comprehension. Bilateral benign lesions and inflammation are also conceivable but rare.

 

193

Sign

 94

a  Intravascular contrast sign

1. Definition A lesion shows a strong wash-in and washout curve after the injection of an extravascular contrast agent (e.g., Gd-DTPA) but shows continuous, progressive enhancement after the injection of an intravascular contrast agent.

2. Diagram

3. Examples

 

194

4. Interpretation If a lesion shows a “classic” malignant enhancement curve with strong initial wash-in and subsequent washout, this means that the lesion contains a network of small vessels and arteriovenous shunts that permit rapid clearance of the extravascular contrast agent Gd-DTPA. If the same lesion shows progressive enhancement after the administration of an intravascular contrast agent, it may be assumed that “leaks” are present within the angiogenesis network. This is a very strong sign of carcinoma.

 

195

Sign

 95

a  Pectoralis pseudolesion

1. Definition Lesion or spot at the lateral border of the pectoralis muscle, isointense to muscle and often bilateral, which “melts” into the muscle on neighboring slices.

2. Diagram

 

196

3. Examples

4. Interpretation Nodular soft-tissue masses that are isointense to muscle, generally with a detectable fibrous structure and/or muscular extensions with lipid elements, are normal anatomic findings in the lateral portions of the pectoralis major and minor muscles. They should not be misinterpreted as lymph nodes or carcinoma. Their enhancement characteristics are identical to muscle, and they do not show malignant-type wash-in or washout.

 

197

Sign

 96

a  Tumor recovery sign

1. Definition A new focus with malignant-type enhancement (wash-in, washout, ring, etc.) is detected during or after chemotherapy.

2. Diagram

 

198

3. Examples

4. Interpretation If a tumor initially shrinks or ceases to enhance in response to chemotherapy but then develops new areas that show classic wash-in and washout effects not previously recorded, this is an extremely poor prognostic sign. It means that the tumor has “recovered” and is inducing new and effective angiogenesis. This should prompt reconsideration and revision of the current treatment, as a tumor displaying new malignant features on MRI should be considered a very aggressive lesion.

 

199

Sign

 97

a  Incorrect shimming sign

1. Definition Water-filled compartments in a breast implant should appear dark on silicone images but instead show varying degrees of brightness.

2. Diagram

 

200

3. Examples

4. Interpretation Ordinarily, fat and water signals should be completely saturated in silicone images. But if this saturation is incomplete, a water component in the silicone image will show signal levels of varying intensity, usually trending from light to dark in one direction. Typically there is also a detectable thin pleural fluid layer in silicone images that shows similar high signal intensity. This signifies incomplete, incorrect shimming of the water signal. This effect is most apparent in patients with a unilateral implant where shimming is done over both breasts, causing the “silicone signal” to appear too low. In this case the scan should be repeated after the imaging frequency has been manually tuned to the silicone gel. A gradual trend in the signal intensity of a water component in a silicone implant should not prompt a false-positive diagnosis of intracapsular rupture. The examination should be repeated using a standard silicone frequency and perfect saturation, preferably by manually shimming only the breast that contains the implant.  

201

Sign

 98

a  Patchwork sign

1. Definition Different compartments in a lesion, separated by septations, enhance homogeneously but at markedly different levels of intensity.

2. Diagram

 

202

3. Examples

4. Interpretation A lesion that does not show classic ring enhancement and consists of multiple, relatively well-defined compartments separated by nonenhancing septa and showing a “patchwork” enhancement pattern is almost certainly a fibroadenoma made up of areas with varying degrees of fibrosis or vascularity. This interpretation is supported by additional signs of benignancy (benign wash-in, no washout, no blooming sign, no hook or root sign, no perifocal edema, no choline increase, high ADC, etc.).

 

203

Sign

 99

a  Increased unilateral subcutaneous vascular density

1. Definition More subcutaneous vessels in one breast than in the opposite breast.

2. Diagram

 

204

3. Examples

4. Interpretation The presence of increased subcutaneous vascular density in one breast generally represents a healing phase after radiotherapy or surgery. The differential diagnosis should also include an early neoplasm, especially in patients who did not have an invasive procedure. When cancer is detected in the ipsilateral breast, this sign may also indicate increased vascularization. However, I have rarely seen increased subcutaneous vessels in a tumor-bearing breast as an isolated sign, unaccompanied by the detection of additional intraparenchymal vessels. Vascular thrombosis in the contralateral breast (internal mammary artery and vein or lateral thoracic artery and vein) is also possible but is very rare (see also Sign 145 and 146).

 

205

Sign

 100

a  Increased bilateral subcutaneous veins

1. Definition More subcutaneous veins in both breasts.

2. Diagram

 

206

3. Examples

4. Interpretation Increased bilateral density of subcutaneous veins generally results from venous congestion due to heart failure. Most patients state that they also have edema in other body regions (e.g., the limbs) or are taking medication for heart failure. This sign might also result from previous bilateral irradiation (e.g., for Hodgkin disease) or the radiotherapy of a different intrathoracic tumor in which both breasts were exposed to scattered radiation.

 

207

Sign

 101

a  Special STIR signal intensity pattern

1. Definition A lesion shows homogeneous low signal intensity on T1-weighted GRE images and T2-weighted TSE images, but both high and low signal intensity are seen in different compartments of the lesion on STIR images.

2. Diagram

 

208

3. Examples

4. Interpretation If a lesion appears homogeneous on T1- and T2-weighted images and is heterogeneous on STIR images, this indicates better visualization of details in the STIR images, especially with regard to subtle tissue changes with an increased fluid content. Malignant tumors have protease activity that can dissolve surrounding tissues, creating fissures in which water can accumulate (analogous to ground fissures in an earthquake). These fluid collections are clearly visualized on STIR images, which can discriminate between the more liquid and more solid tumor components. Sharply marginated components are more consistent with a fibroadenoma, whereas ill-defined margins are more typical of carcinoma. Sign 101 may also result from a technical problem due to signal inhomogeneities, HF pulse asymmetries, etc. Further studies are needed to determine the exact significance of this sign.

 

209

Sign

 102

a  Linguine sign

1. Definition An isolated, curved, dark line with clearly definable ends floating within an implant (or within the component of an implant).

2. Diagram

 

210

3. Examples

4. Interpretation The linguine sign is produced by collapsed, free-floating remnants of the implant shell and is considered a sign of intracapsular rupture.

 

211

Sign

 103

a  Pull-away sign

1. Definition A localized separation of the inner membrane of an implant with gel on both sides.

2. Diagram

 

212

3. Examples

4. Interpretation Separation of the inner membrane or a layer of the inner membrane, with silicone gel on both sides of the detached membrane (but still contained within the outer membrane), is a sign of early intracapsular rupture. This sign is so common, however, that the term “rupture” should be used with caution, as it prompts many patients and doctors to take immediate action. In my experience, it is safe to follow the patient for several years to see how the sign develops. I have seen cases in which the pull-away sign remained unchanged for years.

 

213

Sign

 104

a  Keyhole sign

1. Definition Separation of the inner membrane of an implant, creating a radial fold that resembles a keyhole.

2. Diagram

 

214

3. Examples

4. Interpretation The keyhole sign is basically a continuation or progression of the pull-away sign in which the separated layer of the inner membrane looks like a keyhole. Like sign 103, it signifies an incipient intracapsular separation of the membrane layers, or “rupture.”

 

215

Sign

 105

a  Extracapsular silicone sign

1. Definition Silicone is detected outside the implant.

2. Diagram

 

216

3. Examples

4. Interpretation Silicone outside the capsule always signifies an extracapsular rupture. The gel can be identified on T2-weighted images and is seen even more clearly on silicone images. An extracapsular rupture generally requires treatment and is an indication for implant replacement. It is important, however, to exclude a shimming artifact (sign 97) to make sure that the extracapsular fluid is really silicone and is not water due to incorrect shimming. High signal intensity of pleural fluid in the silicone image would provide strong evidence of a shimming artifact.

 

217

Sign

 106

a  Pouch sign

1. Definition Silicone or water is detected within a fold of the shell, outside the implant.

2. Diagram

 

218

3. Examples

4. Interpretation The pouch sign is a fairly reliable sign of rupture, as it shows that implant contents are definitely outside the implant or a component of the implant. It is an indication for close-interval follow-ups or implant replacement.

 

219

Sign

 107

a  Wavy line sign

1. Definition A portion of the shell floats freely inside the implant, producing a wavy line (sometimes called the “C sign” because it resembles the letter C).

2. Diagram

 

220

3. Examples

4. Interpretation Actually an abbreviated form of the linguine sign, the wavy line sign is formed by a piece of freefloating membrane within the implant. Generally it is only a separated layer, and the rest of the shell appears intact. Like the linguine sign, the wavy line signifies an intracapsular separation (“rupture”) of the membrane layers.

 

221

Sign

 108

a  Gel bleed sign

1. Definition Silicone is detected between the implant and fibrous capsule.

2. Diagram

 

222

3. Examples

4. Interpretation The gel bleed sign is relatively difficult to detect without silicone images, as both the shell and fibrous capsule have low signal intensity. But silicone-selective images can clearly demonstrate a collection of silicone gel that protrudes through the shell but is still within the fibrous capsule. It signals incipient silicone penetration through the outer wall of the implant and represents an early stage of extracapsular rupture.

 

223

Sign

 109

a  Focal ductal fluid sign

1. Definition A focal collection of nonenhancing fluid within a duct system on T2-weighted images.

2. Diagram

 

224

3. Examples

4. Interpretation Visible fluid stasis within a single duct or duct system indicates an obstruction of the duct system by an intraductal mass, i.e., a benign tumor such as papilloma or a malignant tumor such as intraductal carcinoma or DCIS. Generally a carcinoma would also show marked enhancement. A papilloma may show little or no enhancement, however, in which case the focal ductal fluid sign would be the only evidence of an intraductal tumor. Intraductal inflammation with incipient abscess formation is less common. (See also signs 132 and 133).

 

225

Sign

 110

a  Two-chamber sign

1. Definition Sharply delineated enhancing lesions that are interconnected and show high T2-weighted signal intensity.

2. Diagram

3. Examples

 

226

4. Interpretation The two-chamber sign generally results from intraductal inflammation in the form of focal ductitis or incipient mastitis. A small mucinous carcinoma may also have this presentation in rare cases, but this lesion would have a large soft-tissue component with malignant-type enhancement kinetics in addition to the two-chamber sign.

 

227

Sign

 111

a  Blood-water cyst

1. Definition A double fluid layer (blood and water) within a cyst.

2. Diagram

 

228

3. Examples

4. Interpretation A blood-water fluid level is often found in cysts following fine-needle aspiration or core biopsy. The cyst may also show peripheral inflammation (see Eclipse sign). In rare cases this sign may also be found in an unbiopsied cyst, usually following palpation or the initiation of anticoagulant use (aspirin, etc.). A simple, asymptomatic blood-water cyst does not require treatment.

 

229

Sign

 112

a  Blackberry sign

1. Definition A cluster of small, round, sharply circumscribed, enhancing nodules resembling a blackberry.

2. Diagram

 

230

3. Examples

4. Interpretation The blackberry sign is almost invariably a sign of benignancy and suggests multiple small papillomas or fibroadenomas, especially when completely surrounded by fat. An early noninvasive carcinoma (DCIS) may produce a blackberry sign within the parenchyma, but this is very rare.

 

231

Sign

 113

a  Tram lines

1. Definition Thin lines of fat intensity on both sides of a linear enhancing structure.

2. Diagram

 

232

3. Examples

4. Interpretation Tram lines almost always represent a sectional view of a blood vessel. A small incipient DCIS is extremely unlikely. A sectional view of a DCIS is a conceivable alternative to intravascular enhancement, but a vessel would have high signal intensity on T2-weighted TSE images (due to the 180° refocusing pulses), whereas DCIS would be hypointense.

 

233

Sign

 114

a  Fat separation sign

1. Definition A lesion is separated from the breast parenchyma by a usually thin, noninfiltrated layer of fat (also called the “FAT-HALO-sign”).

2. Diagram

 

234

3. Examples

4. Interpretation If a lesion, whether enhancing or nonenhancing, is separated from the rest of the parenchyma by a relatively sharp, noninfiltrated, nonenhancing layer of fat, it is most likely a benign lesion such as fibroadenoma, phylloides tumor, or papilloma. By contrast, even a small carcinoma would already have infiltrated the adjacent fatty layer.

 

235

Sign

 115

a  Bilateral pectoralis degeneration sign

1. Definition The presence of fatty spots within both pectoralis muscles, which are thin and atrophic.

2. Diagram

 

236

3. Examples

4. Interpretation Bilateral atrophy, hypotrophy, or fatty degeneration of both pectoralis muscles is generally a sign of muscular disease (muscular dystrophy, etc.).

 

237

Sign

 116

a  Unilateral pectoralis atrophy sign

1. Definition One pectoralis muscle is atrophic while the other is normal.

2. Diagram

 

238

3. Examples

4. Interpretation Unilateral pectoralis muscle atrophy is a feature of Poland syndrome. Unilateral breast asymmetry or hypoplasia of the ipsilateral breast may also be present in these cases.

 

239

Sign

 117

a  Intact retroglandular fat layer

1. Definition A thin, intact fatty layer is present between a lesion near the pectoralis muscle and the muscle itself.

2. Diagram

 

240

3. Examples

4. Interpretation With a deep retroglandular lesion located very close to the pectoralis muscle, a malignant lesion will almost always show signs of penetrating the thin fat layer and invading the muscle. A benign lesion, on the other hand (fibroadenoma, cyst, etc.), will leave the fat layer intact. Consequently, this sign is very helpful in discriminating between benign and malignant lesions.

 

241

Sign

 118

a  STIR-selective perifocal edema

1. Definition Band of edema around a lesion, visible only on STIR images and not on T2-weighted TSE images.

2. Diagram

 

242

3. Examples

4. Interpretation It is still unclear why edema is detectable on STIR images but not on T2-weighted TSE images. Presumably this results from the greater sensitivity of the STIR sequence to edema. In the few cases where we have observed this sign, all the lesions were fibroadenomas.

 

243

Sign

 119

a  Border sign

1. Definition The border of a lesion can be discerned, even within a small area of parenchyma, following contrast injection.

2. Diagram

 

244

3. Examples

4. Interpretation With this sign, the border of a lesion can be clearly discerned and characterized, even within a very small area of parenchyma. An irregular border is suggestive of carcinoma, while a smooth, regular border suggests fibroadenoma or papilloma. In all cases the lesion is clearly definable and does not represent adenosis.

 

245

Sign

 120

a  Cross-talk sign

1. Definition The presence of thin, thread-like connections (sometimes enhancing) between two enhancing lesions.

2. Diagram

 

246

3. Examples

4. Interpretation Two small, enhancing lesions that are interconnected by thin lines that also enhance (usually more intensely then the lesions) are almost always malignant. The only other possibility is severe inflammatory foci, which may exhibit this sign in rare cases.

 

247

Sign

 121

a  Unilateral subcutaneous rim enhancement

1. Definition Thin line of peripheral enhancement beneath the skin of one breast and not the other.

2. Diagram

 

248

3. Examples

4. Interpretation Peripheral subcutaneous enhancement in one breast is generally a sign of severe inflammation or inflammatory carcinoma. Another possibility is postirradiation change in a patient who has undergone radiotherapy.

 

249

Sign

 122

a Intense peripheral rim on postcontrast STIR

1. Definition Lesion shows a narrow rim of high signal intensity on a postcontrast STIR image.

2. Diagram

 

250

3. Examples

4. Interpretation Peripheral high signal intensity on postcontrast STIR images appears to represent very active peripheral areas of tumor angiogenesis around a high-grade carcinoma. To date, we have not detected this sign in association with benign lesions.

 

251

Sign

 123

a  Increased unilateral nipple enhancement

1. Definition The nipple of a previously untreated, cancerous breast shows increased enhancement relative to the contralateral nipple.

2. Diagram

 

252

3. Examples

4. Interpretation When a previously untreated breast harbors a suspicious lesion and the ipsilateral nipple also shows unilateral enhancement, this is a strong sign of DCIS involvement close to the carcinoma. An alternative explanation in a treated breast would be prior radiotherapy inciting an inflammatory reaction in the nipple.

 

253

Sign

 124

a  Small perifocal enhancement

1. Definition The ratio of the radius of perifocal enhancement to the radius of the core lesion is less than 1.6.

2. Diagram

 

254

3. Examples

4. Interpretation Perifocal enhancement around a carcinoma is itself a sign of carcinoma. A detailed analysis of these lesions has shown, however, that inflammatory processes consistently occur within a very small radius around a carcinoma. The differential diagnosis would include concomitant DCIS, but this is more likely to occur at a greater distance from the main lesion (see sign 125).

 

255

Sign

 125

a  Large perifocal enhancement

1. Definition The ratio of the radius of perifocal enhancement to the radius of the core lesion is greater than 1.6.

2. Diagram

 

256

3. Examples

4. Interpretation A larger area of perifocal enhancement measuring more than 1.6 times the radius of the core lesion is unlikely to be perifocal inflammation and is more consistent with concomitant DCIS. The size and location of the DCIS should be accurately reported to the surgeon to ensure that all tiny malignant foci are removed.

 

257

Sign

 126

a  Dark heart sign

1. Definition The heart does not enhance after contrast administration.

2. Diagram

 

258

3. Examples

4. Interpretation If the heart does not enhance after contrast injection, this simply means that an insufficient amount of contrast agent is reaching the heart. The contrast injection was either omitted or technically flawed, eliminating the possibility of a meaningful kinetic analysis. A “dark heart” means that the examination should be repeated.

 

259

Sign

 127

a  Unilateral subcutaneous edema

1. Definition Fluid in the subcutaneous region of one breast.

2. Diagram

 

260

3. Examples

4. Interpretation Unilateral subcutaneous edema is best appreciated on T2-weighted TSE or STIR images and may be a result of radiotherapy or inflammation. This is easily determined from the patient’s history. If radiotherapy and inflammation can be excluded, an inflammatory carcinoma should be suspected.

 

261

Sign

 128

a  Stacked beads sign

1. Definition Sharply circumscribed round masses that form a stacked arrangement within a duct.

2. Diagram

 

262

3. Examples

4. Interpretation Small, round, sharply circumscribed masses that appear to form a stacked arrangement within a duct system and usually enhance markedly after contrast injection are most likely to be papillomas, especially if they do not blend to form an intraductal “cord” on delayed dynamic images. Usually the surrounding duct system is visible on T2-weighted images as a result of ductal dilatation and engorgement. The masses within the duct may show all types of enhancement patterns ranging from gradual progressive enhancement to malignant-type wash-in and washout.

 

263

Sign

 129

a  Corona sign

1. Definition Small, ill-defined enhancing spots around an enhancing mass, resembling a corona or dandelion.

2. Diagram

 

264

3. Examples

4. Interpretation An annular or crown-like array of spots around an enhancing, malignant-type lesion very often represent small satellite lesions of intraductal carcinoma (DCIS, LCIS). It very rarely signifies perifocal inflammation.

 

265

Sign

 130

a  Drapery sign

1. Definition Focal, linear subcutaneous enhancement with folds.

2. Diagram

 

266

3. Examples

4. Interpretation With some cancers the subcutaneous region of the breast enhances in a circumscribed area and appears to be “thrown into folds” like a drape. Histologic examination in past cases has revealed subcutaneous lymphangiosis or subcutaneous tumor spread. We have seen no cases in which this sign was caused by inflammation.

 

267

Sign

 131

a  Crossing edema sign

1. Definition Edema crosses over the presternal fat into the opposite breast.

2. Diagram

 

268

3. Examples

4. Interpretation As a rule, edema associated with a breast lesion is confined strictly to the ipsilateral breast. The pathobiochemical and pathophysiologic changes caused by the tumor affect that breast while sparing the opposite breast. Bilateral edema may occur in association with bilateral breast cancer or in systemic diseases such as heart failure. We have seen cases, however, in which unilateral edema documented before chemotherapy “migrated” into the opposite breast after the start of chemotherapy. We have not yet found an adequate pathophysiologic explanation for this phenomenon. Tumor breakdown during chemotherapy or the spread of carcinomatous lymphangiosis to the contralateral side has been confirmed in a few isolated cases but has not been found in other cases.

 

269

Sign

 132

a  Duct obstruction sign

1. Definition A duct is enlarged and obstructed by an intraductal mass.

2. Diagram

 

270

3. Examples

4. Interpretation Intraductal masses may obstruct the duct lumen, leading to dilatation and engorgement. In our experience, the obstructing lesions are almost always papillomas and almost never intraductal carcinomas, and therefore this sign is more likely to indicate a benign lesion. Malignant lesions are apparently “permeable” and do not tend to cause duct obstruction.

 

271

Sign

 133

a  Duct nonobstruction sign

1. Definition The duct is not obstructed or enlarged by an intraductal mass, i.e., the mass is permeable.

2. Diagram

 

272

3. Examples

4. Interpretation The duct nonobstruction sign is basically the opposite of the duct obstruction sign. In our experience, an intraductal mass lesion that does not cause duct obstruction should be interpreted as intraductal carcinoma (DCIS, LCIS), especially if it shows additional malignant signs (unilateral linear or branched enhancement pattern, often with wash-in and washout). Based on current information, it is reasonable to assume that benign lesions like papillomas lead to duct obstruction while malignant lesions such as DCIS are permeable and do not obstruct the ductal system.

 

273

Sign

 134

a  Donut sign

1. Definition A small enhancing ring that is sharply demarcated in all dynamic images.

2. Diagram

 

274

3. Examples

4. Interpretation A small ring that is sharply delineated throughout the dynamic study and does not “fill in” is inconsistent with carcinoma and is more likely to be a sharply circumscribed benign lesion, generally a papilloma or fibroadenoma. Carcinomas also show ring enhancement, but generally only in the initial dynamic sequence. Later the enhancement fills in the central portion of the lesion (sign 19), culminating in more or less homogeneous enhancement of the entire mass.

 

275

Sign

 135

a  Camouflage sign

1. Definition A lesion is smaller and no longer enhances after chemotherapy but is still detectable as a mass on T1weighted precontrast and T2-weighted images.

2. Diagram

 

276

3. Examples

4. Interpretation As a rule, successful chemotherapy leads to a loss of tumor enhancement suggesting that viable tumor has been eradicated. But if T1-weighted precontrast images and/or T2-weighted images still demonstrate a hypointense lesion at the same location, often with a slightly reduced size, this generally means that the carcinoma is only “camouflaged.” When these lesions were examined histologically, it was found that residual cancer cells were still present within the mass and were still viable in some cases. Thus, the tumor may be described as a severely damaged but “sleeping” cancer that may continue to grow in subsequent months and years. It may eventually produce a new clone of viable cancer cells and again show malignant-type enhancement, usually appearing first at the periphery of the original tumor as a small area of centripetal ring enhancement (see sign 142, Recurrent border cancer).

 

277

Sign

 136

a  Dissolving cancer sign

1. Definition A cancer does not enhance and is not detectable after chemotherapy in T1-weighted precontrast and T2-weighted scans.

2. Diagram

 

278

3. Examples

4. Interpretation If the tumor no longer enhances after chemotherapy and is no longer detectable as a mass lesion in T1-weighted precontrast and T2-weighted images, this is an extremely positive sign suggesting that the tumor has been completely destroyed and replaced by fibrous tissue. Histologic correlations in our cases have detected no viable, residual surviving tumor cells.

 

279

Sign

 137

a  Melting candies sign

1. Definition A stack of enhancing intraductal lesions is sharply defined on early dynamic images but “melt together” on later images.

2. Diagram

 

280

3. Examples

4. Interpretation If intraductal lesions appear sharp on initial dynamic scans, like a stack of beads, and increasing blend together on delayed scans, this suggests a string of small intraductal malignant lesions (DCIS, LCIS), especially if the duct system is not obstructed.

 

281

Sign

 138

a  Constant candies sign

1. Definition A stack of enhancing intraductal lesions is sharp on early dynamic images and still have a sharp, beaded appearance on late images.

2. Diagram

 

282

3. Examples

4. Interpretation A well-defined “stacked” arrangement of small, round, enhancing intraductal lesions on both early and late dynamic scans is inconsistent with intraductal malignancies and is strongly suggestive of intraductal papillomas or diffuse papillomatosis within the duct system. Most cases show associated obstruction and dilatation of the duct system (sign 132, Duct obstruction sign).

 

283

Sign

 139

a  Bright T2w cancer

1. Definition An ill-defined enhancing lesion has a positive blooming sign and/or hook sign but is bright on T2weighted images.

2. Diagram

 

284

3. Examples

4. Interpretation A few mucinous carcinomas have such a large mucus or mucin content (more than 90% of the mass) that the entire mucinous carcinoma appears bright on T2-weighted images. Ordinarily, mucinous carcinomas are clearly detectable as mass lesions with accompanying cystic components. But if the solid components make up less than 10% of the total lesion area, contrast enhancement may appear relatively slow and the lesion may even appear hyperintense on T2-weighted images, thus contradicting the principle of sign 32 (cancers are hypointense on T2-weighted TSE images). In more than 20 years of practice, however, we have seen only one instance of a “bright T2W cancer.” The rest were clearly detectable carcinomas with malignant wash-in and washout kinetics and adjacent or intratumoral cystic mucinous components. Sign 139 should remind us that enhancing lesions with ill-defined margins and high signal intensity on T2-weighted TSE images may possibly be malignant: a mucinous carcinoma containing abundant mucin. This is particularly the case if the lesion shows a positive blooming sign, hook sign, or both.

 

285

Sign

 140

a  Enhancing pectoralis

1. Definition Enhancing infiltration of one pectoralis muscle, usually on the same side as a cancerous breast.

2. Diagram

 

286

3. Examples

4. Interpretation Enhancing infiltration of the pectoralis muscle behind a breast that contains a cancerous tumor usually signifies malignant invasion of the muscle by the cancer.

 

287

Sign

 141

a  Resolving edema sign

1. Definition Edema in a cancerous breast clears after chemotherapy.

2. Diagram

 

288

3. Examples

4. Interpretation The resolution of edema in a cancer-bearing breast after chemotherapy is a sign of successful chemotherapy with an effective cytostatic agent. Generally there will be complete, unilateral resolution of edema in the affected breast.

 

289

Sign

 142

a  Recurrent border cancer

1. Definition After chemotherapy, a strongly enhancing (small) cancer reappears at the border of the previous (successfully treated) cancer, which is still visible on T2-weighted TSE images.

2. Diagram

 

290

3. Examples

4. Interpretation The recurrent border cancer sign is a bad omen. It means that a new clone of aggressive cells has developed that is resistant to the previous chemotherapy regimen, which therefore must be changed. Generally the border cancer first appears at the periphery of the original tumor, which has been “successfully treated” in the first round of chemotherapy but is still visible on T1- and T2-weighted images (see Camouflage sign). Now, however, the cancer displays all kinetic signs of malignancy such as wash-in and washout and is very aggressive.

 

291

Sign

 143

a  Bright round lymph nodes on T2-weighted TSE images

1. Definition Rounded, enhancing lymph nodes that are hyperintense to breast parenchyma on T2-weighted TSE images.

2. Diagram

 

292

3. Examples

4. Interpretation Normal lymph nodes present a reniform or bean shape, have a well-defined hilar notch, and are less than 10 mm (preferably less than 5 mm) in size. If a lymph node assumes a round shape and loses its hilar notch or shows marked enhancement, this usually signifies metastatic involvement of the node. Metastatic lymph nodes generally have low signal intensity on T2-weighted images, however. So far we have observed “bright lymph nodes” only in patients with inflammatory breast disease; we have never seen then in association with cancer. Apparently this is a sign of benign lymphadenopathy.

 

293

Sign

 144

a  Normal cardiac and aortic enhancement

1. Definition A region of interest (ROI) in the left ventricle and aorta shows a typical wash-in/washout curve after the injection of 0.1 mmol/kg body weight gadolinium-DTPA.

2. Diagram

 

294

3. Examples

4. Interpretation Rapid initial enhancement by approximately 100% (wash-in) followed by a sharp decline of signal intensity (washout) in the left ventricle and aorta is typical of the successful injection of contrast material. This curve indicates that the contrast injection was technically correct and that a complete dose has been injected into the body. If this curve is not detected, it should be assumed that the injection was incomplete or unsuccessful. In this case the kinetic data cannot be meaningfully interpreted.

 

295

Sign

 145

a  Increasing unilateral vessel sign

1. Definition An increasing number of vessels can be detected in (usually one) breast during follow-up examinations.

2. Diagram

 

296

3. Examples

4. Interpretation A unilateral increase in breast vascularity, usually subcutaneous, has been viewed as a very early sign of carcinoma formation that was later documented in follow-up examinations. Generally it took six months to two years before cancer was detected in that breast at follow-up. It is also conceivable that this sign is a precursor of inflammation (mastitis), but so far the pronounced form has been observed only in breasts that went on to develop cancer.

 

297

Sign

 146

a  Increasing bilateral vessel sign

1. Definition An increasing number of vessels can be detected in both breasts during follow-up examinations.

2. Diagram

 

298

3. Examples

4. Interpretation A bilateral increase in vascularity compared with previous images is generally not a manifestation of breast disease but of a systemic underlying disease such as developing heart failure.

 

299

Sign

 147

a  Lesion with high precontrast signal intensity

1. Definition The precontrast signal intensity of a breast lesion is higher than the normal signal intensity of breast parenchyma.

2. Diagram

 

300

3. Examples

4. Interpretation Increased signal intensity in the precontrast image is almost always a benign sign. It may signify fat necrosis (oil cyst) or hemorrhage with methemoglobin formation (after biopsy, anticoagulant medication, a fall onto the breast, etc.). This sign may also represent an intramammary lymph node, which should be interpreted as benign. Lymph node metastases are generally hypointense in the precontrast image and enhance intensely after contrast administration. In very rare cases, liposarcoma may present with increased precontrast signal intensity (due to fatty tissue). This would be the only, very rare example of a malignant lesion with this sign.

 

301

 

a  References

References 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12.

13. 14. 15. 16. 17.

18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24.

 

302

1st International Congress on MR Mammography. Jena, Germany, 29–31 May 1997. Abstracts. Eur Radiol 1997; 7:605–624. 2nd International Congress on MR Mammography. 21–23 September 2000. Jena, Germany. Abstracts. Eur Radiol 2000; 10:F1–56. International consensus conference. Image-detected breast cancer: state of the art diagnosis and treatment. Breast J 2002; 8:70–76. Abstracts of the 4th International Congress on MR-Mammography, 28–30 September 2006, Jena, Germany. Eur Radiol 2006; 16 Suppl 5:E1–110. Abe H, Kurumi Y, Naka S, et al. Open-configuration MR-guided microwave thermocoagulation therapy for metastatic liver tumors from breast cancer. Breast Cancer 2005; 12:26–31. Abenavoli FM, Corelli R, Giordano L. Breast implant evaluation: pitfall of magnetic resonance imaging. Plast Reconstr Surg 2003; 111:507–508. Agnese DM. Advances in breast imaging. Surg Technol Int 2005; 14:51–56. Agoston AT, Daniel BL, Herfkens RJ, et al. Intensity-modulated parametric mapping for simultaneous display of rapid dynamic and high-spatial-resolution breast MR imaging data. Radiographics 2001; 21:217–226. Agrawal G, Chen JH, Baick CH, et al. Pathological complete response in triple negative poorly differentiated invasive ductal breast carcinoma detected during pregnancy. J Clin Oncol 2007; 25:2618–2620. Ahearn TS, Staff RT, Redpath TW, Semple SI. The effects of renal variation upon measurements of perfusion and leakage volume in breast tumours. Phys Med Biol 2004; 49:2041–2051. Ahmed R, Ali SM. Role of imaging in diagnosis of carcinoma of breast. J Coll Physicians Surg Pak 2005; 15:238–241. Ahn CY, DeBruhl ND, Gorczyca DP, Shaw WW, Bassett LW. Comparative silicone breast implant evaluation using mammography, sonography, and magnetic resonance imaging: experience with 59 implants. Plast Reconstr Surg 1994; 94:620–627. Ahn CY, Narayanan K, Shaw WW. In vivo anatomic study of cutaneous perforators in free flaps using magnetic resonance imaging. J Reconstr Microsurg 1994; 10:157––163. Ahn CY, Shaw WW. Regional silicone-gel migration in patients with ruptured implants. Ann Plast Surg 1994; 33:201–208. Ahn CY, Shaw WW, Narayanan K, Gorczyca DP, DeBruhl ND, Bassett LW. Residual silicone detection using MRI following previous breast implant removal: case reports. Aesthetic Plast Surg 1995; 19:361–367. Ahn CY, Shaw WW, Narayanan K, et al. Definitive diagnosis of breast implant rupture using magnetic resonance imaging. Plast Reconstr Surg 1993; 92:681–691. Akazawa K, Tamaki Y, Taguchi T, et al. Preoperative evaluation of residual tumor extent by three-dimensional magnetic resonance imaging in breast cancer patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Breast J 2006; 12:130–137. Akbas H, Sahin B, Eroglu L, et al. Estimation of breast prosthesis volume by the Cavalieri principle using magnetic resonance images. Aesthetic Plast Surg 2004; 28:275–280. Akcan A, Akyildiz H, Deneme MA, Akgun H, Aritas Y. Granulomatous lobular mastitis: a complex diagnostic and therapeutic problem. World J Surg 2006; 30:1403–1409. Al Sarakbi W, Worku D, Escobar PF, Mokbel K. Breast papillomas: current management with a focus on a new diagnostic and therapeutic modality. Int Semin Surg Oncol 2006; 3:1. Allgayer B, Lukas P, Loos W, Kersting-Sommerhoff B. [The MRT of the breast with 2D-spin-echo and gradient-echo sequences in diagnostically problematic cases]. Rofo 1993; 158:423–427. Alterson R, Plewes DB. Bilateral symmetry analysis of breast MRI. Phys Med Biol 2003; 48:3431–3443. Altundag K, Morandi P, Altundag O. MRI in breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2004; 351:2235–2236; author reply 2235–2236. Amano G, Ohuchi N, Ishibashi T, Ishida T, Amari M, Satomi S. Correlation of three-dimensional magnetic resonance imaging with precise histopathological map concerning carcinoma extension in the breast. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2000; 60:43–55.

25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. 41. 42. 43. 44. 45. 46. 47. 48. 49. 50. 51. 52.

Amano G, Yajima M, Moroboshi Y, Kuriya Y, Ohuchi N. MRI accurately depicts underlying DCIS in a patient with Paget’s disease of the breast without palpable mass and mammography findings. Jpn J Clin Oncol 2005; 35:149–153. Amano Y, Aoki R, Kumita S, Kumazaki T. Silicone-selective multishot echo-planar imaging for rapid MRI survey of breast implants. Eur Radiol 2007; 17:1875–1878. Ando Y, Fukatsu H, Ishigaki T, Endo T, Miyazaki M. Intramammary Extension of Breast Cancer: Diagnosis with MR Mammography. Breast Cancer 1998; 5:291–300. Ando Y, Fukatsu H, Ishiguchi T, Ishigaki T, Endo T, Miyazaki M. Diagnostic utility of tumor vascularity on magnetic resonance imaging of the breast. Magn Reson Imaging 2000; 18:807–813. Apple SK, Suthar F. How do we measure a residual tumor size in histopathology (the gold standard) after neoadjuvant chemotherapy? Breast 2006; 15:370–376. Aref M, Brechbiel M, Wiener EC. Identifying tumor vascular permeability heterogeneity with magnetic resonance imaging contrast agents. Invest Radiol 2002; 37:178–192. Aritas Y, Bedirli A, Karahan OI, Okten T, Sakrak O, Ince O. Carcinosarcoma of the breast: clinicopathologic and radiologic findings in an unusual case. Breast J 2003; 9:323–324. Armitage P, Behrenbruch C, Brady M, Moore N. Extracting and visualizing physiological parameters using dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging of the breast. Med Image Anal 2005; 9:315–329. Artemov D, Mori N, Okollie B, Bhujwalla ZM. MR molecular imaging of the Her-2/neu receptor in breast cancer cells using targeted iron oxide nanoparticles. Magn Reson Med 2003; 49:403–408. Artemov D, Mori N, Ravi R, Bhujwalla ZM. Magnetic resonance molecular imaging of the HER-2/neu receptor. Cancer Res 2003; 63:2723–2727. Artemov D, Revelon G, Atalar E, Bluemke DA, Bhujwalla ZM, Zerhouni EA. Switchable multicoil array for MR micro-imaging of breast lesions. Magn Reson Med 1999; 41:569–574. Artemov D, Solaiyappan M, Bhujwalla ZM. Magnetic resonance pharmacoangiography to detect and predict chemotherapy delivery to solid tumors. Cancer Res 2001; 61:3039–3044. Arzumanova NV. [Magnetic resonance tomography in the diagnosis of breast tumors]. Vestn Rentgenol Radiol 1999:21–24. Ascher S. MR a catalyst for improving women’s health. Diagn Imaging (San Franc) 1999; 21:199–203. Ashkar L, Mesurolle B, Tremblay F. Sonographic target sign and rim enhancement on magnetic resonance imaging in metastatic melanoma to the breast. Australas Radiol 2006; 50:237–240. Asoglu O, Ozmen V, Karanlik H, et al. Feasibility of surgical management in patients with granulomatous mastitis. Breast J 2005; 11:108–114. Athanasiou A, Vanel D, Balleyguier C, et al. Dynamic optical breast imaging: a new technique to visualise breast vessels: comparison with breast MRI and preliminary results. Eur J Radiol 2005; 54:72–79. Azavedo E, Bone B. Imaging breasts with silicone implants. Eur Radiol 1999; 9:349–355. Bagley FH. The role of magnetic resonance imaging mammography in the surgical management of the index breast cancer. Arch Surg 2004; 139:380–383; discussion 383. Baker DR. Magnetic resonance imaging of occult breast cancer. Clin Breast Cancer 2000; 1:66–67. Balu-Maestro C, Chapellier C, Bleuse A, Chanalet I, Chauvel C, Largillier R. Imaging in evaluation of response to neoadjuvant breast cancer treatment benefits of MRI. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2002; 72:145–152. Barbacioru C, Arunachalam A, Cowden D, Kahwash E, Saltz JH. Pharmacokinetic mapping of breast tumors: a new statistical analysis technique for dynamic magnetic resonance imaging. AMIA Annu Symp Proc 2003:783. Barloon TJ, Young DC, Bergus G. The role of diagnostic imaging in women with breast implants. Am Fam Physician 1996; 54:2029–2036. Bartella L, Liberman L, Morris EA, Dershaw DD. Nonpalpable mammographically occult invasive breast cancers detected by MRI. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2006; 186:865–870. Bartella L, Morris EA. Advances in breast imaging: magnetic resonance imaging. Curr Oncol Rep 2006; 8:7–13. Bartella L, Morris EA, Dershaw DD, et al. Proton MR spectroscopy with choline peak as malignancy marker improves positive predictive value for breast cancer diagnosis: preliminary study. Radiology 2006; 239:686–692. Bartella L, Smith CS, Dershaw DD, Liberman L. Imaging breast cancer. Radiol Clin North Am 2007; 45:45–67. Barton MB. Breast cancer screening. Benefits, risks, and current controversies. Postgrad Med 2005; 118:27–28, 33–26, 46.

 

303

  53. 54. 55. 56. 57. 58.

59. 60. 61. 62. 63. 64. 65.

66. 67. 68. 69. 70. 71. 72. 73. 74. 75. 76. 77.  

304

a  References Barzilai A, Horowitz A, Geier A, Degani H. Phosphate metabolites and steroid hormone receptors of benign and malignant breast tumors. A Nuclear Magnetic Resonance study. Cancer 1991; 67:2919–2925. Baum F, Fischer U, Fuzesi L, Obenauer S, Vosshenrich R, Grabbe E. [The radial scar in contrast media-enhanced MR mammography]. Rofo 2000; 172:817–823. Baum F, Fischer U, Vosshenrich R, Grabbe E. Classification of hypervascularized lesions in CE MR imaging of the breast. Eur Radiol 2002; 12:1087–1092. Baum J, Smith D. New ways to look at the breast. Harv Womens Health Watch 1998; 5:5. Bazzocchi M, Berra I, Francescutti GE, et al. [Papillary lesions of the breast: diagnostic imaging and contribution of percutaneous needle biopsy with 14G needle]. Radiol Med (Torino) 2001; 101:424–431. Bazzocchi M, Facecchia I, Zuiani C, di Loreto C, Puglisi F, Vasciaveo A. [Atypical ductal hyperplasia of the breast. Its diagnostic imaging and the role of percutaneous needle biopsy with a 14-gauge needle]. Radiol Med (Torino) 1999; 98:133–137. Bazzocchi M, Facecchia I, Zuiani C, Puglisi F, Di Loreto C, Smania S. [Diagnostic imaging of lobular carcinoma of the breast: mammographic, ultrasonographic and MR findings]. Radiol Med (Torino) 2000; 100:436–443. Bazzocchi M, Zuiani C, Panizza P, et al. Contrast-enhanced breast MRI in patients with suspicious microcalcifications on mammography: results of a multicenter trial. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2006; 186:1723–1732. Beatty JD, Porter BA. Contrast-enhanced breast magnetic resonance imaging: the surgical perspective. Am J Surg 2007; 193:600–605; discussion 605. Beck R, Heywang SH, Eiermann W, Permanetter W, Lissner J. [Contrast enhancement of the nipple in nuclear magnetic resonance tomography of the breast with Gd-DTPA]. Digitale Bilddiagn 1987; 7:167–169. Bedrosian I, Mick R, Orel SG, et al. Changes in the surgical management of patients with breast carcinoma based on preoperative magnetic resonance imaging. Cancer 2003; 98:468–473. Bedrosian I, Schlencker J, Spitz FR, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging-guided biopsy of mammographically and clinically occult breast lesions. Ann Surg Oncol 2002; 9:457–461. Beekman WH, Hage JJ, Taets van Amerongen AH, Mulder JW. Accuracy of ultrasonography and magnetic resonance imaging in detecting failure of breast implants filled with silicone gel. Scand J Plast Reconstr Surg Hand Surg 1999; 33:415–418. Beekman WH, van Straalen WR, Hage JJ, Taets van Amerongen AH, Mulder JW. Imaging signs and radiologists’ jargon of ruptured breast implants. Plast Reconstr Surg 1998; 102:1281–1289. Beier J, Buge T, Stroszczynski C, Oellinger H, Fleck E, Felix R. [2D and 3D parameter images for the analysis of contrast medium distribution in dynamic CT and MRI]. Radiologe 1998; 38:832–840. Beier J, Oellinger H, Richter CS, Fleck E, Felix R. Registered image subtraction for CT-, MR- and coronary angiography. Eur Radiol 1997; 7:82–89. Belkic K. Current dilemmas and future perspectives for breast cancer screening with a focus on optimization of magnetic resonance spectroscopic imaging by advances in signal processing. Isr Med Assoc J 2004; 6:610–618. Belli P, Costantini M, Malaspina C, Magistrelli A, Latorre G, Bonomo L. MRI accuracy in residual disease evaluation in breast cancer patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Clin Radiol 2006; 61:946–953. Belli P, Costantini M, Romani M, Marano P, Pastore G. Magnetic resonance imaging in breast cancer recurrence. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2002; 73:223–235. Belli P, Costantini M, Romani M, Pastore G. Role of magnetic resonance imaging in inflammatory carcinoma of the breast. Rays 2002; 27:299–305. Belli P, Pastore G, Romani M, Terribile D, Canade A, Costantini M. Role of magnetic resonance imaging in the diagnosis of recurrence after breast conserving therapy. Rays 2002; 27:241–257. Belli P, Romani M, Costantini M, et al. Role of magnetic resonance imaging in the pre and postchemotherapy evaluation in locally advanced breast carcinoma. Rays 2002; 27:279–290. Belli P, Romani M, Magistrelli A, Masetti R, Pastore G, Costantini M. Diagnostic imaging of breast implants: role of MRI. Rays 2002; 27:259–277. Beomonte Zobel B, Testa A, Ciccozzi A, Tella S, Calvisi G, Ambrosio A. [Intracystic papillary carcinoma of the breast assessed preoperatively with magnetic resonance]. Radiol Med (Torino) 1988; 75:673–675. Beomonte Zobel B, Testa A, Tella S, et al. [Magnetic resonance of the breast. Clinical experience with a dedicated coil]. Radiol Med (Torino) 1988; 76:146–151.

78. 79. 80. 81. 82. 83. 84. 85. 86. 87. 88. 89. 90. 91.

92. 93. 94. 95. 96. 97. 98. 99. 100. 101. 102. 103.

Beresford M, Padhani AR, Goh V, Makris A. Imaging breast cancer response during neoadjuvant systemic therapy. Expert Rev Anticancer Ther 2005; 5:893–905. Beresford MJ, Padhani AR, Taylor NJ, et al. Inter- and intraobserver variability in the evaluation of dynamic breast cancer MRI. J Magn Reson Imaging 2006; 24:1316–1325. Berg WA. Image-guided breast biopsy and management of high-risk lesions. Radiol Clin North Am 2004; 42:935–946, vii. Berg WA, Anderson ND, Zerhouni EA, Chang BW, Kuhlman JE. MR imaging of the breast in patients with silicone breast implants: normal postoperative variants and diagnostic pitfalls. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1994; 163:575–578. Berg WA, Caskey CI, Hamper UM, et al. Single- and double- lumen silicone breast implant integrity: prospective evaluation of MR and US criteria. Radiology 1995; 197:45–52. Berg WA, Gutierrez L, NessAiver MS, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of mammography, clinical examination, US, and MR imaging in preoperative assessment of breast cancer. Radiology 2004; 233:830–849. Berg WA, Nguyen TK, Middleton MS, Soo MS, Pennello G, Brown SL. MR imaging of extracapsular silicone from breast implants: diagnostic pitfalls. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2002; 178:465–472. Berna JD, Nieves FJ, Romero T, Arcas I. A multimodality approach to the diagnosis of breast hamartomas with atypical mammographic appearance. Breast J 2001; 7:2–7. Bertschinger K, Caduff R, Kubik-Huch RA. Benign intramammary and axillary lesions mimicking malignancy. Eur Radiol 2000; 10:1029–1030. Bhattarai N, Kanemaki Y, Kurihara Y, Nakajima Y, Fukuda M, Maeda I. Intraductal papilloma: features on MR ductography using a microscopic coil. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2006; 186:44–47. Bhujwalla ZM, Artemov D, Aboagye E, et al. The physiological environment in cancer vascularization, invasion and metastasis. Novartis Found Symp 2001; 240:23–38; discussion 38–45, 152–153. Bick U. [Typical and unusual findings in MR mammography]. Rofo 2000; 172:415–428. Bilbey JH, Connell DG. MRI diagnosis of a ruptured breast implant presenting as an infraclavicular mass. Can Assoc Radiol J 1993; 44:224–226. Bilimoria KY, Cambic A, Hansen NM, Bethke KP. Evaluating the impact of preoperative breast magnetic resonance imaging on the surgical management of newly diagnosed breast cancers. Arch Surg 2007; 142:441–445; discussion 445–447. Binokay F, Soyupak SK, Inal M, Celiktas M, Akgul E, Aksungur E. Primary and metastatic rhabdomyosarcoma in the breast: report of two pediatric cases. Eur J Radiol 2003; 48:282–284. Birjawi GA, Haddad MC, Tawil AN, Khoury NJ. Metastatic rhabdomyosarcoma to the breast. Eur Radiol 2001; 11:555–558. Bishop J, Poole G, Leitch M, Plewes DB. Magnetic resonance imaging of shear wave propagation in excised tissue. J Magn Reson Imaging 1998; 8:1257–1265. Bishop J, Samani A, Sciarretta J, Plewes DB. Two-dimensional MR elastography with linear inversion reconstruction: methodology and noise analysis. Phys Med Biol 2000; 45:2081–2091. Bishop JE, Santyr GE, Kelcz F, Plewes DB. Limitations of the keyhole technique for quantitative dynamic contrast-enhanced breast MRI. J Magn Reson Imaging 1997; 7:716–723. Blair S, McElroy M, Middleton MS, et al. The efficacy of breast MRI in predicting breast conservation therapy. J Surg Oncol 2006; 94:220–225. Blaumeiser B, Tjalma WA, Verslegers I, De Schepper AM, Buytaert P. Invasive papillary carcinoma of the male breast. Eur Radiol 2002; 12:2207–2210. Bluemke DA, Gatsonis CA, Chen MH, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging of the breast prior to biopsy. Jama 2004; 292:2735–2742. Bodini M, Berruti A, Bottini A, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging in comparison to clinical palpation in assessing the response of breast cancer to epirubicin primary chemotherapy. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2004; 85:211–218. Boesnach I, Friedburg H, Beth T. [Clinical benefit of compensation of motion artefacts in contrast media enhanced MRI mammography]. Biomed Tech (Berl) 2002; 47 Suppl 1 Pt 2:619–621. Boetes C. The evaluation of women with familial risk of breast cancer. J Exp Clin Cancer Res 2002; 21:97–101. Boetes C, Barentsz JO, Mus RD, et al. MR characterization of suspicious breast lesions with a gadolinium-enhanced TurboFLASH subtraction technique. Radiology 1994; 193:777–781.

 

305

 

a  References

104. Boetes C, Mus RD, Holland R, et al. Breast tumors: comparative accuracy of MR imaging relative to mammography and US for demonstrating extent. Radiology 1995; 197:743–747. 105. Boetes C, Stoutjesdijk M. MR imaging in screening women at increased risk for breast cancer. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 2001; 9:357–372, vii. 106. Boetes C, Strijk SP, Holland R, Barentsz JO, Van Der Sluis RF, Ruijs JH. False-negative MR imaging of malignant breast tumors. Eur Radiol 1997; 7:1231–1234. 107. Boetes C, Veltman J. Screening women at increased risk with MRI. Cancer Imaging 2005; 5 Spec No A:S10–15. 108. Boetes C, Veltman J, van Die L, Bult P, Wobbes T, Barentsz JO. The role of MRI in invasive lobular carcinoma. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2004; 86:31–37. 109. Boets A, Van Steen A, Van Ongeval C, Drijkoningen R, Christiaens B. Familial tubular breast carcinoma. Jbr-Btr 2005; 88:114–115. 110. Boggis CR, Bundred NJ. Magnetic-resonance imaging in breast cancer. Lancet 1998; 351:1362. 111. Bohris C, Jenne JW, Rastert R, et al. MR monitoring of focused ultrasound surgery in a breast tissue model in vivo. Magn Reson Imaging 2001; 19:167–175. 112. Bolan PJ, Nelson MT, Yee D, Garwood M. Imaging in breast cancer: Magnetic resonance spectroscopy. Breast Cancer Res 2005; 7:149–152. 113. Bollet MA, Thibault F, Bouillon K, et al. Role of dynamic magnetic resonance imaging in the evaluation of tumor response to preoperative concurrent radiochemotherapy for large breast cancers: a prospective Phase II study. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2007. 114. Bombardieri E, Gianni L. The choice of the correct imaging modality in breast cancer management. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2004; 31 Suppl 1:S179–186. 115. Bone B, Aspelin P, Bronge L, Isberg B, Perbeck L, Veress B. Sensitivity and specificity of MR mammography with histopathological correlation in 250 breasts. Acta Radiol 1996; 37:208–213. 116. Bone B, Aspelin P, Isberg B, Perbeck L, Veress B. Contrast-enhanced MR imaging of the breast in patients with breast implants after cancer surgery. Acta Radiol 1995; 36:111–116. 117. Bone B, Isberg B, Perbeck L, Aspelin P. [Magnetic resonance tomography. A new method in the diagnosis of breast cancer]. Lakartidningen 1993; 90:2590–2592. 118. Bone B, Pentek Z, Perbeck L, Veress B. Diagnostic accuracy of mammography and contrast-enhanced MR imaging in 238 histologically verified breast lesions. Acta Radiol 1997; 38:489–496. 119. Bone B, Szabo BK, Perbeck LG, Veress B, Aspelin P. Can contrast-enhanced MR imaging predict survival in breast cancer? Acta Radiol 2003; 44:373–378. 120. Bone B, Wiberg MK, Parrado C, Falkmer U, Aspelin P, Gad A. Mechanism of contrast enhancement in breast lesions at MR imaging. Acta Radiol 1998; 39:494–500. 121. Bone B, Wiberg MK, Szabo BK, Szakos A, Danielsson R. Comparison of 99mTc-sestamibi scintimammography and dynamic MR imaging as adjuncts to mammography in the diagnosis of breast cancer. Acta Radiol 2003; 44:28–34. 122. Bone BK, Szabo B, Palko A, Aspelin P. [Magnetic resonance imaging in the diagnosis of breast diseases]. Orv Hetil 2001; 142:2123–2131. 123. Bongers V, van Rijk PP. [MRI recommended for patients with axillary lymph node metastases from an occult breast carcinoma]. Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd 1997; 141:2256–2257. 124. Bootz F, Keiner S, Schulz T, Scheffler B, Seifert V. Magnetic resonance imaging – guided biopsies of the petrous apex and petroclival region. Otol Neurotol 2001; 22:383–388. 125. Bosmans H, Van Ongeval C, Vandenbosch G, Van Steen A, Marchal G. Review of MR mammography techniques. Jbr-Btr 2000; 83:122–126. 126. Boston RC, Schnall MD, Englander SA, Landis JR, Moate PJ. Estimation of the content of fat and parenchyma in breast tissue using MRI T1 histograms and phantoms. Magn Reson Imaging 2005; 23:591–599. 127. Boulet P, Taourel P, Prat X, Pujol J. Tumour detection and staging by contrast enhanced MRI. J Exp Clin Cancer Res 2002; 21:37–38. 128. Boverman G, Miller EL, Li A, et al. Quantitative spectroscopic diffuse optical tomography of the breast guided by imperfect a priori structural information. Phys Med Biol 2005; 50:3941–3956. 129. Boyer B, Naudinat E, Falise B, et al. [Role of MRI in pre-clinical breast lesions. Preliminary results]. J Radiol 1994; 75:505–513.  

306

130. Brachet C, Dufrane JP, Van De Casseye M, Ost M, Debusscher L. [Bilateral breast masses]. Rev Med Brux 2000; 21:165–169. 131. Bradbury A, Olopade OI. The case for individualized screening recommendations for breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2006; 24:3328–3330. 132. Bradley AJ, Carrington BM, Hammond CL, Swindell R, Magee B. Accuracy of axillary MR imaging in treated breast cancer for distinguishing between recurrent tumour and treatment effects: does intravenous Gd-DTPA enhancement help in cases of diagnostic dilemma? Clin Radiol 2000; 55:921–928. 133. Bradley WG, Jr. Optimizing lesion contrast without using contrast agents. J Magn Reson Imaging 1999; 10:442–449. 134. Braeuning MP, Pisano ED. New modalities in breast imaging: digital mammography and magnetic resonance imaging. Breast Cancer Res Treat 1995; 35:31–38. 135. Braga L, Semelka RC, Pietrobon R, Martin D, de Barros N, Guller U. Does hypervascularity of liver metastases as detected on MRI predict disease progression in breast cancer patients? AJR Am J Roentgenol 2004; 182:1207–1213. 136. Brasch R, Pham C, Shames D, et al. Assessing tumor angiogenesis using macromolecular MR imaging contrast media. J Magn Reson Imaging 1997; 7:68–74. 137. Brasch R, Turetschek K. MRI characterization of tumors and grading angiogenesis using macromolecular contrast media: status report. Eur J Radiol 2000; 34:148–155. 138. Brem RF, Fishman M, Rapelyea JA. Detection of ductal carcinoma in situ with mammography, breast specific gamma imaging, and magnetic resonance imaging: a comparative study. Acad Radiol 2007; 14:945–950. 139. Brem RF, Tempany CM, Zerhouni EA. MR detection of breast implant rupture. J Comput Assist Tomogr 1992; 16:157–159. 140. Brenner RJ. Breast MR imaging. An analysis of its role with respect to other imaging and interventional modalities. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 1994; 2:705–723. 141. Brenner RJ. Asymmetric densities of the breast: strategies for imaging evaluation. Semin Roentgenol 2001; 36:201–216. 142. Brenner RJ, Rothman BJ. Detection of primary breast cancer in women with known adenocarcinoma metastatic to the axilla: use of MRI after negative clinical and mammographic examination. J Magn Reson Imaging 1997; 7:1153–1158. 143. Brenner RJ, Shellock FG, Rothman BJ, Giuliano A. Technical note: magnetic resonance imaging-guided pre-operative breast localization using „freehand technique“. Br J Radiol 1995; 68:1095–1098. 144. Brewster A, Helzlsouer K. Breast cancer epidemiology, prevention, and early detection. Curr Opin Oncol 2001; 13:420–425. 145. Brinck U, Fischer U, Korabiowska M, Jutrowski M, Schauer A, Grabbe E. The variability of fibroadenoma in contrast-enhanced dynamic MR mammography. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1997; 168:1331–1334. 146. Brix G, Kiessling F, Lucht R, et al. Microcirculation and microvasculature in breast tumors: pharmacokinetic analysis of dynamic MR image series. Magn Reson Med 2004; 52:420–429. 147. Brookes JA, Murray AD, Redpath TW, Needham G, Gilbert FJ. Choice of contrast enhancement index for dynamic magnetic resonance mammography. Magn Reson Imaging 1996; 14:1023–1031. 148. Brookes JA, Redpath TW, Gilbert FJ, Murray AD, Staff RT. Accuracy of T1 measurement in dynamic contrast-enhanced breast MRI using two- and three-dimensional variable flip angle fast low-angle shot. J Magn Reson Imaging 1999; 9:163–171. 149. Brookes JA, Redpath TW, Gilbert FJ, Needham G, Murray AD. Measurement of spin-lattice relaxation times with FLASH for dynamic MRI of the breast. Br J Radiol 1996; 69:206–214. 150. Brooksby B, Pogue BW, Jiang S, et al. Imaging breast adipose and fibroglandular tissue molecular signatures by using hybrid MRI-guided near-infrared spectral tomography. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2006; 103:8828–8833. 151. Brown J, Buckley D, Coulthard A, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging screening in women at genetic risk of breast cancer: imaging and analysis protocol for the UK multicentre study. UK MRI Breast Screening Study Advisory Group. Magn Reson Imaging 2000; 18:765–776. 152. Brown J, Coulthard A, Dixon AK, et al. Protocol for a national multi-centre study of magnetic resonance imaging screening in women at genetic risk of breast cancer. Breast 2000; 9:78–82. 153. Brown J, Smith RC, Lee CH. Incidental enhancing lesions found on MR imaging of the breast. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2001; 176:1249–1254.  

307

 

a  References

154. Brown JE, Coleman RE. Assessment of the effects of breast cancer on bone and the response to therapy. Breast 2002; 11:375–385. 155. Brown MS, Stemmer SM, Simon JH, et al. White matter disease induced by high-dose chemotherapy: longitudinal study with MR imaging and proton spectroscopy. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 1998; 19:217–221. 156. Brown SL, Middleton MS, Berg WA, Soo MS, Pennello G. Prevalence of rupture of silicone gel breast implants revealed on MR imaging in a population of women in Birmingham, Alabama. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2000; 175:1057–1064. 157. Brown SL, Pennello G, Berg WA, Soo MS, Middleton MS. Silicone gel breast implant rupture, extracapsular silicone, and health status in a population of women. J Rheumatol 2001; 28:996–1003. 158. Brown SL, Silverman BG, Berg WA. Rupture of silicone-gel breast implants: causes, sequelae, and diagnosis. Lancet 1997; 350:1531–1537. 159. Brown V, Carty NJ. A case of nodular fascitis of the breast and review of the literature. Breast 2005; 14:384–387. 160. Buadu AA, Buadu LD, Murakami J, Murayama S, Hashiguchi N, Masuda K. Enhancement of the Nipple-AreolarComplex on Contrast-Enhanced MR Imaging of the Breast. Breast Cancer 1998; 5:285–289. 161. Buadu LD, Murakami J, Murayama S, et al. Breast lesions: correlation of contrast medium enhancement patterns on MR images with histopathologic findings and tumor angiogenesis. Radiology 1996; 200:639–649. 162. Buadu LD, Murakami J, Murayama S, et al. Patterns of peripheral enhancement in breast masses: correlation of findings on contrast medium enhanced MRI with histologic features and tumor angiogenesis. J Comput Assist Tomogr 1997; 21:421–430. 163. Buchanan CL, Morris EA, Dorn PL, Borgen PI, Van Zee KJ. Utility of breast magnetic resonance imaging in patients with occult primary breast cancer. Ann Surg Oncol 2005; 12:1045–1053. 164. Buchberger W, DeKoekkoek-Doll P, Obrist P, Dunser M. [Value of MR tomography in inconclusive mammography findings]. Radiologe 1997; 37:702–709. 165. Buckley DL, Drew PJ, Mussurakis S, Monson JR, Horsman A. Microvessel density of invasive breast cancer assessed by dynamic Gd-DTPA enhanced MRI. J Magn Reson Imaging 1997; 7:461–464. 166. Buckley DL, Kerslake RW, Blackband SJ, Horsman A. Quantitative analysis of multi-slice Gd-DTPA enhanced dynamic MR images using an automated simplex minimization procedure. Magn Reson Med 1994; 32:646–651. 167. Buckley DL, Mussurakis S, Horsman A. Effect of temporal resolution on the diagnostic efficacy of contrast-enhanced MRI in the conservatively treated breast. J Comput Assist Tomogr 1998; 22:47–51. 168. Bugat R, Bataillard A, Lesimple T, et al. [Standards, Options and Recommendations for the management of patient with carcinoma of unknown primary site]. Bull Cancer 2002; 89:869–875. 169. Buis DR, Peerdeman SM, Vandertop WP. Metastatic adenocarcinoma in the cerebellopontine angle, presenting as a meningioma: a case report of rare occurrence. Acta Neurochir (Wien) 2004; 146:1369–1372; discussion 1372. 170. Bullitt E, Lin NU, Ewend MG, et al. Tumor therapeutic response and vessel tortuosity: preliminary report in metastatic breast cancer. Med Image Comput Comput Assist Interv Int Conf Med Image Comput Comput Assist Interv 2006; 9:561–568. 171. Bulstrode N, Bellamy E, Shrotria S. Breast volume assessment: comparing five different techniques. Breast 2001; 10:117–123. 172. Busch M, Bornstedt A, Wendt M, Duerk JL, Lewin JS, Gronemeyer D. Fast „real time“ imaging with different k-space update strategies for interventional procedures. J Magn Reson Imaging 1998; 8:944–954. 173. Buthiau D, Rixe O, Nizri D, Piette JC, Khayat D. [Breast cancer: role of MRI in follow-up of cases treated]. Bull Acad Natl Med 1995; 179:693–705; discussion 705–696. 174. Butterworth EJ, Walsh EG, Hugg JW. A TiO(2) dielectric filled toroidal radio frequency cavity resonator for high-field NMR. NMR Biomed 2001; 14:184–191. 175. Buttner A, Bauer M, Schulz-Wendtland R, Grebmeier H, Tulusan HA, Lang N. [Significance of MR-mammography for evaluation of the tumor and adjacent tissue]. Gynakol Geburtshilfliche Rundsch 1993; 33 Suppl 1:229–230. 176. Buyukgebiz B, Uguz A, Bober E, Buyukgebiz A. Precocious puberty in a patient with indicanuria. J Pediatr Endocrinol Metab 1999; 12:561–563. 177. Bydder GM. Clinical applications of contrast agents in body imaging. Top Magn Reson Imaging 1991; 3:74–84. 178. Cakir B, Tuncbilek N, Karakas HM, Unlu E, Ozyilmaz F. Granulomatous mastitis mimicking breast carcinoma. Breast J 2002; 8:251–252.  

308

179. Calderon-Margalit R, Paltiel O. Prevention of breast cancer in women who carry BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations: a critical review of the literature. Int J Cancer 2004; 112:357–364. 180. Callicott C, Thomas JM, Goode AW. The magnetization transfer characteristics of human breast tissues: an in vitro NMR study. Phys Med Biol 1999; 44:1147–1154. 181. Camann W, Stuebe A. Contrast imaging while breast-feeding. Anesthesiology 2006; 105:1277; author reply 1277. 182. Canade A, Costantini M, Magistrelli A, Belli P, Pastore G. Radial scar: from conventional imaging to the new techniques. Case reports. Rays 2002; 27:319–323. 183. Canade A, Magistrelli A, Lombardi R, Costantini M, Franceschini G, Belli P. Suspected cup syndrome. Diagnostic imaging of a misunderstood breast tumor for its uncommon location. Rays 2003; 28:379–385. 184. Capobianco G, Spaliviero B, Dessole S, et al. Paget’s disease of the nipple diagnosed by MRI. Arch Gynecol Obstet 2006; 274:316–318. 185. Capobianco G, Spaliviero B, Dessole S, et al. Lymph node axillary metastasis from occult contralateral infiltrating lobular carcinoma arising in accessory breast: MRI diagnosis. Breast J 2007; 13:305–307. 186. Cappabianca S, De Rosa R, Greco M, Accarino B, Del Vecchio A, Grassi R. Census of radiological machines in Radiodiagnostic Services of public and recognized hospitals in the Campania Region. Radiol Med (Torino) 2002; 104:213–223. 187. Caramella T, Chapellier C, Ettore F, Raoust I, Chamorey E, Balu-Maestro C. Value of MRI in the surgical planning of invasive lobular breast carcinoma: a prospective and a retrospective study of 57 cases: comparison with physical examination, conventional imaging, and histology. Clin Imaging 2007; 31:155–161. 188. Carriero A, Ambrossini R, Mattei PA, Angelucci D, Bonomo L. Magnetic resonance of the breast: correlation between enhancement patterns and microvessel density in malignant tumors. J Exp Clin Cancer Res 2002; 21:83–87. 189. Carriero A, Di Credico A, Mansour M, Bonomo L. Maximum intensity projection analysis in magnetic resonance of the breast. J Exp Clin Cancer Res 2002; 21:77–81. 190. Carswell H. Breast MR finds role as pretreatment test. Diagn Imaging (San Franc) 1992; 14:51–55. 191. Caruso A, Bongiorno L, Vallini L, Russo P, Tomao F, Grandinetti ML. Breast cancer and distress resulting from Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI): the impact of a psychological intervention of emotional and informative support. J Exp Clin Cancer Res 2006; 25:499–505. 192. Caruso MK, Guillot TS, Nguyen T, Greenway FL. The cost effectiveness of three different measures of breast volume. Aesthetic Plast Surg 2006; 30:16–20. 193. Caskey CI, Berg WA, Hamper UM, Sheth S, Chang BW, Anderson ND. Imaging spectrum of extracapsular silicone: correlation of US, MR imaging, mammographic, and histopathologic findings. Radiographics 1999; 19 Spec No: S39–51; quiz S261–262. 194. Casselman JW, Winand S, Steyaert L, Rigauts H, Clarysse A. Contrast-enhanced MRI of the breast: technique and indications. J Belge Radiol 1996; 79:76–81. 195. Castellon SA, Silverman DH, Ganz PA. Breast cancer treatment and cognitive functioning: current status and future challenges in assessment. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2005; 92:199–206. 196. Causer PA, Piron CA, Jong RA, et al. MR imaging-guided breast localization system with medial or lateral access. Radiology 2006; 240:369–379. 197. Cecil KM, Schnall MD, Siegelman ES, Lenkinski RE. The evaluation of human breast lesions with magnetic resonance imaging and proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2001; 68:45–54. 198. Celda B, Monleon D, Martinez-Bisbal MC, et al. MRS as endogenous molecular imaging for brain and prostate tumors: FP6 project „eTUMOR“. Adv Exp Med Biol 2006; 587:285–302. 199. Cerny V, Schinas P, Eliades S, Sarbach B. [MRI of the breast: technique and clinical results]. Rev Med Suisse Romande 1994; 114:805–810. 200. Cervera M, Martinez-Regueira F, Sola J, et al. [Sequelae after illegal injection of liquid silicone for breast augmentation: report of two cases]. Cir Esp 2006; 80:227–229. 201. Cervinka V, St’astny K, Havlicek K, Nechvatal L. [An axillary metastasis as the first sign of the breast carcinoma – a case review]. Rozhl Chir 2006; 85:71–73. 202. Chala LF, de Barros N, de Camargo Moraes P, et al. Fat necrosis of the breast: mammographic, sonographic, computed tomography, and magnetic resonance imaging findings. Curr Probl Diagn Radiol 2004; 33:106–126. 203. Chalazonitis AN, Tsimitselis G, Tzovara J, Chronopoulos P. Tuberculosis of the breast. Breast J 2003; 9:327–329.  

309

 

a  References

204. Chance B, Nioka S, Zhang J, et al. Breast cancer detection based on incremental biochemical and physiological properties of breast cancers: a six-year, two-site study. Acad Radiol 2005; 12:925–933. 205. Chang J, Graber HL, Koo PC, Aronson R, Barbour SL, Barbour RL. Optical imaging of anatomical maps derived from magnetic resonance images using time-independent optical sources. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 1997; 16:68–77. 206. Chang SD, Lee E, Sakamoto GT, Brown NP, Adler JR, Jr. Stereotactic radiosurgery in patients with multiple brain metastases. Neurosurg Focus 2000; 9:e3. 207. Chang YC, Huang CS, Liu YJ, Chen JH, Lu YS, Tseng WY. Angiogenic response of locally advanced breast cancer to neoadjuvant chemotherapy evaluated with parametric histogram from dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI. Phys Med Biol 2004; 49:3593–3602. 208. Chang YW, Lee MH, Kwon KH, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging of metaplastic carcinoma of the breast: sonographic and pathologic correlation. Acta Radiol 2004; 45:18–22. 209. Chappuis PO. [Breast cancer screening different from that used for the general population: who is concerned and with which approach?]. Rev Med Suisse 2006; 2:1296–1298, 1301–1292, 1304–1295. 210. Char DH, Miller T, Kroll S. Orbital metastases: diagnosis and course. Br J Ophthalmol 1997; 81:386–390. 211. Charles-Edwards EM, deSouza NM. Diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging and its application to cancer. Cancer Imaging 2006; 6:135–143. 212. Checkley D, Tessier JJ, Wedge SR, et al. Dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI of vascular changes induced by the VEGFsignalling inhibitor ZD4190 in human tumour xenografts. Magn Reson Imaging 2003; 21:475–482. 213. Chen C, Orel SG, Harris E, Schnall MD, Czerniecki BJ, Solin LJ. Outcome after treatment of patients with mammographically occult, magnetic resonance imaging-detected breast cancer presenting with axillary lymphadenopathy. Clin Breast Cancer 2004; 5:72–77. 214. Chen C, Orel SG, Schnall MD, Harris E, Solin LJ. Breast conservation treatment for patients presenting with axillary lymphadenopathy from presumed primary breast cancer: the role of breast magnetic resonance imaging for staging. Clin Breast Cancer 2002; 3:219–222. 215. Chen CA, Chen M. Simultaneous occurrence of hepatic focal nodular hyperplasia and uterine endometrial stromal nodule in a patient having treated breast infiltrating ductal carcinoma. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2003; 82:585–586. 216. Chen J, Daniel BL, Pauly KB. Investigation of proton density for measuring tissue temperature. J Magn Reson Imaging 2006; 23:430–434. 217. Chen MH, Cash EP, Danias PG, et al. Respiratory maneuvers decrease irradiated cardiac volume in patients with leftsided breast cancer. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson 2002; 4:265–271. 218. Chen SC, Carton AK, Albert M, Conant EF, Schnall MD, Maidment AD. Initial clinical experience with contrast-enhanced digital breast tomosynthesis. Acad Radiol 2007; 14:229–238. 219. Chen W, Giger ML, Bick U, Newstead GM. Automatic identification and classification of characteristic kinetic curves of breast lesions on DCE-MRI. Med Phys 2006; 33:2878–2887. 220. Chen W, Giger ML, Lan L, Bick U. Computerized interpretation of breast MRI: investigation of enhancement-variance dynamics. Med Phys 2004; 31:1076–1082. 221. Chenevert TL, Helvie MA, Aisen AM, et al. Dynamic three-dimensional imaging with partial k-space sampling: initial application for gadolinium-enhanced rate characterization of breast lesions. Radiology 1995; 196:135–142. 222. Cher DJ, Conwell JA, Mandel JS. MRI for detecting silicone breast implant rupture: meta-analysis and implications. Ann Plast Surg 2001; 47:367–380. 223. Cheung HS, Tse GM, Lai SY, Yeung DK. Relationship between lesion size and signal enhancement on subtraction fat-suppressed MR imaging of the breast. Magn Reson Imaging 2004; 22:1259–1264. 224. Cheung HS, Tse GM, Ma TK. ‘Leafy’ pattern in phyllodes tumour of the breast: MRI-pathologic correlation. Clin Radiol 2002; 57:230–231. 225. Cheung YC, Chen SC, Su MY, et al. Monitoring the size and response of locally advanced breast cancers to neoadjuvant chemotherapy (weekly paclitaxel and epirubicin) with serial enhanced MRI. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2003; 78:51–58. 226. Cheung YC, Wan YL, Lo YF, Leung WM, Chen SC, Hsueh S. Preoperative magnetic resonance imaging evaluation for breast cancers after sonographically guided core-needle biopsy: a comparison study. Ann Surg Oncol 2004; 11:756–761.  

310

227. Cheung YC, Wan YL, Ng SH, Ng KK, Lee KF, Chao TC. Angiolipoma of the breast with microcalcification. Mammographic, sonographic, and histologic appearances. Clin Imaging 1999; 23:353–355. 228. Chiba T, Ibrahim M. Cavernous lymphangioma of the breast: case report of an infant. Nippon Geka Hokan 1995; 64:23–26. 229. Chiles C, Woodard PK, Gutierrez FR, Link KM. Metastatic involvement of the heart and pericardium: CT and MR imaging. Radiographics 2001; 21:439–449. 230. Chinnaiyan AM, Prasad U, Shankar S, et al. Combined effect of tumor necrosis factor-related apoptosis-inducing ligand and ionizing radiation in breast cancer therapy. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2000; 97:1754–1759. 231. Chodosh LA, Cardiff RD. In vivo imaging of the mammary gland: the shape of things to come. J Mammary Gland Biol Neoplasia 2006; 11:101–102. 232. Choi BG, Kim HH, Kim EN, et al. New subtraction algorithms for evaluation of lesions on dynamic contrast-enhanced MR mammography. Eur Radiol 2002; 12:3018–3022. 233. Chou CP, Wu MT, Chang HT, et al. Monitoring breast cancer response to neoadjuvant systemic chemotherapy using parametric contrast-enhanced MRI: a pilot study. Acad Radiol 2007; 14:561–573. 234. Chourmouzi D, Boulogianni G, Zarampoukas T, Drevelengas A. Sonography and MRI of tamoxifen-associated mullerian adenosarcoma of the uterus. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2003; 181:1673–1675. 235. Chow CK. Imaging in inflammatory breast carcinoma. Breast Dis 2005; 22:45–54. 236. Chu DZ, Yamanashi WS, Frazer J, et al. Proton NMR of human breast tumors: correlation with clinical prognostic parameters. J Surg Oncol 1987; 36:1–4. 237. Chua SL, Goh PS, Tan LK. Magnetic resonance imaging of leptomeningeal metastases to the spine. Singapore Med J 1993; 34:253–256. 238. Chung A, Saouaf R, Scharre K, Phillips E. The impact of MRI on the treatment of DCIS. Am Surg 2005; 71:705–710. 239. Chung JH, Rajagopal V, Nielsen PM, Nash MP. A biomechanical model of mammographic compressions. Biomech Model Mechanobiol 2007. 240. Chung KC, Greenfield ML, Walters M. Decision-analysis methodology in the work-up of women with suspected silicone breast implant rupture. Plast Reconstr Surg 1998; 102:689–695. 241. Church DN, Bahl A, Jones A, Price CG. HER2-positive breast cancer brain metastases: multiple responses to systemic chemotherapy and trastuzumab – a case report. J Neurooncol 2006; 79:289–292. 242. Ciatto S. Questioning minimum screening mammography reading workload, and MRI assessment of breast microcalcifications. Breast 2006; 15:461–463. 243. Cilotti A, Caligo MA, Cipollini G, et al. Breast MR imaging screening in eight women proved or suspected to be carriers of BRCA1&2 gene mutations. J Exp Clin Cancer Res 2002; 21:137–140. 244. Cilotti A, Iacconi C, Marini C, et al. Contrast-enhanced MR imaging in patients with BI-RADS 3–5 microcalcifications. Radiol Med (Torino) 2007; 112:272–286. 245. Cilotti A, Marini C, Iacconi C, et al. Ultrasonographic appearance of breast implant complications. Ann Plast Surg 2006; 56:243–247. 246. Cisneros-Reig I, Laguna Sastre M, Alcalde Sanchez M, et al. Bilateral occult breast carcinoma: a second primary tumour or contralateral tumour metastasis? Eur J Surg 2001; 167:312–315. 247. Cleveland DL, Broussard M. Magnetic resonance imaging of the breast. Radiol Technol 1995; 67:177–180. 248. Coblentz C. Imagerie du sein. Can Assoc Radiol J 2005; 56:264–265. 249. Cocquyt V, Van Belle S. Lobular carcinoma in situ and invasive lobular cancer of the breast. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol 2005; 17:55–60. 250. Cody HS, 3rd. Current surgical management of breast cancer. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol 2002; 14:45–52. 251. Cohen EK, Leonhardt CM, Shumak RS, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging in potential postsurgical recurrence of breast cancer: pitfalls and limitations. Can Assoc Radiol J 1996; 47:171–176. 252. Cohen FJ. Identification and location of extravasated silicone gel using magnetic resonance imaging. Plast Reconstr Surg 1993; 91:1371. 253. Cole CF, Coleman C. Breast imaging today and tomorrow. Nurse Pract Forum 1999; 10:129–136. 254. Cole RP, Morris AD. MRI scan diagnosis of trilucent breast implant rupture. Br J Plast Surg 2000; 53:251–252.

 

311

 

a  References

255. Coles CE, Moody AM, Wilson CB, Burnet NG. Reduction of radiotherapy-induced late complications in early breast cancer: the role of intensity-modulated radiation therapy and partial breast irradiation. Part II – Radiotherapy strategies to reduce radiation-induced late effects. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol) 2005; 17:98–110. 256. Collins BT, Heiberg EM, Perman WH, Herrmann VM. Correlation of fine needle aspiration biopsy and dynamic contrast-enhanced 3D magnetic resonance imaging of the breast. Acta Cytol 1999; 43:158–162. 257. Collins JD, Shaver M, Batra P, Brown K, Disher AC. Magnetic resonance imaging of chest wall lesions. J Natl Med Assoc 1991; 83:352–360. 258. Collins MJ, Hoffmeister J, Worrell SW. Computer-aided detection and diagnosis of breast cancer. Semin Ultrasound CT MR 2006; 27:351–355. 259. Conrad C, Corfitsen MT, Gyldholm N, Christiansen FL. Pre-operative MR-mammography in breast cancer patients. Eur J Surg Oncol 1999; 25:142–145. 260. Contant CM, Swaak AJ, Obdeijn AI, et al. A prospective study on silicone breast implants and the silicone-related symptom complex. Clin Rheumatol 2002; 21:215–219. 261. Coombs BD, Szumowski J, Coshow W. Two-point Dixon technique for water-fat signal decomposition with B0 inhomogeneity correction. Magn Reson Med 1997; 38:884–889. 262. Cooney BS, Orel SG, Schnall MD, Troupin RH. Invasive lobular carcinoma in a patient with synchronous ductal carcinoma in situ: detection with MR imaging. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1994; 162:1318–1320. 263. Corot C, Robert P, Lancelot E, Martinell A, Santus R. Distribution of gadomelitol in a human breast tumor model in mice. Magma 2005; 18:138–143. 264. Cortesi L, Canossi B, De Santis M, et al. Usefulness of breast MRI in a patient with genetic risk. J Exp Clin Cancer Res 2002; 21:131–136. 265. Cortesi L, Turchetti D, Marchi I, et al. Breast cancer screening in women at increased risk according to different family histories: an update of the Modena Study Group experience. BMC Cancer 2006; 6:210. 266. Cossu E, Fiaschetti V, Talamo M, Comes MS, Serafini G, Simonetti G. New technologies in breast MRI. J Exp Clin Cancer Res 2002; 21:59–64. 267. Costa SD, Souchon R, Scharl A. [Ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence after conservative breast cancer surgery – diagnosis and therapy]. Zentralbl Gynakol 2004; 126:244–251. 268. Costantini M, Belli P, Magistrelli A, Romani M, Pastore G. MRI in insulin-dependent diabetic mastopathy. A case report. Rays 2002; 27:307–312. 269. Costantini M, Magistrelli A, Franceschini G, Mule A, Pastore G, Belli P. MRI in phyllodes tumor of the breast. Case reports. Rays 2002; 27:313–318. 270. Coulthard A. Magnetic resonance imaging-guided pre-operative breast localization using a „freehand technique“. Br J Radiol 1996; 69:482–483. 271. Coulthard A, Beveridge CJ, Potterton AJ. MRI in routine breast cancer follow-up: correlation with clinical outcome. Clin Radiol 1999; 54:459–461. 272. Coulthard A, Potterton AJ. Pitfalls of breast MRI. Br J Radiol 2000; 73:665–671. 273. Courcoutsakis NA, Hill SC, Chow CK, Gralnick H. Breast hemangiomas in a patient with Kasabach-Merritt syndrome: imaging findings. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1997; 169:1397–1399. 274. Coutts GA, Gilderdale DJ, Chui M, Kasuboski L, DeSouza NM. Integrated and interactive position tracking and imaging of interventional tools and internal devices using small fiducial receiver coils. Magn Reson Med 1998; 40:908–913. 275. Cowlam TE, Bucknall TE. Cutaneous ectopic breast calcification in a haemodialysis patient. Breast 2003; 12:342–344. 276. Cowley G. Beyond the mammogram. Newsweek 1997; 129:59. 277. Cron GO, Kelcz F, Santyr GE. Improvement in breast lesion characterization with dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI using pharmacokinetic modeling and bookend T(1) measurements. Magn Reson Med 2004; 51:1066–1070. 278. Cron GO, Santyr G, Kelcz F. Accurate and rapid quantitative dynamic contrast-enhanced breast MR imaging using spoiled gradient-recalled echoes and bookend T(1) measurements. Magn Reson Med 1999; 42:746–753. 279. Cross MJ, Harms SE, Cheek JH, Peters GN, Jones RC. New horizons in the diagnosis and treatment of breast cancer using magnetic resonance imaging. Am J Surg 1993; 166:749–753; discussion 753–745. 280. Crystal P. Cost-effectiveness of breast magnetic resonance imaging to screen BRCA1/2 mutation carriers. Jama 2006; 296:2681–2682; author reply 2682.  

312

281. Dadiani M, Margalit R, Sela N, Degani H. High-resolution magnetic resonance imaging of disparities in the transcapillary transfer rates in orthotopically inoculated invasive breast tumors. Cancer Res 2004; 64:3155–3161. 282. Dagnelie J, Peetrons P. [Magnetic resonance imaging in senology]. J Belge Radiol 1988; 71:161–165. 283. Daldrup HE, Roberts TP, Muhler A, et al. [Macromolecular contrast media for MR mammography. A new approach to characterizing breast tumors]. Radiologe 1997; 37:733–740. 284. Daldrup HE, Shames DM, Husseini W, Wendland MF, Okuhata Y, Brasch RC. Quantification of the extraction fraction for gadopentetate across breast cancer capillaries. Magn Reson Med 1998; 40:537–543. 285. Daldrup-Link HE, Brasch RC. Macromolecular contrast agents for MR mammography: current status. Eur Radiol 2003; 13:354–365. 286. Daldrup-Link HE, Kaiser A, Helbich T, et al. Macromolecular contrast medium (feruglose) versus small molecular contrast medium (gadopentetate) enhanced magnetic resonance imaging: differentiation of benign and malignant breast lesions. Acad Radiol 2003; 10:1237–1246. 287. Daldrup-Link HE, Kaiser A, Link TM, et al. Comparison between gadopentetate and feruglose (Clariscan)-enhanced MR-mammography: preliminary clinical experience. Acad Radiol 2002; 9 Suppl 2:S343–347. 288. Daldrup-Link HE, Okuhata Y, Wolfe A, et al. Decrease in tumor apparent permeability-surface area product to a MRI macromolecular contrast medium following angiogenesis inhibition with correlations to cytotoxic drug accumulation. Microcirculation 2004; 11:387–396. 289. Daldrup-Link HE, Rydland J, Helbich TH, et al. Quantification of breast tumor microvascular permeability with feruglose-enhanced MR imaging: initial phase II multicenter trial. Radiology 2003; 229:885–892. 290. Daldrup-Link HE, Shames DM, Wendland M, et al. Comparison of Gadomer-17 and gadopentetate dimeglumine for differentiation of benign from malignant breast tumors with MR imaging. Acad Radiol 2000; 7:934–944. 291. Dalmau J, Gonzalez RG, Lerwill MF. Case records of the Massachusetts General Hospital. Case 4–2007. A 56-year-old woman with rapidly progressive vertigo and ataxia. N Engl J Med 2007; 356:612–620. 292. Dalpiaz G, Zingarelli A, Anania G, Bazzocchi M. [Magnetic resonance in a case of lobular adenocarcinoma of the breast]. Radiol Med (Torino) 1996; 91:475–477. 293. Daniel B, Herfkens R. Intraoperative MR imaging: can image guidance improve therapy? Acad Radiol 2002; 9:875–877. 294. Daniel BL. Images in clinical medicine. Mammographically occult breast cancer. N Engl J Med 1999; 340:358. 295. Daniel BL. Intraprocedural magnetic resonance imaging-guided interventions in the breast. Top Magn Reson Imaging 2000; 11:184–190. 296. Daniel BL, Birdwell RL, Ikeda DM, et al. Breast lesion localization: a freehand, interactive MR imaging-guided technique. Radiology 1998; 207:455–463. 297. Daniel BL, Butts K, Glover GH, Cooper C, Herfkens RJ. Breast cancer: gadolinium-enhanced MR imaging with a 0.5-T open imager and three-point Dixon technique. Radiology 1998; 207:183–190. 298. Daniel BL, Gardner RW, Birdwell RL, Nowels KW, Johnson D. Magnetic resonance imaging of intraductal papilloma of the breast. Magn Reson Imaging 2003; 21:887–892. 299. Daniel BL, Jeffrey SS, Birdwell RL, Ikeda DM, Sawyer-Glover AM, Herfkens RJ. Three-dimensional shaded-surface rendering of MR images of the breast: technique, applications, and impact on surgical management of breast disease. Radiographics 1998; 18:483–496. 300. Daniel BL, Yen YF, Glover GH, et al. Breast disease: dynamic spiral MR imaging. Radiology 1998; 209:499–509. 301. Dannert S, Kruck W, Schick F, Claussen CD, Muller-Schimpfle M. [MR tomographic characterization of suspicious breast lesions with dynamic susceptibility-weighted T2* sequences]. Rofo 2001; 173:38–43. 302. Dao TH, Rahmouni A, Campana F, Laurent M, Asselain B, Fourquet A. Tumor recurrence versus fibrosis in the irradiated breast: differentiation with dynamic gadolinium-enhanced MR imaging. Radiology 1993; 187:751–755. 303. Dao TH, Rahmouni A, Servois V, Nguyen-Tan T. MR imaging of the breast in the follow-up evaluation of conservative nonoperatively treated breast cancer. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 1994; 2:605–622. 304. Dao TN, Lamont JP, Knox SM. Clinical utility of breast magnetic resonance imaging in patients presenting with primary breast cancer. Proc (Bayl Univ Med Cent) 2007; 20:227–230. 305. Dardik A. Use of magnetic resonance imaging in breast oncology. J Am Coll Surg 2005; 200:742. 306. Darnell A, Gallardo X, Sentis M, Castaner E, Fernandez E, Villajos M. Primary lymphoma of the breast: MR imaging features. A case report. Magn Reson Imaging 1999; 17:479–482.  

313

 

a  References

307. Daschner H, Allgayer B, Golder W. [Imaging of silicone granuloma of the breast using magnetic resonance tomography]. Rontgenpraxis 1992; 45:95–97. 308. Dash N, Lupetin AR, Daffner RH, Deeb ZL, Sefczek RJ, Schapiro RL. Magnetic resonance imaging in the diagnosis of breast disease. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1986; 146:119–125. 309. Dash N, Sharma P, Lupetin AR, Schapiro RL, Contractor FM. Magnetic resonance imaging appearance of primary squamous cell carcinoma of the breast. J Comput Tomogr 1987; 11:359–363. 310. Date S. [Diagnosis of intraductal spread of breast cancer by high-resolution MR imaging: correlation between MR imaging and pathohistological findings]. Nippon Igaku Hoshasen Gakkai Zasshi 1998; 58:212–220. 311. Dausse F, Balu-Maestro C, Chapellier C, Leblanc-Talent P. Rhabdomyosarcoma of the breast. Clin Imaging 2005; 29:337–341. 312. David J, Trop I, Lalonde L. Breast procedures guided by magnetic resonance imaging. Can Assoc Radiol J 2005; 56:309–318. 313. Davidorf FH, Chambers RB, Gresak P. False-positive magnetic resonance imaging of a metastatic carcinoma simulating a malignant melanoma. Ann Ophthalmol 1992; 24:391–394. 314. Davies RR. Variations in breast MR imaging protocol. Radiology 2002; 223:586. 315. Davis MH, Khotanzad A, Flamig DP, Harms SE. A physics-based coordinate transformation for 3-D image matching. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 1997; 16:317–328. 316. Davis PC, Hudgins PA, Peterman SB, Hoffman JC, Jr. Diagnosis of cerebral metastases: double-dose delayed CT vs contrast-enhanced MR imaging. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 1991; 12:293–300. 317. Davis PL, Julian TB, Staiger M, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging detection and wire localization of an ‘occult’ breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat 1994; 32:327–330. 318. Davis PL, McCarty KS, Jr. Technologic considerations for breast tumor size assessment. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 1994; 2:623–631. 319. Davis PL, McCarty KS, Jr. Sensitivity of enhanced MRI for the detection of breast cancer: new, multicentric, residual, and recurrent. Eur Radiol 1997; 7 Suppl 5:289–298. 320. Davis PL, McCarty KS, Jr. Magnetic resonance imaging in breast cancer staging. Top Magn Reson Imaging 1998; 9:60–75. 321. Davis PL, Staiger MJ, Harris KB, et al. Breast cancer measurements with magnetic resonance imaging, ultrasonography, and mammography. Breast Cancer Res Treat 1996; 37:1–9. 322. Davis S. Lymphedema following breast cancer treatment. Radiol Technol 1998; 70:42–56; quiz 57–60. 323. Davison D. Novel breast-imaging methods. Clin J Oncol Nurs 2005; 9:255–256. 324. de Almeida A, Sobol WT, Barnes GT. Characterization of the reciprocity law failure in three mammography screenfilm systems. Med Phys 1999; 26:682–688. 325. De Cicco C, Mariani L, Vedruccio C, et al. Clinical application of spectral electromagnetic interaction in breast cancer: diagnostic results of a pilot study. Tumori 2006; 92:207–212. 326. de Gery S, Perret F, Espie M, Frija J. [Breast imaging and biopsy procedures in the diagnosis of breast cancer]. Presse Med 2003; 32:125–133. 327. de Guerke L, Baron M, Dessogne P, Callonnec F, d’Anjou J. Cystic lymphangioma of the breast. Breast J 2005; 11:515–516. 328. De Simone M, Verrotti A, Iughetti L, et al. Increased visceral adipose tissue is associated with increased circulating insulin and decreased sex hormone binding globulin levels in massively obese adolescent girls. J Endocrinol Invest 2001; 24:438–444. 329. Dean KI, Komu M. Breast tumor imaging with ultra low field MRI. Magn Reson Imaging 1994; 12:395–401. 330. Dean KI, Majurin ML, Komu M. Relaxation times of normal breast tissues. Changes with age and variations during the menstrual cycle. Acta Radiol 1994; 35:258–261. 331. DeAngelis GA, de Lange EE, Miller LR, Morgan RF. MR imaging of breast implants. Radiographics 1994; 14:783–794. 332. DeAngelis GA, Moran RE, Fajardo LL, Mugler JP, Christopher JM, Harvey JA. MRI-guided needle localization: technique. Semin Ultrasound CT MR 2000; 21:337–350. 333. Degani H, Chetrit-Dadiani M, Bogin L, Furman-Haran E. Magnetic resonance imaging of tumor vasculature. Thromb Haemost 2003; 89:25–33.  

314

334. Degani H, Gusis V, Weinstein D, Fields S, Strano S. Mapping pathophysiological features of breast tumors by MRI at high spatial resolution. Nat Med 1997; 3:780–782. 335. Degenhard A, Tanner C, Hayes C, Hawkes DJ, Leach MO. Pre-processed image reconstruction applied to breast and brain MR imaging. Physiol Meas 2001; 22:589–604. 336. Degenhard A, Tanner C, Hayes C, Hawkes DJ, Leach MO. Comparison between radiological and artificial neural network diagnosis in clinical screening. Physiol Meas 2002; 23:727–739. 337. Del Frate C, Borghese L, Cedolini C, et al. Role of pre-surgical breast MRI in the management of invasive breast carcinoma. Breast 2007. 338. Del Maschio A, Bazzocchi M, Giuseppetti GM, et al. Breast MRI: report on a multicentric national trial by the Study Section of Magnetic Resonance and Breast Imaging. Radiol Med (Torino) 2002; 104:262–272. 339. Del Maschio A, De Gaspari A, Panizza P. Present indications for the use of breast MRI. J Exp Clin Cancer Res 2002; 21:55–58. 340. Del Maschio A, De Gaspari A, Panizza P. Magnetic Resonance in breast imaging. Radiol Med (Torino) 2002; 104:253–261. 341. Del Maschio A, Panizza P. [Magnetic resonance of the breast]. Radiol Med (Torino) 1998; 96:154–160. 342. Del Maschio A, Panizza P. MR state of the art. Eur J Radiol 1998; 27 Suppl 2:S250–253. 343. Delille JP, Slanetz PJ, Yeh ED, Halpern EF, Kopans DB, Garrido L. Invasive ductal breast carcinoma response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy: noninvasive monitoring with functional MR imaging pilot study. Radiology 2003; 228:63–69. 344. Delille JP, Slanetz PJ, Yeh ED, Kopans DB, Garrido L. Breast cancer: regional blood flow and blood volume measured with magnetic susceptibility-based MR imaging – initial results. Radiology 2002; 223:558–565. 345. Delille JP, Slanetz PJ, Yeh ED, Kopans DB, Garrido L. Physiologic changes in breast magnetic resonance imaging during the menstrual cycle: perfusion imaging, signal enhancement, and influence of the T1 relaxation time of breast tissue. Breast J 2005; 11:236–241. 346. Delille JP, Slanetz PJ, Yeh ED, Kopans DB, Halpern EF, Garrido L. Hormone replacement therapy in postmenopausal women: breast tissue perfusion determined with MR imaging – initial observations. Radiology 2005; 235:36–41. 347. Dell DD. Spread the word about breast cancer. Nursing 2005; 35:56–63; quiz 63–54. 348. Delorme S. [Breast cancer. Sonography and magnetic resonance mammography]. Radiologe 2004; 44:621–637; quiz 638–629. 349. Delpassand ES, Jackson EF. Differentiation between benign and malignant breast lesions with MR imaging and scintimammography. Radiology 1997; 205:283–284; author reply 285–286. 350. Demartini WB, Lehman CD, Peacock S, Russell MT. Computer-aided detection applied to breast MRI: assessment of CAD-generated enhancement and tumor sizes in breast cancers before and after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Acad Radiol 2005; 12:806–814. 351. Demirkazik FB. MR imaging features of breast lymphoma. Eur J Radiol 2002; 42:62–64. 352. Demos SG, Vogel AJ, Gandjbakhche AH. Advances in optical spectroscopy and imaging of breast lesions. J Mammary Gland Biol Neoplasia 2006; 11:165–181. 353. den Boer JA, Hoenderop RK, Smink J, et al. Pharmacokinetic analysis of Gd-DTPA enhancement in dynamic threedimensional MRI of breast lesions. J Magn Reson Imaging 1997; 7:702–715. 354. Denis F, Desbiez-Bourcier AV, Chapiron C, Arbion F, Body G, Brunereau L. Contrast enhanced magnetic resonance imaging underestimates residual disease following neoadjuvant docetaxel based chemotherapy for breast cancer. Eur J Surg Oncol 2004; 30:1069–1076. 355. Denton ER, Sonoda LI, Rueckert D, et al. Comparison and evaluation of rigid, affine, and nonrigid registration of breast MR images. J Comput Assist Tomogr 1999; 23:800–805. 356. Derby KA, Frankel SD, Kaufman L, et al. Differentiation of silicone gel from water and fat in MR phase imaging of protons at 0.064 T. Radiology 1993; 189:617–620. 357. Derebek E, Balci P, Alanyali H, et al. Detection of bilateral multifocal breast cancer using Tc-99m sestamibi imaging. The role of delayed imaging. Clin Nucl Med 1999; 24:590–593. 358. Dershaw DD. Equipment, technique, quality assurance, and accreditation for imaging-guided breast biopsy procedures. Radiol Clin North Am 2000; 38:773–789, ix.  

315

 

a  References

359. Dershaw DD. Breast imaging and the conservative treatment of breast cancer. Radiol Clin North Am 2002; 40:501– 516. 360. Dershaw DD, Osborne M. Imaging techniques in breast cancer. Semin Surg Oncol 1989; 5:82–93. 361. Desmond KL, Ramsay EA, Plewes DB. Comparison of biphasic and reordered fat suppression for dynamic breast MRI. J Magn Reson Imaging 2007; 25:1293–1298. 362. deSouza NM, Coutts GA, Puni RK, Young IR. Magnetic resonance imaging guided breast biopsy using a frameless stereotactic technique. Clin Radiol 1996; 51:425–428. 363. deSouza NM, Kormos DW, Krausz T, et al. MR-guided biopsy of the breast after lumpectomy and radiation therapy using two methods of immobilization in the lateral decubitus position. J Magn Reson Imaging 1995; 5:525–528. 364. Deurloo EE, Klein Zeggelink WF, Teertstra HJ, et al. Contrast-enhanced MRI in breast cancer patients eligible for breast-conserving therapy: complementary value for subgroups of patients. Eur Radiol 2006; 16:692–701. 365. Deurloo EE, Muller SH, Peterse JL, Besnard AP, Gilhuijs KG. Clinically and mammographically occult breast lesions on MR images: potential effect of computerized assessment on clinical reading. Radiology 2005; 234:693–701. 366. Deurloo EE, Peterse JL, Rutgers EJ, Besnard AP, Muller SH, Gilhuijs KG. Additional breast lesions in patients eligible for breast-conserving therapy by MRI: impact on preoperative management and potential benefit of computerised analysis. Eur J Cancer 2005; 41:1393–1401. 367. Devon RK, Rosen MA, Mies C, Orel SG. Breast reconstruction with a transverse rectus abdominis myocutaneous flap: spectrum of normal and abnormal MR imaging findings. Radiographics 2004; 24:1287–1299. 368. Dhawan AP, Arata L. Segmentation of medical images through competitive learning. Comput Methods Programs Biomed 1993; 40:203–215. 369. Di Maggio C. State of the art of current modalities for the diagnosis of breast lesions. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2004; 31 Suppl 1:S56–69. 370. Dibiane A, Amrar F, Abdelmoumni A, et al. [Multiple calcified cerebral metastases revealing bronchial adenocarcinoma. Apropos of a case]. J Radiol 1998; 79:563–565. 371. Dieing A, Schulz CO, Schmid P, et al. Orbital metastases in breast cancer: report of two cases and review of the literature. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 2004; 130:745–748. 372. Diekmann F, Diekmann S, Beljavskaja M, et al. [Preoperative MRT of the breast in invasive lobular carcinoma in comparison with invasive ductal carcinoma]. Rofo 2004; 176:544–549. 373. Diekmann F, Diekmann S, Jeunehomme F, Muller S, Hamm B, Bick U. Digital mammography using iodine-based contrast media: initial clinical experience with dynamic contrast medium enhancement. Invest Radiol 2005; 40:397–404. 374. Diekmann F, Diekmann S, Taupitz M, et al. Use of iodine-based contrast media in digital full-field mammography – initial experience. Rofo 2003; 175:342–345. 375. Diekmann F, Rudolph B, Winzer KJ, Bick U. Liposarcoma of the breast arising within a phyllodes tumor. J Comput Assist Tomogr 1999; 23:764–766. 376. Dietrich CF, Kratzer W, Strobe D, et al. Assessment of metastatic liver disease in patients with primary extrahepatic tumors by contrast-enhanced sonography versus CT and MRI. World J Gastroenterol 2006; 12:1699–1705. 377. Digabel-Chabay C, Allioux C, Labbe-Devilliers C, Meingan P, Ricaud Couprie M. [Architectural distortion and diagnostic difficulties]. J Radiol 2004; 85:2099–2106. 378. Digby W, Keppler J. The current status of positron emission tomography. Radiol Manage 2000; 22:37–40. 379. Dixon AK, Wheeler TK, Lomas DJ, Mackenzie R. Computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging for axillary symptoms following treatment of breast carcinoma? A randomized trial. Clin Radiol 1993; 48:371–376. 380. Dobke MK, Middleton MS. Clinical impact of breast implant magnetic resonance imaging. Ann Plast Surg 1994; 33:241–246. 381. Dobos N, Rubesin SE. Radiologic imaging modalities in the diagnosis and management of colorectal cancer. Hematol Oncol Clin North Am 2002; 16:875–895. 382. Doi K. Overview on research and development of computer-aided diagnostic schemes. Semin Ultrasound CT MR 2004; 25:404–410. 383. Doihara H, Fujita T, Takabatake D, Takahashi H, Ogasawara Y, Shimizu N. Clinical significance of multidetector-row computed tomography in breast surgery. Breast J 2006; 12:S204–209.  

316

384. Dorne L, Stroman P, Rolland C, et al. Magnetic resonance study of virgin and explanted silicone breast prostheses. Can proton relaxation times be used to monitor their biostability? Asaio J 1994; 40:M625–631. 385. D’Orsi CJ. Early detection of breast cancer: mammography. Breast Cancer Res Treat 1991; 18 Suppl 1:S107–109. 386. D’Orsi CJ, Adler DD, Ikeda DM, et al. Breast imaging. Radiology 1994; 190:936–938. 387. Dose Schwarz J, Bader M, Jenicke L, Hemminger G, Janicke F, Avril N. Early prediction of response to chemotherapy in metastatic breast cancer using sequential 18F-FDG PET. J Nucl Med 2005; 46:1144–1150. 388. Douek M, Davidson T, Taylor I. Breast cancer imaging – what are the optimal modalities? Eur J Surg Oncol 1998; 24:573–582. 389. Douek M, Hall-Craggs MA. Can the use of preoperative MR imaging reduce local recurrence rates in patients with retroareolar breast cancer who undergo breast-conservation surgery? Radiology 1999; 210:880–881. 390. Douek M, Tobias J. How reliable is MRI for predicting extent of residual breast cancer with different primary medical therapies? Nat Clin Pract Oncol 2005; 2:128–129. 391. Douek M, Vaidya JS, Baum M, Taylor I. Magnetic-resonance imaging and breast cancer multicentricity. Lancet 1998; 352:652–653. 392. Douek M, Vaidya JS, Lakhani SR, Hall-Craggs MA, Baum M, Taylor I. Can magnetic-resonance imaging help elucidate natural history of breast cancer multicentricity? Lancet 1998; 351:801–802. 393. Dougherty L, Isaac G, Rosen MA, et al. High frame-rate simultaneous bilateral breast DCE-MRI. Magn Reson Med 2007; 57:220–225. 394. Dowden R. Re: The life span of silicone gel breast implants and a comparison of mammography, ultrasonography, and magnetic resonance imaging in detecting implant rupture: a meta-analysis. Ann Plast Surg 1999; 43:99–100. 395. Doyle AJ, Alder SL, Rohr LR. Myoepithelial lesions of the breast: imaging characteristics and diagnosis with largecore needle biopsy in two cases. Radiology 1994; 193:787–788. 396. Doyle DJ, Relihan N, Redmond HP, Barry JE. Metastatic manifestations of invasive lobular breast carcinoma. Clin Radiol 2005; 60:271–274. 397. Doyley MM, Feng Q, Weaver JB, Paulsen KD. Performance analysis of steady-state harmonic elastography. Phys Med Biol 2007; 52:2657–2674. 398. Doyley MM, Van Houten EE, Weaver JB, et al. Shear modulus estimation using parallelized partial volumetric reconstruction. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 2004; 23:1404–1416. 399. Drake DB, Miller L, Janus CL, DeLange EE, Morgan RF. Magnetic resonance imaging of in situ mammary prostheses. Ann Plast Surg 1994; 33:258–262. 400. Drew PJ, Chatterjee S, Turnbull LW, et al. Dynamic contrast enhanced magnetic resonance imaging of the breast is superior to triple assessment for the pre-operative detection of multifocal breast cancer. Ann Surg Oncol 1999; 6:599–603. 401. Drew PJ, Kerin MJ, Mahapatra T, et al. Evaluation of response to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for locally advanced breast cancer with dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI of the breast. Eur J Surg Oncol 2001; 27:617–620. 402. Drew PJ, Kerin MJ, Turnbull LW, et al. Routine screening for local recurrence following breast-conserving therapy for cancer with dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging of the breast. Ann Surg Oncol 1998; 5:265–270. 403. Drew PJ, Monson JR. Magnetic resonance mammography. Br J Surg 1996; 83:1316–1318. 404. Drew PJ, Turnbull LW, Chatterjee S, et al. Prospective comparison of standard triple assessment and dynamic magnetic resonance imaging of the breast for the evaluation of symptomatic breast lesions. Ann Surg 1999; 230:680–685. 405. Drew PJ, Turnbull LW, Kerin MJ. Magnetic-resonance imaging for breast cancer. Lancet 1998; 351:1661–1662. 406. Drew PJ, Turnbull LW, Kerin MJ, Carleton PJ, Fox JN. Multicentricity and recurrence of breast cancer. Lancet 1997; 349:208–209. 407. Drozdz W, Strzalka M. [Mammography screening for breast cancer]. Przegl Lek 1998; 55:663–668. 408. Du W, Du YP, Bick U, et al. Breast MR imaging with high spectral and spatial resolutions: preliminary experience. Radiology 2002; 224:577–585. 409. Duffy FJ, Jr., May JW, Jr. Tissue expanders and magnetic resonance imaging: the „hot“ breast implant. Ann Plast Surg 1995; 35:647–649. 410. Duric N, Littrup P, Babkin A, et al. Development of ultrasound tomography for breast imaging: technical assessment. Med Phys 2005; 32:1375–1386.  

317

 

a  References

411. Duvoisin B. [Follow-up of gynecological carcinomas using tomodensitometry and magnetic resonance imaging]. Rev Med Suisse Romande 1994; 114:787–788. 412. Eby PR, Lehman C. MRI-guided breast interventions. Semin Ultrasound CT MR 2006; 27:339–350. 413. Eccles D, Bunyan D, Barker S, Castle B. BRCA1 mutation and neuronal migration defect: implications for chemoprevention. J Med Genet 2005; 42:e42. 414. Echevarria JJ, Lopez JA, Alvarez JA, Astigarraga E. Breast involvement in a case of primary systemic amyloidosis: mammographic, US, and MR appearances. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2000; 24:451–453. 415. Echevarria JJ, Lopez-Ruiz JA, Martin D, Imaz I, Martin M. Usefulness of MRI in detecting occult breast cancer associated with Paget’s disease of the nipple-areolar complex. Br J Radiol 2004; 77:1036–1039. 416. Echevarria JJ, Martin M, Saiz A, et al. Overall breast density in MR mammography: diagnostic and therapeutic implications in breast cancer. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2006; 30:140–147. 417. Edell SL, Eisen MD. Current imaging modalities for the diagnosis of breast cancer. Del Med J 1999; 71:377–382. 418. Edelman RR, Warach S. Magnetic resonance imaging (2). N Engl J Med 1993; 328:785–791. 419. Edlich RF, Winters KL, Lin KY. Breast cancer and ovarian cancer genetics. J Long Term Eff Med Implants 2005; 15:533–545. 420. Eid S, Dos Santos E, Boisserie-Lacroix M, Grelet P, Rivel J. [Lactating adenoma: radiologic aspects. A case report]. J Radiol 2001; 82:264–267. 421. Eisinger F. [Breast cancer screening for women with a strong familial risk]. Bull Cancer 2005; 92:874–884. 422. Eisinger F, Bressac B, Castaigne D, et al. [Identification and management of hereditary breast-ovarian cancers (2004 update)]. Pathol Biol (Paris) 2006; 54:230–250. 423. El Khoury C, Servois V, Thibault F, et al. MR quantification of the washout changes in breast tumors under preoperative chemotherapy: feasibility and preliminary results. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2005; 184:1499–1504. 424. El Yousef SJ, Duchesneau RH. Magnetic resonance imaging of the human breast: a Phase I trial. Radiol Clin North Am 1984; 22:859–868. 425. El Yousef SJ, Duchesneau RH, Alfidi RJ, Haaga JR, Bryan PJ, LiPuma JP. Magnetic resonance imaging of the breast. Work in progress. Radiology 1984; 150:761–766. 426. el Yousef SJ, O’Connell DM, Duchesneau RH, Smith MJ, Hubay CA, Guyton SP. Benign and malignant breast disease: magnetic resonance and radiofrequency pulse sequences. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1985; 145:1–8. 427. Eliat PA, Dedieu V, Bertino C, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging contrast-enhanced relaxometry of breast tumors: an MRI multicenter investigation concerning 100 patients. Magn Reson Imaging 2004; 22:475–481. 428. Elkowitz SS, Patel M, Hirschfield LS. Paravertebral muscle metastases from primary tongue and nasopharyngeal carcinomas. Clin Radiol 1991; 43:400–401. 429. el-Kwae EA, Fishman JE, Bianchi MJ, Pattany PM, Kabuka MR. Detection of suspected malignant patterns in threedimensional magnetic resonance breast images. J Digit Imaging 1998; 11:83–93. 430. Elmaci L, Ekinci G, Kurtkaya O, Sav A, Pamir MN. Tumor in tumor: metastasis of breast carcinoma to intracranial meningioma. Tumori 2001; 87:423–427. 431. Elmore JG, Armstrong K, Lehman CD, Fletcher SW. Screening for breast cancer. Jama 2005; 293:1245–1256. 432. Elson EM, Jones A, King R, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging of Trilucent TM breast implants. Clin Radiol 2002; 57:263–267. 433. Elster AD, Sanders TG, Vines FS, Chen MY. Size and shape of the pituitary gland during pregnancy and post partum: measurement with MR imaging. Radiology 1991; 181:531–535. 434. Elwady N, Ousehal A, Alibou F, Tazi Z, Boukind H, Kadiri R. [Angiosarcoma of the breast. Radiological aspects. About one case]. J Radiol 2000; 81:50–53. 435. Englander SA, Ulug AM, Brem R, Glickson JD, van Zijl PC. Diffusion imaging of human breast. NMR Biomed 1997; 10:348–352. 436. Englmeier KH, Griebel J, Lucht R, Knopp M, Siebert M, Brix G. [Dynamic MR mammography. Multidimensional visualization of contrast medium enhancement in virtual reality]. Radiologe 2000; 40:262–266. 437. Englmeier KH, Hellwig G, Griebel J, Delorme S, Siebert M, Brix G. Dynamic MR-mammography in virtual reality. Stud Health Technol Inform 2003; 94:72–78. 438. Englmeier KH, Hellwig G, Griebel J, Delorme S, Siebert M, Brix G. Morphofunctional visualization of MR-mammography in virtual reality. Stud Health Technol Inform 2003; 95:27–32.  

318

439. Englmeier KH, Hellwig G, Griebel J, Delorme S, Siebert M, Brix G. Morpho-functional visualization of dynamic MR-mammography. Medinfo 2004; 11:838–841. 440. Enya M, Goto H, Nandate Y, Kiryu T, Kanematsu M, Hoshi H. [Usefulness of dynamic MR mammography for diagnosis of axillary lymph node status in breast cancer patient]. Nippon Igaku Hoshasen Gakkai Zasshi 2000; 60:764– 770. 441. Ercolani P, Giovagnoni A, Giuseppetti G, Baldassarre S, De Nigris E, Amici F. [Dynamic imaging with magnetic resonance in the diagnosis of breast disease]. Radiol Med (Torino) 1991; 82:422–426. 442. Ercolani P, Giuseppetti GM, Greco A, et al. [Magnetic resonance versus traditional breast imaging in solid nodular diseases of the breast]. Radiol Med (Torino) 1994; 87:36–40. 443. Ercolani P, Valeri G, Amici F. Dynamic MRI of the breast. Eur J Radiol 1998; 27 Suppl 2:S265–271. 444. Erdem G, Karakas HM, Yetkin F, Alkan A, Firat AK, Kahraman B. Brucellar breast abscess. Breast 2006; 15:554–557. 445. Erguvan-Dogan B, Whitman GJ, Kushwaha AC, Phelps MJ, Dempsey PJ. BI-RADS-MRI: a primer. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2006; 187:W152–160. 446. Erguvan-Dogan B, Whitman GJ, Nguyen VA, et al. Specimen radiography in confirmation of MRI-guided needle localization and surgical excision of breast lesions. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2006; 187:339–344. 447. Erguvan-Dogan B, Yang WT. Direct injection of paraffin into the breast: mammographic, sonographic, and MRI features of early complications. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2006; 186:888–894. 448. Erman M, Karaoglu A, Oksuzoglu B, Aydingoz U, Ayhan A, Guler N. Solitary esophageal metastasis of breast cancer after 11 years: a case report. Med Oncol 2002; 19:171–175. 449. Ernst MF, Roukema JA. Diagnosis of non-palpable breast cancer: a review. Breast 2002; 11:13–22. 450. Ernst T, Chang L, Cooray D, et al. The effects of tamoxifen and estrogen on brain metabolism in elderly women. J Natl Cancer Inst 2002; 94:592–597. 451. Ertas G, Gulcur HO, Tunaci M. Improved lesion detection in MR mammography: three-dimensional segmentation, moving voxel sampling, and normalized maximum intensity-time ratio entropy. Acad Radiol 2007; 14:151–161. 452. Eshed I, Althoff CE, Hamm B, Hermann KG. Claustrophobia and premature termination of magnetic resonance imaging examinations. J Magn Reson Imaging 2007; 26:401–404. 453. Esik O. [Results of radiotherapy in the year of the Rontgen centenary]. Orv Hetil 1998; 139:547–551. 454. Esik O, Szavcsur P, Szakall S, Jr., et al. Angiography effectively supports the diagnosis of hepatic metastases in medullary thyroid carcinoma. Cancer 2001; 91:2084–2095. 455. Espinosa LA, Daniel BL, Jeffrey SS, Nowels KW, Ikeda DM. MRI features of mucosa-associated lymphoid tissue lymphoma in the breast. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2005; 185:199–202. 456. Espinosa LA, Daniel BL, Vidarsson L, Zakhour M, Ikeda DM, Herfkens RJ. The lactating breast: contrast-enhanced MR imaging of normal tissue and cancer. Radiology 2005; 237:429–436. 457. Esserman L. Integration of imaging in the management of breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2005; 23:1601–1602. 458. Esserman L, Hylton N, George T, Weidner N. Contrast-Enhanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging to Assess Tumor Histopathology and Angiogenesis in Breast Carcinoma. Breast J 1999; 5:13–21. 459. Esserman L, Hylton N, Yassa L, Barclay J, Frankel S, Sickles E. Utility of magnetic resonance imaging in the management of breast cancer: evidence for improved preoperative staging. J Clin Oncol 1999; 17:110–119. 460. Esserman L, Kaplan E, Partridge S, et al. MRI phenotype is associated with response to doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide neoadjuvant chemotherapy in stage III breast cancer. Ann Surg Oncol 2001; 8:549–559. 461. Esserman L, Sepucha K, Ozanne E, Hwang ES. Applying the neoadjuvant paradigm to ductal carcinoma in situ. Ann Surg Oncol 2004; 11:28S–36S. 462. Esserman L, Wolverton D, Hylton N. Magnetic resonance imaging for primary breast cancer management: current role and new applications. Endocr Relat Cancer 2002; 9:141–153. 463. Esserman LJ, Kumar AS, Herrera AF, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging captures the biology of ductal carcinoma in situ. J Clin Oncol 2006; 24:4603–4610. 464. Esserman LJ, Wolverton D, Hylton N. Integration of breast imaging into cancer management. Curr Oncol Rep 2000; 2:572–581. 465. Essink-Bot ML, Rijnsburger AJ, van Dooren S, de Koning HJ, Seynaeve C. Women’s acceptance of MRI in breast cancer surveillance because of a familial or genetic predisposition. Breast 2006; 15:673–676.  

319

 

a  References

466. Evans D, Lalloo F, Shenton A, Boggis C, Howell A. Uptake of screening and prevention in women at very high risk of breast cancer. Lancet 2001; 358:889–890. 467. Evans WP. Breast masses. Appropriate evaluation. Radiol Clin North Am 1995; 33:1085–1108. 468. Everson LI, Parantainen H, Detlie T, et al. Diagnosis of breast implant rupture: imaging findings and relative efficacies of imaging techniques. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1994; 163:57–60. 469. Eyre H, Sondik E, Smith RA, Kessler L. Joint meeting on the feasibility of a study of screening premenopausal women (40–49 years) for breast cancer: April 20–21, 1994. Cancer 1995; 75:1391–1403. 470. Fabre Demard N, Boulet P, Prat X, Charra L, Lesnik A, Taourel P. [Breast MRI in invasive lobular carcinoma: diagnosis and staging]. J Radiol 2005; 86:1027–1034. 471. Fajardo LL. Imaging of the breast. Acad Radiol 1995; 2 Suppl 2:S152–154. 472. Fan X, Abe H, Medved M, et al. Fat suppression with spectrally selective inversion vs. high spectral and spatial resolution MRI of breast lesions: qualitative and quantitative comparisons. J Magn Reson Imaging 2006; 24:1311–1315. 473. Fan X, Medved M, Karczmar GS, et al. Diagnosis of suspicious breast lesions using an empirical mathematical model for dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI. Magn Reson Imaging 2007; 25:593–603. 474. Fanale MA, Uyei AR, Theriault RL, Adam K, Thompson RA. Treatment of metastatic breast cancer with trastuzumab and vinorelbine during pregnancy. Clin Breast Cancer 2005; 6:354–356. 475. Fantini S, Heffer EL, Pera VE, Sassaroli A, Liu N. Spatial and spectral information in optical mammography. Technol Cancer Res Treat 2005; 4:471–482. 476. Farria DM, Gorczyca DP, Barsky SH, Sinha S, Bassett LW. Benign phyllodes tumor of the breast: MR imaging features. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1996; 167:187–189. 477. Farrugia ME, Conway R, Simpson DJ, Kurian KM. Paraneoplastic limbic encephalitis. Clin Neurol Neurosurg 2005; 107:128–131. 478. Faucher A, Barreau B, Dilhuydy MH. [Contribution to the study of the future of silicon-gel breast implants in mammary reconstruction after cancer: concerning 205 implants]. Ann Chir Plast Esthet 2000; 45:97–101. 479. Felden A, Vagner J, Hinz A, et al. ROBITOM-robot for biopsy and therapy of the mamma. Biomed Tech (Berl) 2002; 47 Suppl 1 Pt 1:2–5. 480. Feldman DR, Conway WF, Spicer KM. Ferromagnetic artifact from a tissue expander used for breast reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg 1995; 95:426–427. 481. Fellah L, Leconte I, Weynand B, Donnez J, Berliere M. Breast tuberculosis imaging. Fertil Steril 2006; 86:460–461. 482. Fenlon HM, Phelan NC, O’Sullivan P, Tierney S, Gorey T, Ennis JT. Benign versus malignant breast disease: comparison of contrast-enhanced MR imaging and Tc-99m tetrofosmin scintimammography. Radiology 1997; 205:214–220. 483. Fennigkoh L. MRI evaluation of breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2007; 357:192; author reply 193. 484. Fetterly KA, Schueler BA. Performance evaluation of a „dual-side read“ dedicated mammography computed radiography system. Med Phys 2003; 30:1843–1854. 485. Fink A, Wasser K, Aufderstrasse D, Ludemann H, Delorme S. [Suspected contrast medium concentration in dynamic MR-mammography. Post-traumatic fracture of the ribs]. Radiologe 2002; 42:753–755. 486. Fink C, Ludemann H, Wasser K, Delorme S. Incidental finding of a mucinous carcinoma of the breast by dynamic MRI in a patient with a history of breast trauma (horse bite): incidental mucinous carcinoma after breast trauma. Clin Imaging 2002; 26:254–257. 487. Fischer DR, Baltzer P, Malich A, et al. Is the „blooming sign“ a promising additional tool to determine malignancy in MR mammography? Eur Radiol 2004; 14:394–401. 488. Fischer DR, Malich A, Wurdinger S, Boettcher J, Dietzel M, Kaiser WA. The adjacent vessel on dynamic contrast-enhanced breast MRI. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2006; 187:W147–151. 489. Fischer DR, Reichenbach JR, Rauscher A, Sedlacik J, Kaiser WA. Application of an exogenous hyperoxic contrast agent in MR mammography: initial results. Eur Radiol 2005; 15:829–832. 490. Fischer DR, Wurdinger S, Boettcher J, Malich A, Kaiser WA. Further signs in the evaluation of magnetic resonance mammography: a retrospective study. Invest Radiol 2005; 40:430–435. 491. Fischer H, Hennig J. Neural network-based analysis of MR time series. Magn Reson Med 1999; 41:124–131. 492. Fischer U, Baum F, Luftner-Nagel S. Preoperative MR imaging in patients with breast cancer: preoperative staging, effects on recurrence rates, and outcome analysis. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 2006; 14:351–362, vi.  

320

493. Fischer U, Doler W, Luftner-Nagel S, Grabbe E. A multipurpose phantom for quality assurance of contrast-enhanced MR imaging of the breast. Eur Radiol 2000; 10:162–166. 494. Fischer U, Kopka L, Brinck U, Korabiowska M, Schauer A, Grabbe E. Prognostic value of contrast-enhanced MR mammography in patients with breast cancer. Eur Radiol 1997; 7:1002–1005. 495. Fischer U, Kopka L, Grabbe E. Invasive mucinous carcinoma of the breast missed by contrast-enhancing MR imaging of the breast. Eur Radiol 1996; 6:929–931. 496. Fischer U, Kopka L, Grabbe E. Magnetic resonance guided localization and biopsy of suspicious breast lesions. Top Magn Reson Imaging 1998; 9:44–59. 497. Fischer U, Kopka L, Grabbe E. Breast carcinoma: effect of preoperative contrast-enhanced MR imaging on the therapeutic approach. Radiology 1999; 213:881–888. 498. Fischer U, Rodenwaldt J, Hundertmark C, Doler W, Grabbe E. [MRI-assisted biopsy and localization of the breast]. Radiologe 1997; 37:692–701. 499. Fischer U, von Heyden D, Vosshenrich R, Vieweg I, Grabbe E. [Signal characteristics of malignant and benign lesions in dynamic 2D-MRT of the breast]. Rofo 1993; 158:287–292. 500. Fischer U, Vosshenrich R, Bruhn H, Keating D, Raab BW, Oestmann JW. MR-guided localization of suspected breast lesions detected exclusively by postcontrast MRI. J Comput Assist Tomogr 1995; 19:63–66. 501. Fischer U, Vosshenrich R, Doler W, Hamadeh A, Oestmann JW, Grabbe E. MR imaging-guided breast intervention: experience with two systems. Radiology 1995; 195:533–538. 502. Fischer U, Vosshenrich R, Keating D, et al. MR-guided biopsy of suspect breast lesions with a simple stereotaxic addon-device for surface coils. Radiology 1994; 192:272–273. 503. Fischer U, Vosshenrich R, Kopka L, Kahlen O, Grabbe E. [Contrast medium assisted dynamic MR-mammography after diagnostic and therapeutic interventions on the breast]. Bildgebung 1996; 63:94–100. 504. Fischer U, Vosshenrich R, Probst A, Burchhardt H, Grabbe E. [Preoperative MR-mammography in diagnosed breast carcinoma. Useful information or useless extravagance?]. Rofo 1994; 161:300–306. 505. Fischer U, Vosshenrich R, von Heyden D, Knipper H, Oestmann JW, Grabbe E. [Inflammatory lesions of the breast: indication for MR-mammography?]. Rofo 1994; 161:307–311. 506. Fischer U, Westerhof JP, Brinck U, Korabiowska M, Schauer A, Grabbe E. [Ductal carcinoma in situ in dynamic MRmammography at 1.5 T]. Rofo 1996; 164:290–294. 507. Fischer U, Zachariae O, Baum F, von Heyden D, Funke M, Liersch T. The influence of preoperative MRI of the breasts on recurrence rate in patients with breast cancer. Eur Radiol 2004; 14:1725–1731. 508. Flamig DP, Pierce WB, Harms SE, Griffey RH. Magnetization transfer contrast in fat-suppressed steady-state threedimensional MR images. Magn Reson Med 1992; 26:122–131. 509. Flamm CR, Ziegler KM, Aronson N. Technology Evaluation Center assessment synopsis: use of magnetic resonance imaging to avoid a biopsy in women with suspicious primary breast lesions. J Am Coll Radiol 2005; 2:485–487. 510. Flanagan FL, Murray JG, Gilligan P, Stack JP, Ennis JT. Digital subtraction in Gd-DTPA enhanced imaging of the breast. Clin Radiol 1995; 50:848–854. 511. Fletcher DW, Haselgrove JC, Bolinger L. High-resolution imaging using Hadamard encoding. Magn Reson Imaging 1999; 17:1457–1468. 512. Flickinger FW, Allison JD, Sherry RM, Wright JC. Differentiation of benign from malignant breast masses by timeintensity evaluation of contrast enhanced MRI. Magn Reson Imaging 1993; 11:617–620. 513. Floery D, Helbich TH. MRI-Guided percutaneous biopsy of breast lesions: materials, techniques, success rates, and management in patients with suspected radiologic-pathologic mismatch. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 2006; 14:411–425, viii. 514. Fobben ES, Rubin CZ, Kalisher L, Dembner AG, Seltzer MH, Santoro EJ. Breast MR imaging with commercially available techniques: radiologic-pathologic correlation. Radiology 1995; 196:143–152. 515. Forbes F, Peyrard N, Fraley C, Georgian-Smith D, Goldhaber DM, Raftery AE. Model-based region-of-interest selection in dynamic breast MRI. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2006; 30:675–687. 516. Foroudi F, Tiver KW. Occult breast carcinoma presenting as axillary metastases. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2000; 47:143–147. 517. Forrai G, Polgar C, Zana K, et al. The role of STIR MRI sequence in the evaluation of the breast following conservative surgery and radiotherapy. Neoplasma 2001; 48:7–11.  

321

 

a  References

518. Fowler PA, Casey CE, Cameron GG, Foster MA, Knight CH. Cyclic changes in composition and volume of the breast during the menstrual cycle, measured by magnetic resonance imaging. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1990; 97:595–602. 519. Fowlkes JB, Emelianov SY, Pipe JG, et al. Magnetic-resonance imaging techniques for detection of elasticity variation. Med Phys 1995; 22:1771–1778. 520. Fox B, Pacheco P, DeMonte F. Carcinoma of the breast metastatic to the optic nerve mimicking an optic nerve sheath meningioma: case report and review of the literature. Skull Base 2005; 15:281–287; discussion 287–289. 521. Franceschini G, D’Ugo D, Masetti R, et al. Surgical treatment and MRI in phyllodes tumors of the breast: our experience and review of the literature. Ann Ital Chir 2005; 76:127–140. 522. Franceschini G, Masetti R, Brescia A, et al. Phyllodes tumor of the breast: magnetic resonance imaging findings and surgical treatment. Breast J 2005; 11:144–145. 523. Francis A, England D, Rowlands D, Bradley S. Breast papilloma: mammogram, ultrasound and MRI appearances. Breast 2002; 11:394–397. 524. Francis A, England DW, Rowlands DC, Wadley M, Walker C, Bradley SA. The diagnosis of invasive lobular breast carcinoma. Does MRI have a role? Breast 2001; 10:38–40. 525. Frankel S, Occhipinti K, Kaufman L, et al. MRI findings in subjects with breast implants. Plast Reconstr Surg 1995; 96:852–859. 526. Frankel S, Occhipinti K, Kaufman L, et al. Characteristics of magnetic resonance sequences used for imaging silicone gel, saline, and gel-saline implants at low field strengths. Invest Radiol 1994; 29:781–786. 527. Frankel SD, Occhipinti KA, Kaufman L, Hunt TK, Kerley SM. MRI of a silicone breast implant surrounded by an enlarging hemorrhagic collection. Plast Reconstr Surg 1994; 94:865–868. 528. Frankel SD, Sickles EA. Morphologic criteria for interpreting abnormalities seen at breast MR imaging. Radiology 1997; 202:633–634. 529. Frauscher F. MRI evaluation of breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2007; 357:192; author reply 193. 530. Frei KA, Bonel HM, Forrer P, Alleman J, Steiner RA. Primary breast lymphoma, contralateral breast cancer, and bilateral Brenner tumors of the ovary. Obstet Gynecol 2002; 100:1079–1082. 531. Frei KA, Bonel HM, Pelte MF, Hylton NM, Kinkel K. Paget disease of the breast: findings at magnetic resonance imaging and histopathologic correlation. Invest Radiol 2005; 40:363–367. 532. Frei KA, Kinkel K, Bonel HM, Lu Y, Esserman LJ, Hylton NM. MR imaging of the breast in patients with positive margins after lumpectomy: influence of the time interval between lumpectomy and MR imaging. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2000; 175:1577–1584. 533. Friedenson B. Roads to breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2001; 344:936; author reply 937. 534. Friedman EP, Hall-Craggs MA, Mumtaz H, Schneidau A. Breast MR and the appearance of the normal and abnormal nipple. Clin Radiol 1997; 52:854–861. 535. Friedman P, Sanders L, Russo J, Sharo R, Swaminathan S, Smith R. Detection and localization of occult lesions using breast magnetic resonance imaging: initial experience in a community hospital. Acad Radiol 2005; 12:728–738. 536. Friedman PD, Swaminathan SV, Herman K, Kalisher L. Breast MRI: the importance of bilateral imaging. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2006; 187:345–349. 537. Friedman PD, Swaminathan SV, Smith R. SENSE imaging of the breast. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2005; 184:448–451. 538. Friedrich M. MRI of the breast: state of the art. Eur Radiol 1998; 8:707–725. 539. Friedrich M, Krauth M, Lange K. [Angiosarcoma of the breast after breast-preserving therapy of invasive ductal carcinoma]. Rofo 1996; 165:195–197. 540. Frings M, Antoch G, Knorn P, et al. Strategies in detection of the primary tumour in anti-Yo associated paraneoplastic cerebellar degeneration. J Neurol 2005; 252:197–201. 541. Froh MS, Barber DC, Brock KK, Plewes DB, Martel AL. Piecewise-quadrilateral registration by optical flow – applications in contrast-enhanced MR imaging of the breast. Med Image Comput Comput Assist Interv Int Conf Med Image Comput Comput Assist Interv 2006; 9:686–693. 542. Frouge C, Guinebretiere JM, Contesso G, Di Paola R, Blery M. Correlation between contrast enhancement in dynamic magnetic resonance imaging of the breast and tumor angiogenesis. Invest Radiol 1994; 29:1043–1049. 543. Fu P, Kurihara Y, Kanemaki Y, et al. High-resolution MRI in detecting subareolar breast abscess. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2007; 188:1568–1572.  

322

544. Fuchsjager MH, Helbich TH. [In situ ductal carcinoma of the breast: a diagnostic challenge]. Wien Med Wochenschr Suppl 2002:69–73. 545. Fuchsjager MH, Philipp MO, Loewe C, Helbich TH. [Diagnostic management of nipple discharge]. Wien Klin Wochenschr 2003; 115 Suppl 2:33–39. 546. Fujikawa A, Tsuchiya K, Katase S, Kurosaki Y, Hachiya J. Diffusion-weighted MR imaging of Carmofur-induced leukoencephalopathy. Eur Radiol 2001; 11:2602–2606. 547. Fullerton GD. Technical report of the international working group on breast MRI. J Magn Reson Imaging 1999; 10:978. 548. Funke M, Fischer U, Grabbe E. [MR-mammography: current status and perspectives]. Aktuelle Radiol 1996; 6:130–135. 549. Funovics MA, Kapeller B, Hoeller C, et al. MR imaging of the her2/neu and 9.2.27 tumor antigens using immunospecific contrast agents. Magn Reson Imaging 2004; 22:843–850. 550. Furman E, Margalit R, Bendel P, Horowitz A, Degani H. In vivo studies by magnetic resonance imaging and spectroscopy of the response to tamoxifen of MCF7 human breast cancer implanted in nude mice. Cancer Commun 1991; 3:287–297. 551. Furman-Haran E, Degani H. Parametric analysis of breast MRI. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2002; 26:376–386. 552. Furman-Haran E, Grobgeld D, Degani H. Dynamic contrast-enhanced imaging and analysis at high spatial resolution of MCF7 human breast tumors. J Magn Reson 1997; 128:161–171. 553. Furman-Haran E, Grobgeld D, Kelcz F, Degani H. Critical role of spatial resolution in dynamic contrast-enhanced breast MRI. J Magn Reson Imaging 2001; 13:862–867. 554. Furman-Haran E, Kelcz F, Degani H. Magnetic resonance imaging of breast cancer angiogenesis: a review. J Exp Clin Cancer Res 2002; 21:47–54. 555. Furman-Haran E, Margalit R, Grobgeld D, Degani H. Dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging reveals stress-induced angiogenesis in MCF7 human breast tumors. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 1996; 93:6247–6251. 556. Furman-Haran E, Schechtman E, Kelcz F, Kirshenbaum K, Degani H. Magnetic resonance imaging reveals functional diversity of the vasculature in benign and malignant breast lesions. Cancer 2005; 104:708–718. 557. Furusawa H, Namba K, Thomsen S, et al. Magnetic resonance-guided focused ultrasound surgery of breast cancer: reliability and effectiveness. J Am Coll Surg 2006; 203:54–63. 558. Furuta A, Ishibashi T, Takahashi S, et al. [Magnetic resonance imaging of breast cancer: correlation between contrast enhancement and tumor angiogenesis]. Nippon Igaku Hoshasen Gakkai Zasshi 1999; 59:682–688. 559. Gabata T, Kadoya M, Matsui O, et al. Peritumoral spared area in fatty liver: correlation between opposed-phase gradient-echo MR imaging and CT arteriography. Abdom Imaging 2001; 26:384–389. 560. Gabriel HA, Feng C, Mendelson EB, Benjamin S. Breast MRI for cancer detection in a patient with diabetic mastopathy. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2004; 182:1081–1083. 561. Galimberti V, Bassani G, Monti S, et al. Clinical experience with axillary presentation breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2004; 88:43–47. 562. Galinsky D, Kisselgoff D, Sella T, Peretz T, Libson E, Sklair-Levy M. Effect of breast magnetic resonance imaging on the clinical management of breast cancer. Isr Med Assoc J 2005; 7:700–703. 563. Gallardo X, Sentis M, Castaner E, Andreu X, Darnell A, Canalias J. Enhancement of intramammary lymph nodes with lymphoid hyperplasia: a potential pitfall in breast MRI. Eur Radiol 1998; 8:1662–1665. 564. Galons JP, Altbach MI, Paine-Murrieta GD, Taylor CW, Gillies RJ. Early increases in breast tumor xenograft water mobility in response to paclitaxel therapy detected by non-invasive diffusion magnetic resonance imaging. Neoplasia 1999; 1:113–117. 565. Gandjbakhche AH, Chernomordik V, Hattery D, Hassan M, Gannot I. Tissue characterization by quantitative optical imaging methods. Technol Cancer Res Treat 2003; 2:537–551. 566. Garcia R, Frame L, Caranto JF, et al. Report of the Working Groups on Breast MRI: report of the Consumer Affairs Working Group. Breast J 2004; 10 Suppl 2:S17–19. 567. Garimella V, Qutob O, Fox JN, et al. Recurrence rates after DCE-MRI image guided planning for breast-conserving surgery following neoadjuvant chemotherapy for locally advanced breast cancer patients. Eur J Surg Oncol 2007; 33:157–161.  

323

 

a  References

568. Garrido L, Kwong KK, Pfleiderer B, et al. Echo-planar chemical shift imaging of silicone gel prostheses. Magn Reson Imaging 1993; 11:625–634. 569. Garrido-Laguna I, Fernandez Hidalgo O, Garcia Foncillas J. MRI evaluation of breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2007; 357:191; author reply 193. 570. Gatzemeier W, Liersch T, Stylianou A, Buttler A, Becker H, Fischer U. [Preoperative MR mammography in breast carcinoma. Effect on operative treatment from the surgical viewpoint]. Chirurg 1999; 70:1460–1468. 571. Gatzemeier W, Liersch T, Stylianou A, Buttler A, Fischer U, Becker H. [Effect of MR mammography on surgical procedure in operative treatment of breast cancer]. Langenbecks Arch Chir Suppl Kongressbd 1998; 115:1488–1490. 572. Gaubitz M, Jackisch C, Domschke W, Heindel W, Pfleiderer B. Silicone breast implants: correlation between implant ruptures, magnetic resonance spectroscopically estimated silicone presence in the liver, antibody status and clinical symptoms. Rheumatology (Oxford) 2002; 41:129–135; discussion 123–124. 573. Gebauer B, Bostanjoglo M, Moesta KT, Schneider W, Schlag PM, Felix R. Magnetic resonance-guided biopsy of suspicious breast lesions with a handheld vacuum biopsy device. Acta Radiol 2006; 47:907–913. 574. Gehl HB, Frahm C. [MRI-controlled biopsies]. Radiologe 1998; 38:194–199. 575. Geijer B, Holtas S. Diffusion-weighted imaging of brain metastases: their potential to be misinterpreted as focal ischaemic lesions. Neuroradiology 2002; 44:568–573. 576. Genson CC, Blane CE, Helvie MA, Waits SA, Chenevert TL. Effects on breast MRI of artifacts caused by metallic tissue marker clips. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2007; 188:372–376. 577. Georgian-Smith D, Goldhaber DM, Haynor DR, Kaufman L. Ghost imaging for targeting breast masses with MR imaging: a phantom study. Acad Radiol 2000; 7:487–492. 578. Germer J. MR evaluation of breast implants. Radiol Technol 2002; 73:573–577. 579. Ghai S, Muradali D, Bukhanov K, Kulkarni S. Nonenhancing breast malignancies on MRI: sonographic and pathologic correlation. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2005; 185:481–487. 580. Ghanem N, Altehoefer C, Hogerle S, et al. Comparative diagnostic value and therapeutic relevance of magnetic resonance imaging and bone marrow scintigraphy in patients with metastatic solid tumors of the axial skeleton. Eur J Radiol 2002; 43:256–261. 581. Ghanouni P, Kurian AW, Margolis D, et al. Ductal pattern enhancement on magnetic resonance imaging of the breast due to ductal lavage. Breast J 2007; 13:281–286. 582. Ghate SV, Rosen EL, Soo MS, Baker JA. MRI-guided vacuum-assisted breast biopsy with a handheld portable biopsy system. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2006; 186:1733–1736. 583. Ghosh L, Dahut W, Kakar S, et al. Management of patients with metastatic cancer of unknown primary. Curr Probl Surg 2005; 42:12–66. 584. Gianfelice D, Khiat A, Amara M, Belblidia A, Boulanger Y. MR imaging-guided focused ultrasound surgery of breast cancer: correlation of dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI with histopathologic findings. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2003; 82:93–101. 585. Gianfelice D, Khiat A, Amara M, Belblidia A, Boulanger Y. MR imaging-guided focused US ablation of breast cancer: histopathologic assessment of effectiveness – initial experience. Radiology 2003; 227:849–855. 586. Gianfelice D, Khiat A, Boulanger Y, Amara M, Belblidia A. Feasibility of magnetic resonance imaging-guided focused ultrasound surgery as an adjunct to tamoxifen therapy in high-risk surgical patients with breast carcinoma. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2003; 14:1275–1282. 587. Gibbs P, Liney GP, Lowry M, Kneeshaw PJ, Turnbull LW. Differentiation of benign and malignant sub-1 cm breast lesions using dynamic contrast enhanced MRI. Breast 2004; 13:115–121. 588. Gibbs P, Turnbull LW. Textural analysis of contrast-enhanced MR images of the breast. Magn Reson Med 2003; 50:92–98. 589. Gibril F, Reynolds JC, Chen CC, et al. Specificity of somatostatin receptor scintigraphy: a prospective study and effects of false-positive localizations on management in patients with gastrinomas. J Nucl Med 1999; 40:539–553. 590. Gibson AP, Hebden JC, Arridge SR. Recent advances in diffuse optical imaging. Phys Med Biol 2005; 50:R1–43. 591. Gilbert FJ. New screening techniques for breast cancer (MRI). Dis Markers 1999; 15:115–116. 592. Gilbert FJ. Should we use MRI to screen women at high-risk of breast cancer? Cancer Imaging 2005; 5:32–38. 593. Gilbert FJ. Screening for breast cancer in women at moderate and high risk. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol) 2005; 17:240–243.  

324

594. Gilhuijs KG, Deurloo EE, Muller SH, Peterse JL, Schultze Kool LJ. Breast MR imaging in women at increased lifetime risk of breast cancer: clinical system for computerized assessment of breast lesions initial results. Radiology 2002; 225:907–916. 595. Gilhuijs KG, Giger ML, Bick U. Computerized analysis of breast lesions in three dimensions using dynamic magneticresonance imaging. Med Phys 1998; 25:1647–1654. 596. Gilles R. [MRI of the breast. Techniques and current values]. Cancer Radiother 2003; 7 Suppl 1:115s–119s. 597. Gilles R, Calafat JF, Tristant H. [Imaging of breast neoplasms]. Bull Cancer 1997; 84:77–82. 598. Gilles R, Guinebretiere JM, Lucidarme O, et al. Nonpalpable breast tumors: diagnosis with contrast-enhanced subtraction dynamic MR imaging. Radiology 1994; 191:625–631. 599. Gilles R, Guinebretiere JM, Shapeero LG, et al. Assessment of breast cancer recurrence with contrast-enhanced subtraction MR imaging: preliminary results in 26 patients. Radiology 1993; 188:473–478. 600. Gilles R, Guinebretiere JM, Toussaint C, et al. Locally advanced breast cancer: contrast-enhanced subtraction MR imaging of response to preoperative chemotherapy. Radiology 1994; 191:633–638. 601. Gilles R, Meunier M, Lucidarme O, et al. Clustered breast microcalcifications: evaluation by dynamic contrast-enhanced subtraction MRI. J Comput Assist Tomogr 1996; 20:9–14. 602. Gilles R, Meunier M, Trouffleau P, et al. [Diagnosis of infraclinical lesions of the breast with dynamic MRI: results of a prospective and multicenter study]. J Radiol 1997; 78:293–297. 603. Gilles R, Thiollier S, Guinebretiere JM, et al. [Diagnosis of local breast cancer recurrences by magnetic resonance imaging]. J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod (Paris) 1995; 24:788–793. 604. Gilles R, Zafrani B, Guinebretiere JM, et al. Ductal carcinoma in situ: MR imaging-histopathologic correlation. Radiology 1995; 196:415–419. 605. Gimi B, Mori N, Ackerstaff E, Frost EE, Bulte JW, Bhujwalla ZM. Noninvasive MRI of endothelial cell response to human breast cancer cells. Neoplasia 2006; 8:207–213. 606. Giron GL, Boolbol SK, Gross J, Cohen JM, Feldman S. Postlactational microcalcifications. Breast J 2004; 10:247–252. 607. Given-Wilson R, Britton P. Breast. Clin Radiol 2004; 59:892–894. 608. Glazebrook KN, Morton MJ, Reynolds C. Vascular tumors of the breast: mammographic, sonographic, and MRI appearances. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2005; 184:331–338. 609. Glunde K, Ackerstaff E, Mori N, Jacobs MA, Bhujwalla ZM. Choline phospholipid metabolism in cancer: consequences for molecular pharmaceutical interventions. Mol Pharm 2006; 3:496–506. 610. Godtliebsen F, Chu CK, Sorbye SH, Torheim G. An estimator for functional data with application to MRI. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 2001; 20:36–44. 611. Goehde SC, Forsting M, Debatin JF. Screening with MRI: a new „all inclusive“ protocol. Semin Ultrasound CT MR 2003; 24:2–11. 612. Goeminne JC, Brouillard A, Jaumain P, Ferrant A, Snyers B, De Potter P. Bilateral granulomatous panuveitis as initial presentation of diffuse systemic T cell lymphoma. Ophthalmologica 1999; 213:323–326. 613. Goerres GW, Michel SC, Fehr MK, et al. Follow-up of women with breast cancer: comparison between MRI and FDG PET. Eur Radiol 2003; 13:1635–1644. 614. Goethals I, De Winter O, De Bondt P, De Sutter J, Dierckx R, Van De Wiele C. The clinical value of nuclear medicine in the assessment of irradiation-induced and anthracycline-associated cardiac damage. Ann Oncol 2002; 13:1331–1339. 615. Goffin J, Chappuis PO, Wong N, Foulkes WD. Re: Magnetic resonance imaging and mammography in women with a hereditary risk of breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 2001; 93:1754–1755. 616. Gokalp G, Topal U. MR imaging in probably benign lesions (BI-RADS category 3) of the breast. Eur J Radiol 2006; 57:436–444. 617. Golder WA. [Magnetic resonance imaging of the breast: costs and efficiency]. Onkologie 2001; 24:185–188. 618. Goodman CM, Cohen V, Thornby J, Netscher D. The life span of silicone gel breast implants and a comparison of mammography, ultrasonography, and magnetic resonance imaging in detecting implant rupture: a meta-analysis. Ann Plast Surg 1998; 41:577–585; discussion 585–576. 619. Gorczyca DP. Bilateral surface coils in MR breast imaging: potential hazards. Radiology 1993; 186:906–907. 620. Gorczyca DP. MR imaging of breast implants. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 1994; 2:659–672.  

325

 

a  References

621. Gorczyca DP, DeBruhl ND, Ahn CY, et al. Silicone breast implant ruptures in an animal model: comparison of mammography, MR imaging, US, and CT. Radiology 1994; 190:227–232. 622. Gorczyca DP, DeBruhl ND, Sullenberger PC, Farria D, Sinha S, Bassett LW. Wire localization of breast lesions before biopsy: use of an MR-compatible device in phantoms and cadavers. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1995; 165:835–838. 623. Gorczyca DP, Schneider E, DeBruhl ND, et al. Silicone breast implant rupture: comparison between three-point Dixon and fast spin-echo MR imaging. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1994; 162:305–310. 624. Gorczyca DP, Sinha S, Ahn CY, et al. Silicone breast implants in vivo: MR imaging. Radiology 1992; 185:407–410. 625. Gordenne W, Bauduin E. Diagnostic accuracy of new imaging techniques in breast diseases. J Belge Radiol 1989; 72:35–38. 626. Gordon PB. Ultrasound for breast cancer screening and staging. Radiol Clin North Am 2002; 40:431–441. 627. Gordon PB. Image-directed fine needle aspiration biopsy in nonpalpable breast lesions. Clin Lab Med 2005; 25:655–678, v. 628. Gorson KC, Musaphir S, Lathi ES, Wolfe G. Radiation-induced malignant fibrous histiocytoma of the brachial plexus. J Neurooncol 1995; 26:73–77. 629. Goscin CP, Berman CG, Clark RA. Magnetic resonance imaging of the breast. Cancer Control 2001; 8:399–406. 630. Goto M, Ito H, Akazawa K, et al. Diagnosis of breast tumors by contrast-enhanced MR imaging: comparison between the diagnostic performance of dynamic enhancement patterns and morphologic features. J Magn Reson Imaging 2007; 25:104–112. 631. Goto M, Sakuma H, Kobayashi S, Matsumura K, Takeda K. Dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging of the entire breast with spectral-selective inversion fast three dimensional sequence. Magma 1998; 7:69–75. 632. Gould SW, Gedroyc W, Darzi A. Magnetic resonance mammography. Br J Surg 1997; 84:426. 633. Gould SW, Lamb G, Lomax D, Gedroyc W, Darzi A. Interventional MR-guided excisional biopsy of breast lesions. J Magn Reson Imaging 1998; 8:26–30. 634. Graham SJ, Bronskill MJ. MR measurement of relative water content and multicomponent T2 relaxation in human breast. Magn Reson Med 1996; 35:706–715. 635. Graham SJ, Bronskill MJ, Byng JW, Yaffe MJ, Boyd NF. Quantitative correlation of breast tissue parameters using magnetic resonance and X-ray mammography. Br J Cancer 1996; 73:162–168. 636. Graham SJ, Stanchev PL, Bronskill MJ. Criteria for analysis of multicomponent tissue T2 relaxation data. Magn Reson Med 1996; 35:370–378. 637. Graham SJ, Stanchev PL, Lloyd-Smith JO, Bronskill MJ, Plewes DB. Changes in fibroglandular volume and water content of breast tissue during the menstrual cycle observed by MR imaging at 1.5 T. J Magn Reson Imaging 1995; 5:695–701. 638. Gralow JR. Breast cancer 2004: Progress and promise on the clinical front. Phys Med 2006; 21 Suppl 1:2. 639. Grammaticos PC. Evaluation of nuclear medicine tests for the diagnosis of breast carcinoma. Nucl Med Rev Cent East Eur 2002; 5:165–170. 640. Grebe P, Wilhelm K, Brunier A, Mitze M. [MR tomography of cystosarcoma phylloides. A case report]. Aktuelle Radiol 1992; 2:376–378. 641. Greco M, Agresti R, Giovanazzi R. Impact of the diagnostic methods on the therapeutic strategies. Q J Nucl Med 1998; 42:66–80. 642. Greco RJ. Nonsurgical breast enhancement – fact or fiction? Plast Reconstr Surg 2002; 110:337–339. 643. Greenleaf JF, Fatemi M, Insana M. Selected methods for imaging elastic properties of biological tissues. Annu Rev Biomed Eng 2003; 5:57–78. 644. Greenman RL, Lenkinski RE, Schnall MD. Bilateral imaging using separate interleaved 3D volumes and dynamically switched multiple receive coil arrays. Magn Reson Med 1998; 39:108–115. 645. Gribbestad IS, Nilsen G, Fjosne H, et al. Contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging of the breast. Acta Oncol 1992; 31:833–842. 646. Gribbestad IS, Nilsen G, Fjosne HE, Kvinnsland S, Haugen OA, Rinck PA. Comparative signal intensity measurements in dynamic gadolinium-enhanced MR mammography. J Magn Reson Imaging 1994; 4:477–480. 647. Gribbestad IS, Singstad TE, Nilsen G, et al. In vivo 1H MRS of normal breast and breast tumors using a dedicated double breast coil. J Magn Reson Imaging 1998; 8:1191–1197.  

326

648. Griebsch I, Brown J, Boggis C, et al. Cost-effectiveness of screening with contrast enhanced magnetic resonance imaging vs X-ray mammography of women at a high familial risk of breast cancer. Br J Cancer 2006; 95:801–810. 649. Groves AM, Warren RM, Godward S, Rajan PS. Characterization of pure high-grade DCIS on magnetic resonance imaging using the evolving breast MR lexicon terminology: can it be differentiated from pure invasive disease? Magn Reson Imaging 2005; 23:733–738. 650. Grunberg SM, Weiss MH, Russell CA, et al. Long-term administration of mifepristone (RU486): clinical tolerance during extended treatment of meningioma. Cancer Invest 2006; 24:727–733. 651. Grunberg SM, Weiss MH, Spitz IM, et al. Treatment of unresectable meningiomas with the antiprogesterone agent mifepristone. J Neurosurg 1991; 74:861–866. 652. Gruner C, Schonwalder A, Schulz-Wendtland R, Lang N, Bautz W. [What is the role of Doppler color sonography associated with echo-signal enhancing levovist in complementary breast diagnosis?]. Aktuelle Radiol 1998; 8:58–62. 653. Grunwald S, Heyer H, Paepke S, et al. Diagnostic value of ductoscopy in the diagnosis of nipple discharge and intraductal proliferations in comparison to standard methods. Onkologie 2007; 30:243–248. 654. Gualdi GF, Ballesio L, Caterino M, Trasimeni G, Pirolli FM, Melone AK. [Magnetic resonance in the evaluation of breast pathology]. Clin Ter 1988; 126:363–367. 655. Gualdi GF, Casciani E, Giuntini T, D’Amico D, Polettini E. [Imaging of the breast tissue]. Clin Ter 2000; 151:269–278. 656. Guillemaud R, Brady M. Estimating the bias field of MR images. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 1997; 16:238–251. 657. Guitelman M, Colombani-Vidal ME, Zylbersztein CC, et al. Hyperprolactinemia in asymptomatic patients is related to high molecular weight posttranslational variants or glycosylated forms. Pituitary 2002; 5:255–260. 658. Gundry KR. The application of breast MRI in staging and screening for breast cancer. Oncology (Williston Park) 2005; 19:159–169; discussion 170, 173–154, 177. 659. Guo Y, Cai YQ, Cai ZL, et al. Differentiation of clinically benign and malignant breast lesions using diffusionweighted imaging. J Magn Reson Imaging 2002; 16:172–178. 660. Guo Y, Sivaramakrishna R, Lu CC, Suri JS, Laxminarayan S. Breast image registration techniques: a survey. Med Biol Eng Comput 2006; 44:15–26. 661. Guo Y, Suri J, Sivaramakrishna R. Image registration for breast imaging: a review. Conf Proc IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc 2005; 4:3379–3382. 662. Gur D. MRI in breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2004; 351:2235–2236; author reply 2235–2236. 663. Gutierrez L, Montes A. [Siliconomas. A case report]. Rev Med Chil 2002; 130:793–797. 664. Gyorki D, Mann B. MRI evaluation of breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2007; 357:191; author reply 193. 665. Hachiya J, Seki T, Okada M, Nitatori T, Korenaga T, Furuya Y. MR imaging of the breast with Gd-DTPA enhancement: comparison with mammography and ultrasonography. Radiat Med 1991; 9:232–240. 666. Haddad N, Ollivier L, Tardivon A, Thibault F, El Khoury C, Neuenschwander S. [Usefulness of magnetic resonance imaging in Paget disease of the breast]. J Radiol 2007; 88:579–584. 667. Hadden WE. Silicone breast implants: a review. Australas Radiol 1998; 42:296–302. 668. Hadden WE. Recommendations for the surveillance of young women at increased risk for breast cancer. Australas Radiol 2007; 51:1–11. 669. Hadi MA, Zakaria H, Al Tamimi DM, et al. Lipomatous fibroadenoma. Breast J 2002; 8:311–313. 670. Hagen AI, Kvistad KA, Maehle L, et al. Sensitivity of MRI versus conventional screening in the diagnosis of BRCA-associated breast cancer in a national prospective series. Breast 2007. 671. Hall FM. Technologic advances in breast imaging. Current and future strategies, controversies, and opportunities. Surg Oncol Clin N Am 1997; 6:403–409. 672. Hall-Craggs MA. Interventional MRI of the breast: minimally invasive therapy. Eur Radiol 2000; 10:59–62. 673. Hall-Craggs MA, Mumtaz H. Keeping abreast of magnetic resonance: developments in breast cancer imaging. Clin Radiol 1997; 52:253–255. 674. Hamilton RL. Case of the month. July 1996 – precocious puberty. Brain Pathol 1997; 7:711–712. 675. Hamm B, Fischer E, Hopfenmuller W, Sander B. [Improvement of MR tomography of the liver using a multislice gradient echo sequence]. Rofo 1989; 150:307–315. 676. Hampton T. Research findings point to advances in breast cancer screening and treatment. Jama 2007; 298:389–390. 677. Hang-Fu L, Marmolya G, Feiglin DH. Liposuction fat-fillant implant for breast augmentation and reconstruction. Aesthetic Plast Surg 1995; 19:427–437.  

327

 

a  References

678. Hansen NM, Growney A. Breast cancer: pre- and postoperative imaging for staging. Surg Oncol Clin N Am 2007; 16:447–463. 679. Harada T, Tanigawa N, Matsuki M, Nohara T, Narabayashi I. Evaluation of lymph node metastases of breast cancer using ultrasmall superparamagnetic iron oxide-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging. Eur J Radiol 2007. 680. Hardy JR, Powles TJ, Judson I, et al. How many tests are required in the diagnosis of palpable breast abnormalities? Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol) 1990; 2:148–152. 681. Hari S, Kumar J, Kumar A, Chumber S. Bilateral severe mammary duct ectasia. Acta Radiol 2007; 48:398–400. 682. Harms SE. MRI in breast cancer diagnosis and treatment. Curr Probl Diagn Radiol 1996; 25:193–215. 683. Harms SE. Integration of breast magnetic resonance imaging with breast cancer treatment. Top Magn Reson Imaging 1998; 9:79–91. 684. Harms SE. Breast magnetic resonance imaging. Semin Ultrasound CT MR 1998; 19:104–120. 685. Harms SE. Breast Cancer Staging Working Group report. J Magn Reson Imaging 1999; 10:991–994. 686. Harms SE. Technical report of the international working group on breast MRI. J Magn Reson Imaging 1999; 10:979. 687. Harms SE. MR-guided minimally invasive procedures. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 2001; 9:381–392, vii. 688. Harms SE. Integration of breast MRI in clinical trials. J Magn Reson Imaging 2001; 13:830–836. 689. Harms SE. Introduction to the International Working Groups on Breast MRI. Breast J 2004; 10 Suppl 2:S1–2. 690. Harms SE. The use of breast magnetic resonance imaging in ductal carcinoma in situ. Breast J 2005; 11:379–381. 691. Harms SE, Flamig DP. MR imaging of the breast. J Magn Reson Imaging 1993; 3:277–283. 692. Harms SE, Flamig DP. Breast: visualizing Ca not seen by radiography. Diagn Imaging (San Franc) 1993; 15 Suppl:20–24. 693. Harms SE, Flamig DP. Staging of breast cancer with MR imaging. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 1994; 2:573–584. 694. Harms SE, Flamig DP. Breast MRI. Clin Imaging 2001; 25:227–246. 695. Harms SE, Flamig DP, Evans WP, Harries SA, Brown S. MR imaging of the breast: current status and future potential. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1994; 163:1039–1047. 696. Harms SE, Flamig DP, Hesley KL, Evans WP. Magnetic resonance imaging of the breast. Magn Reson Q 1992; 8:139–155. 697. Harms SE, Flamig DP, Hesley KL, et al. Fat-suppressed three-dimensional MR imaging of the breast. Radiographics 1993; 13:247–267. 698. Harms SE, Flamig DP, Hesley KL, et al. MR imaging of the breast with rotating delivery of excitation off resonance: clinical experience with pathologic correlation. Radiology 1993; 187:493–501. 699. Harms SE, Jensen RA, Meiches MD, Flamig DP, Evans WP. Silicone-suppressed 3D MRI of the breast using rotating delivery of off-resonance excitation. J Comput Assist Tomogr 1995; 19:394–399. 700. Harms SE, Rabinovitch R, Julian TB, Rafferty E, Masood S, Weatherall P. Report of the Working Groups on Breast MRI: report of the Breast Cancer Staging Group. Breast J 2004; 10 Suppl 2:S3–8. 701. Harries SA, Amin Z, Smith ME, et al. Interstitial laser photocoagulation as a treatment for breast cancer. Br J Surg 1994; 81:1617–1619. 702. Harris MC, Bernbaum JC, Polin JR, Zimmerman R, Polin RA. Developmental follow-up of breastfed term and nearterm infants with marked hyperbilirubinemia. Pediatrics 2001; 107:1075–1080. 703. Harris R. Screening for breast cancer: what to do with the evidence. Am Fam Physician 2007; 75:1623–1624, 1626. 704. Hartman AR. The problems with risk selection; scientific and psychosocial aspects. Recent Results Cancer Res 2005; 166:125–144. 705. Hartman AR, Daniel BL, Kurian AW, et al. Breast magnetic resonance image screening and ductal lavage in women at high genetic risk for breast carcinoma. Cancer 2004; 100:479–489. 706. Harvey JA. Unusual breast cancers: useful clues to expanding the differential diagnosis. Radiology 2007; 242:683–694. 707. Haselhorst R, Scheffler K, Faletti L, Kaspar A, Prunte C, Seelig J. 29Si imaging of silicone breast implants and intraocular silicone oil. Magn Reson Med 1998; 40:170–174. 708. Hata T, Takahashi H, Watanabe K, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging for preoperative evaluation of breast cancer: a comparative study with mammography and ultrasonography. J Am Coll Surg 2004; 198:190–197. 709. Hauth EA, Jaeger HJ, Lubnau J, et al. MR-guided vacuum-assisted breast biopsy with a handheld biopsy system: clinical experience and results in postinterventional MR mammography after 24 h. Eur Radiol 2007.  

328

710. Hauth EA, Jaeger HJ, Maderwald S, Muehler A, Kimmig R, Forsting M. Quantitative 2- and 3-dimensional analysis of pharmacokinetic model-derived variables for breast lesions in dynamic, contrast-enhanced MR mammography. Eur J Radiol 2007. 711. Hauth EA, Reiter K, Hoffmann O, Otterbach F, Kimmig R, Forsting M. [MR-guided vacuum assisted breast biopsy]. Zentralbl Gynakol 2005; 127:400–406. 712. Hauth EA, Stockamp C, Maderwald S, et al. Evaluation of the three-time-point method for diagnosis of breast lesions in contrast-enhanced MR mammography. Clin Imaging 2006; 30:160–165. 713. Hayasaka K, Tanaka Y, Saitoh T, Takahashi M. Gadolinium-enhanced dynamic MRI of breast hemangioma. Comput Med Imaging Graph 2003; 27:493–495. 714. Hayes C, Padhani AR, Leach MO. Assessing changes in tumour vascular function using dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging. NMR Biomed 2002; 15:154–163. 715. Hayton P, Brady M, Tarassenko L, Moore N. Analysis of dynamic MR breast images using a model of contrast enhancement. Med Image Anal 1997; 1:207–224. 716. He Q, Xu RZ, Shkarin P, et al. Magnetic resonance spectroscopic imaging of tumor metabolic markers for cancer diagnosis, metabolic phenotyping, and characterization of tumor microenvironment. Dis Markers 2003; 19:69–94. 717. Hede K. Breast MRI scans need standards, experts say. J Natl Cancer Inst 2007; 99:1066–1067. 718. Heden P, Nava MB, van Tetering JP, et al. Prevalence of rupture in inamed silicone breast implants. Plast Reconstr Surg 2006; 118:303–308; discussion 309–312. 719. Hefler L, Casselman J, Amaya B, et al. Follow-up of breast lesions detected by MRI not biopsied due to absent enhancement of contrast medium. Eur Radiol 2003; 13:344–346. 720. Heiberg EV, Perman WH, Herrmann VM, Janney CG. Dynamic sequential 3D gadolinium-enhanced MRI of the whole breast. Magn Reson Imaging 1996; 14:337–348. 721. Heinig A, Lampe D, Kolbl H, Beck R, Heywang-Kobrunner SH. Suppression of unspecific enhancement on breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) by antiestrogen medication. Tumori 2002; 88:215–223. 722. Helbich TH. Contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging of the breast. Eur J Radiol 2000; 34:208–219. 723. Helbich TH. Localization and biopsy of breast lesions by magnetic resonance imaging guidance. J Magn Reson Imaging 2001; 13:903–911. 724. Helbich TH, Becherer A, Trattnig S, et al. Differentiation of benign and malignant breast lesions: MR imaging versus Tc-99m sestamibi scintimammography. Radiology 1997; 202:421–429. 725. Helbich TH, Roberts TP, Gossmann A, et al. Quantitative gadopentetate-enhanced MRI of breast tumors: testing of different analytic methods. Magn Reson Med 2000; 44:915–924. 726. Helbich TH, Wunderbaldinger P, Plenk H, Deutinger M, Breitenseher M, Mostbeck GH. The value of MRI in silicone granuloma of the breast. Eur J Radiol 1997; 24:155–158. 727. Hellwig G, Brix G, Griebel J, et al. Dynamic MR mammography: three-dimensional real-time visualization of contrast enhancement in virtual reality. Acad Radiol 2002; 9:1255–1263. 728. Helmberger TK, Laubenberger J, Rummeny E, et al. MRI characteristics in focal hepatic disease before and after administration of MnDPDP: discriminant analysis as a diagnostic tool. Eur Radiol 2002; 12:62–70. 729. Helmberger TK, Schroder J, Holzknecht N, et al. T2-weighted breathold imaging of the liver: a quantitative and qualitative comparison of fast spin echo and half Fourier single shot fast spin echo imaging. Magma 1999; 9:42–51. 730. Henderson E, Sykes J, Drost D, Weinmann HJ, Rutt BK, Lee TY. Simultaneous MRI measurement of blood flow, blood volume, and capillary permeability in mammary tumors using two different contrast agents. J Magn Reson Imaging 2000; 12:991–1003. 731. Hendrick RE, Cutter GR, Berns EA, et al. Community-based mammography practice: services, charges, and interpretation methods. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2005; 184:433–438. 732. Hengst SA, Ehrenstein T, Herzog H, et al. [Magnetic resonance tomography guided focussed ultrasound surgery (MRgFUS) in tumor therapy – a new noninvasive therapy option]. Radiologe 2004; 44:339–346. 733. Henry-Tillman RS, Harms SE, Westbrook KC, Korourian S, Klimberg VS. Role of breast magnetic resonance imaging in determining breast as a source of unknown metastatic lymphadenopathy. Am J Surg 1999; 178:496–500. 734. Hentschel M, Oellinger J, Siewert C, et al. 1H and 31P NMR characterisation of a double breast coil for spectroscopic measurements and imaging. Biomed Tech (Berl) 1999; 44:272–277.  

329

 

a  References

735. Herborn CU, Marincek B, Erfmann D, et al. Breast augmentation and reconstructive surgery: MR imaging of implant rupture and malignancy. Eur Radiol 2002; 12:2198–2206. 736. Hering M, Hagel E, Zwicker C, Krieger G. [Bilateral highly malignant centroblastic lymphoma of the breast]. Rofo 1996; 165:198–200. 737. Hernanz F, Alonso-Bartolome P, Garijo F, et al. Image of the month. Mammary hamartoma. Arch Surg 2007; 142:201–202. 738. Herrmann KH, Wurdinger S, Fischer DR, et al. Application and assessment of a robust elastic motion correction algorithm to dynamic MRI. Eur Radiol 2007; 17:259–264. 739. Hess T, Knopp MV, Hoffmann U, et al. [A pharmacokinetic analysis of Gd-DTPA enhancement in MRT in breast carcinoma]. Rofo 1994; 160:518–523. 740. Hevezi JM. Emerging technology in cancer treatment: radiotherapy modalities. Oncology (Williston Park) 2003; 17:1445–1456; discussions 1460–1442, 1464. 741. Heyn C, Ronald JA, Ramadan SS, et al. In vivo MRI of cancer cell fate at the single-cell level in a mouse model of breast cancer metastasis to the brain. Magn Reson Med 2006; 56:1001–1010. 742. Heys SD, Smith IC, Ross JA, et al. A pilot study with long term follow up of hyperbaric oxygen pretreatment in patients with locally advanced breast cancer undergoing neo-adjuvant chemotherapy. Undersea Hyperb Med 2006; 33:33–43. 743. Heywang SH, Bassermann R, Fenzl G, et al. MRI of the breast – histopathologic correlation. Eur J Radiol 1987; 7:175–182. 744. Heywang SH, Eiermann W, Bassermann R, Fenzl G. Carcinoma of the breast behind a prosthesis – comparison of ultrasound, mammography and MRI (case report). Comput Radiol 1985; 9:283–286. 745. Heywang SH, Hahn D, Eiermann W, Krischke I, Lissner J. [Nuclear magnetic resonance tomography in breast cancer diagnosis – present status and future outlook]. Digitale Bilddiagn 1985; 5:107–111. 746. Heywang SH, Hahn D, Schmidt H, et al. MR imaging of the breast using gadolinium-DTPA. J Comput Assist Tomogr 1986; 10:199–204. 747. Heywang SH, Hilbertz T, Beck R, Bauer WM, Eiermann W, Permanetter W. Gd-DTPA enhanced MR imaging of the breast in patients with postoperative scarring and silicon implants. J Comput Assist Tomogr 1990; 14:348–356. 748. Heywang SH, Wolf A, Pruss E, Hilbertz T, Eiermann W, Permanetter W. MR imaging of the breast with Gd-DTPA: use and limitations. Radiology 1989; 171:95–103. 749. Heywang-Kobrunner SH. Contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging of the breast. Invest Radiol 1994; 29:94–104. 750. Heywang-Kobrunner SH. Breast MRI proves worth but lacks standardization. Diagn Imaging (San Franc) 1999; 21:167–169, 171–163. 751. Heywang-Kobrunner SH. New possibilities of diagnostic imaging and intervention. Curr Probl Cancer 2003; 27:32–38. 752. Heywang-Kobrunner SH, Bick U, Bradley WG, Jr., et al. International investigation of breast MRI: results of a multicentre study (11 sites) concerning diagnostic parameters for contrast-enhanced MRI based on 519 histopathologically correlated lesions. Eur Radiol 2001; 11:531–546. 753. Heywang-Kobrunner SH, Haustein J, Pohl C, et al. Contrast-enhanced MR imaging of the breast: comparison of two different doses of gadopentetate dimeglumine. Radiology 1994; 191:639–646. 754. Heywang-Kobrunner SH, Heinig A, Pickuth D, Alberich T, Spielmann RP. Interventional MRI of the breast: lesion localisation and biopsy. Eur Radiol 2000; 10:36–45. 755. Heywang-Kobrunner SH, Heinig A, Schaumloffel U, et al. MR-guided percutaneous excisional and incisional biopsy of breast lesions. Eur Radiol 1999; 9:1656–1665. 756. Heywang-Kobrunner SH, Huynh AT, Viehweg P, Hanke W, Requardt H, Paprosch I. Prototype breast coil for MRguided needle localization. J Comput Assist Tomogr 1994; 18:876–881. 757. Heywang-Kobrunner SH, Schlegel A, Beck R, et al. Contrast-enhanced MRI of the breast after limited surgery and radiation therapy. J Comput Assist Tomogr 1993; 17:891–900. 758. Heywang-Kobrunner SH, Viehweg P, Heinig A, Kuchler C. Contrast-enhanced MRI of the breast: accuracy, value, controversies, solutions. Eur J Radiol 1997; 24:94–108.  

330

759. Heywang-Kobrunner SH, Wolf HD, Deimling M, Kosling S, Hofer H, Spielmann RP. Misleading changes of the signal intensity on opposed-phase MRI after injection of contrast medium. J Comput Assist Tomogr 1996; 20:173–178. 760. Heywang-Koebrunner SH, Viehweg P. Sensitivity of contrast-enhanced MR imaging of the breast. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 1994; 2:527–538. 761. Hickman PF, Moore NR, Shepstone BJ. The indeterminate breast mass: assessment using contrast enhanced magnetic resonance imaging. Br J Radiol 1994; 67:14–20. 762. Hielscher AH, Bluestone AY, Abdoulaev GS, et al. Near-infrared diffuse optical tomography. Dis Markers 2002; 18:313–337. 763. Hill KA, Rosen B, Shaw P, Causer PA, Warner E. Incidental MRI detection of BRCA1-related solitary peritoneal carcinoma during breast screening-A case report. Gynecol Oncol 2007. 764. Hillman BJ. Do we need randomized controlled clinical trials to evaluate the clinical impact of breast MR imaging? Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 2006; 14:403–409, vii–viii. 765. Hiramatsu H, Enomoto K, Ikeda T, et al. The Role of Contrast-Enhanced High Resolution MRI in the Surgical Planning of Breast Cancer. Breast Cancer 1997; 4:285–290. 766. Hiramatsu H, Enomoto K, Ikeda T, et al. Three-dimensional helical CT for treatment planning of breast cancer. Radiat Med 1999; 17:35–40. 767. Hiramatsu H, Ikeda T, Enomoto K, et al. [The use of high resolution MR imaging for pre-treatment evaluation of breast cancer: detection of intraductal spread]. Nippon Igaku Hoshasen Gakkai Zasshi 1997; 57:182–188. 768. Hiramatsu H, Ikeda T, Mukai M, Masamura S, Kikuchi K, Hiramatsu K. [MRI of ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast: patterns of findings and evaluation of disease extent]. Nippon Igaku Hoshasen Gakkai Zasshi 2000; 60:205–209. 769. Hiramatsu H, Mulkern RV, Oshio K, et al. Silicone-fat differentiation in the breast: exploiting the bright-fat phenomenon in fast spin-echo MR imaging. J Magn Reson Imaging 1994; 4:868–871. 770. Hirose M, Kacher DF, Smith DN, Kaelin CM, Jolesz FA. Feasibility of MR imaging-guided breast lumpectomy for malignant tumors in a 0.5-T open-configuration MR imaging system. Acad Radiol 2002; 9:933–941. 771. Hirose M, Otsuki N, Hayano D, et al. Multi-volume fusion imaging of MR ductography and MR mammography for patients with nipple discharge. Magn Reson Med Sci 2006; 5:105–112. 772. Hitchcock YJ, Proulx GM, Stomper PC. Contrast-enhanced MRI for the assessment of local recurrence after breast conservation. Am J Clin Oncol 2002; 25:428–429. 773. Hittmair K, Turetschek K, Gomiscek G, Stiglbauer R, Schurawitzki H. Field strength dependence of MRI contrast enhancement: phantom measurements and application to dynamic breast imaging. Br J Radiol 1996; 69:215–220. 774. Hlawatsch A, Kuner RP, Teifke A, Hoffmann G, Zamboglou N, Thelen M. [MR mammography of response-control in primary chemo-brachytherapy in BCT-inoperable breast cancer]. Rofo 2001; 173:31–37. 775. Hlawatsch A, Teifke A, Schmidt M, Thelen M. Preoperative assessment of breast cancer: sonography versus MR imaging. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2002; 179:1493–1501. 776. Ho LW, Wong KP, Chan JH, Chow LW, Leung EY, Leong L. MR appearance of metastatic melanotic melanoma in the breast. Clin Radiol 2000; 55:572–573. 777. Hochman MG, Orel SG, Powell CM, Schnall MD, Reynolds CA, White LN. Fibroadenomas: MR imaging appearances with radiologic-histopathologic correlation. Radiology 1997; 204:123–129. 778. Hoffmann U, Brix G, Knopp MV, Hess T, Lorenz WJ. Pharmacokinetic mapping of the breast: a new method for dynamic MR mammography. Magn Reson Med 1995; 33:506–514. 779. Hoisington LA, Scherer DL, Berger KL. Breast MR imaging: applications and pitfalls. Radiol Technol 2007; 78:367–377. 780. Holden A, Anderson JE, Ives FJ, Taylor D, Wylie EJ, Adamson R. Breast MRI: early experience with a 3-D fat-suppressed gradient echo sequence in the evaluation of breast lesions. Australas Radiol 1996; 40:391–397. 781. Holder WD, Jr., White RL, Jr., Zuger JH, Easton EJ, Jr., Greene FL. Effectiveness of positron emission tomography for the detection of melanoma metastases. Ann Surg 1998; 227:764–769; discussion 769–771. 782. Holland AE, Hendrick RE, Jin H, Russ PD, Barentsz JO, Holland R. Correlation of high-resolution breast MR imaging with histopathology; validation of a technique. J Magn Reson Imaging 2000; 11:601–606. 783. Hollingsworth AB. Perspectives on preoperative staging with breast MRI. J Am Coll Surg 2004; 199:173–174.  

331

 

a  References

784. Hollingsworth AB, Stough RG. The emerging role of breast magnetic resonance imaging. J Okla State Med Assoc 2003; 96:299–307. 785. Hollingsworth AB, Stough RG. Preoperative breast MRI for locoregional staging. J Okla State Med Assoc 2006; 99:505–515. 786. Holmich LR, Friis S, Fryzek JP, et al. Incidence of silicone breast implant rupture. Arch Surg 2003; 138:801–806. 787. Holmich LR, Fryzek JP, Kjoller K, et al. The diagnosis of silicone breast-implant rupture: clinical findings compared with findings at magnetic resonance imaging. Ann Plast Surg 2005; 54:583–589. 788. Holmich LR, Kjoller K, Vejborg I, et al. Prevalence of silicone breast implant rupture among Danish women. Plast Reconstr Surg 2001; 108:848–858; discussion 859–863. 789. Holmich LR, Vejborg I, Conrad C, Sletting S, McLaughlin JK. The diagnosis of breast implant rupture: MRI findings compared with findings at explantation. Eur J Radiol 2005; 53:213–225. 790. Holmich LR, Vejborg IM, Conrad C, et al. Untreated silicone breast implant rupture. Plast Reconstr Surg 2004; 114:204–214; discussion 215–206. 791. Hopfe J, Herrmann KH, Lucht R, Bellemann ME, Kaiser WA, Reichenbach JR. [Validation of an entropy-based algorithm for registration of serial 3D MR mammography data]. Z Med Phys 2005; 15:107–114. 792. Horstmann M, Neumaier-Probst E, Lukacs Z, Steinfeld R, Ullrich K, Kohlschutter A. Infantile cobalamin deficiency with cerebral lactate accumulation and sustained choline depletion. Neuropediatrics 2003; 34:261–264. 793. Horvath LJ, Burtness BA, McCarthy S, Johnson KM. Total-body echo-planar MR imaging in the staging of breast cancer: comparison with conventional methods – early experience. Radiology 1999; 211:119–128. 794. Houssami N, Cuzick J, Dixon JM. The prevention, detection, and management of breast cancer. Med J Aust 2006; 184:230–234. 795. Houssami N, French J, Brennan M, Ahern V, Ung O. Breast cancer – new and emerging technologies for diagnosis and management. Aust Fam Physician 2005; 34:657–661. 796. Houssami N, Wilson R. Should women at high risk of breast cancer have screening magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)? Breast 2007; 16:2–4. 797. Howarth D, Slater S, Lau P, Booker J, Clark D, Sillar R. Complementary role of adjunctive breast magnetic resonance imaging and scintimammography in patients of all ages undergoing breast cancer surgery. Australas Radiol 2005; 49:289–297. 798. Hrung JM, Langlotz CP, Orel SG, Fox KR, Schnall MD, Schwartz JS. Cost-effectiveness of MR imaging and coreneedle biopsy in the preoperative work-up of suspicious breast lesions. Radiology 1999; 213:39–49. 799. Hrung JM, Sonnad SS, Schwartz JS, Langlotz CP. Accuracy of MR imaging in the work-up of suspicious breast lesions: a diagnostic meta-analysis. Acad Radiol 1999; 6:387–397. 800. Hsiang D, Shah N, Yu H, et al. Coregistration of dynamic contrast enhanced MRI and broadband diffuse optical spectroscopy for characterizing breast cancer. Technol Cancer Res Treat 2005; 4:549–558. 801. Hsiao HT, Tung KY, Lin CS. Late hematoma after aesthetic breast augmentation with saline-filled, textured silicone prosthesis. Aesthetic Plast Surg 2002; 26:368–371. 802. Huang W, Fisher PR, Dulaimy K, Tudorica LA, O’Hea B, Button TM. Detection of breast malignancy: diagnostic MR protocol for improved specificity. Radiology 2004; 232:585–591. 803. Huber PE, Jenne JW, Rastert R, et al. A new noninvasive approach in breast cancer therapy using magnetic resonance imaging-guided focused ultrasound surgery. Cancer Res 2001; 61:8441–8447. 804. Huber PE, Rastert R, Simiantonakis I, et al. [Magnetic resonance-guided therapy with focused ultrasound. Non-invasive surgery of breast carcinoma?]. Radiologe 2001; 41:173–180. 805. Huch RA, Kunzi W, Debatin JF, Wiesner W, Krestin GP. MR imaging of the augmented breast. Eur Radiol 1998; 8:371–376. 806. Hulka CA, Edmister WB, Smith BL, et al. Dynamic echo-planar imaging of the breast: experience in diagnosing breast carcinoma and correlation with tumor angiogenesis. Radiology 1997; 205:837–842. 807. Hulka CA, Smith BL, Sgroi DC, et al. Benign and malignant breast lesions: differentiation with echo-planar MR imaging. Radiology 1995; 197:33–38. 808. Huppert PE, Trubenbach J, Schick F, Pereira P, Konig C, Claussen CD. [MRI-guided percutaneous radiofrequency ablation of hepatic neoplasms – first technical and clinical experiences]. Rofo 2000; 172:692–700.  

332

809. Hurwitz DJ, Stofman G, Curtin H. Three-dimensional imaging of Poland’s syndrome. Plast Reconstr Surg 1994; 94:719–723. 810. Husband JE, Sharma B. Radiological staging of gastrointestinal and breast tumours. Br J Surg 2006; 93:513–515. 811. Hussain Z, Roberts N, Whitehouse GH, Garcia-Finana M, Percy D. Estimation of breast volume and its variation during the menstrual cycle using MRI and stereology. Br J Radiol 1999; 72:236–245. 812. Hussman K, Renslo R, Phillips JJ, et al. MR mammographic localization. Work in progress. Radiology 1993; 189:915–917. 813. Hwang ES, Kinkel K, Esserman LJ, Lu Y, Weidner N, Hylton NM. Magnetic resonance imaging in patients diagnosed with ductal carcinoma-in-situ: value in the diagnosis of residual disease, occult invasion, and multicentricity. Ann Surg Oncol 2003; 10:381–388. 814. Hylton N. Dedicated Breast MRI Systems Working Group report. J Magn Reson Imaging 1999; 10:1006–1009. 815. Hylton N. Magnetic resonance imaging of the breast: opportunities to improve breast cancer management. J Clin Oncol 2005; 23:1678–1684. 816. Hylton N. MR imaging for assessment of breast cancer response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 2006; 14:383–389, vii. 817. Hylton NM. Vascularity assessment of breast lesions with gadolinium-enhanced MR imaging. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 1999; 7:411–420, x. 818. Hylton NM. Suspension of breast-feeding following gadopentetate dimeglumine administration. Radiology 2000; 216:325–326. 819. Hylton NM. Vascularity assessment of breast lesions with gadolinium-enhanced MR imaging. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 2001; 9:321–332, vi. 820. Hylton NM. Evaluation of gadobenate dimeglumine for contrast-enhanced MRI of the breast. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2003; 181:677–678. 821. Hylton NM, Frankel SD. Imaging techniques for breast MR imaging. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 1994; 2:511–525. 822. Hylton NM, Kinkel K. Technical aspects of breast magnetic resonance imaging. Top Magn Reson Imaging 1998; 9:3–16. 823. Ienzi R, Cirino A, Galia M, Caruso G, Lo Casto A. [Intracystic papillary carcinoma of the breast: mammographic, pneumocystographic, sonographic, power-Doppler and MR appearance: a case report]. Radiol Med (Torino) 2001; 102:403–405. 824. Igarashi T, Tozaki M, Fukuda K. [Evaluation of the extent of ductal carcinoma in situ: comparison of MDCT and high-spatial-resolution MR imaging]. Nippon Igaku Hoshasen Gakkai Zasshi 2005; 65:387–392. 825. Iglesias A, Arias M, Santiago P, Rodriguez M, Manas J, Saborido C. Benign breast lesions that simulate malignancy: magnetic resonance imaging with radiologic-pathologic correlation. Curr Probl Diagn Radiol 2007; 36:66–82. 826. Iida T, Hirata N, Nakagawa M, Noguchi T. [Dynamic MRI of intraductal papilloma]. Nippon Igaku Hoshasen Gakkai Zasshi 1999; 59:189–193. 827. Ikeda DM. Progress report from the American College of Radiology Breast MR Imaging Lexicon Committee. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 2001; 9:295–302, vi. 828. Ikeda DM, Baker DR, Daniel BL. Magnetic resonance imaging of breast cancer: clinical indications and breast MRI reporting system. J Magn Reson Imaging 2000; 12:975–983. 829. Ikeda DM, Birdwell RL, Daniel BL. Potential role of magnetic resonance imaging and other modalities in ductal carcinoma in situ detection. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 2001; 9:345–356, vii. 830. Ikeda DM, Borofsky HB, Herfkens RJ, Sawyer-Glover AM, Birdwell RL, Glover GH. Silicone breast implant rupture: pitfalls of magnetic resonance imaging and relative efficacies of magnetic resonance, mammography, and ultrasound. Plast Reconstr Surg 1999; 104:2054–2062. 831. Ikeda DM, Hylton NM, Kinkel K, et al. Development, standardization, and testing of a lexicon for reporting contrastenhanced breast magnetic resonance imaging studies. J Magn Reson Imaging 2001; 13:889–895. 832. Ikeda O, Nishimura R, Miyayama H, et al. Magnetic resonance evaluation of the presence of an extensive intraductal component in breast cancer. Acta Radiol 2004; 45:721–725.

 

333

 

a  References

833. Ikeda O, Nishimura R, Miyayama H, et al. Evaluation of tumor angiogenesis using dynamic enhanced magnetic resonance imaging: comparison of plasma vascular endothelial growth factor, hemodynamic, and pharmacokinetic parameters. Acta Radiol 2004; 45:446–452. 834. Ikeda O, Yamashita Y, Morishita S, et al. Characterization of breast masses by dynamic enhanced MR imaging. A logistic regression analysis. Acta Radiol 1999; 40:585–592. 835. Ikeda O, Yamashita Y, Takahashi M. Gd-enhanced dynamic magnetic resonance imaging of breast masses. Top Magn Reson Imaging 1999; 10:143–151. 836. Ikeda T, Jinno H, Matsu A, Masamura S, Kitajima M. The role of neoadjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer treatment. Breast Cancer 2002; 9:8–14. 837. Ikeda T, Jinno H, Matsui A, et al. Overview: current status of breast conserving therapy in Japan. Biomed Pharmacother 2002; 56 Suppl 1:182s–186s. 838. Ikeda T, Mitsuyama S. New challenges in the field of breast cancer therapy-do we need surgery for the patients with breast cancer? Breast Cancer 2007; 14:37–38. 839. Ikeda T, Monzawa S, Komoto K, et al. Performance assessment of phased-array coil in breast MR imaging. Magn Reson Med Sci 2004; 3:39–43. 840. Ikeda Y, Narabayashi I, Yoshida S, et al. [Enhanced MRI of breast cancer smaller than 3 cm]. Nippon Igaku Hoshasen Gakkai Zasshi 1991; 51:1314–1323. 841. Inguenault C, Capon-Degardin N, Martinot-Duquennoy V, Pellerin P. [Galactorrhea after mammary plastic surgery]. Ann Chir Plast Esthet 2005; 50:171–175. 842. Insko EK, Connick TJ, Schnall MD, Orel SG. Multicoil array for high resolution imaging of the breast. Magn Reson Med 1997; 37:778–784. 843. Irwig L, Houssami N, van Vliet C. New technologies in screening for breast cancer: a systematic review of their accuracy. Br J Cancer 2004; 90:2118–2122. 844. Ishikawa T, Momiyama N, Hamaguchi Y, et al. Evaluation of dynamic studies of MR mammography for the diagnosis of intraductal lesions with nipple discharge. Breast Cancer 2004; 11:288–294. 845. Ishimaru K, Isomoto I, Okimoto T, Itoyanagi A, Uetani M. Sarcoidosis of the breast. Eur Radiol 2002; 12 Suppl 3: S105–108. 846. Ishiyama K, Sashi R, Katayose Y, Tomura N, Watarai J, Narita K. [Sentinel lymph node after intramammary injection of superparamagnetic iron oxide]. Nippon Igaku Hoshasen Gakkai Zasshi 2002; 62:744–746. 847. Isomoto I, Koshiishi T, Okimoto T, et al. [Evaluation of strongly hyperintense area in breast lesions on fat-suppressed T2-weighted images correlated with histopathology]. Nippon Igaku Hoshasen Gakkai Zasshi 2004; 64:99–106. 848. Isomoto I, Koshiishi T, Okimoto T, Okada H, Uetani M, Hayashi K. [Gradually enhancing breast cancer on dynamic MRI]. Nippon Igaku Hoshasen Gakkai Zasshi 2000; 60:514–519. 849. Issa B. Improved discrimination of breast lesions using selective sampling of segmented MR images. Magma 2006; 19:34–40. 850. Issa B, Buckley DL, Turnbull LW. Heterogeneity analysis of Gd-DTPA uptake: improvement in breast lesion differentiation. J Comput Assist Tomogr 1999; 23:615–621. 851. Itoh Y, Matsushima S, Kinosada Y, Fuwa N, Kikuchi Y. [Quantitative evaluation of magnetization transfer ratio in irradiated breast with breast conservation therapy]. Nippon Igaku Hoshasen Gakkai Zasshi 1997; 57:67–68. 852. Iwasaki H, Morimoto K, Koh M, et al. A case of fat necrosis after breast quadrantectomy in which preoperative diagnosis was enabled by MRI with fat suppression technique. Magn Reson Imaging 2004; 22:285–290. 853. Jackson VP, Hendrick RE, Feig SA, Kopans DB. Imaging of the radiographically dense breast. Radiology 1993; 188:297–301. 854. Jacobs DI. Evaluating autogenous breast reconstruction with MRI. Plast Reconstr Surg 1995; 96:1487. 855. Jacobs MA, Barker PB, Argani P, Ouwerkerk R, Bhujwalla ZM, Bluemke DA. Combined dynamic contrast enhanced breast MR and proton spectroscopic imaging: a feasibility study. J Magn Reson Imaging 2005; 21:23–28. 856. Jacobs MA, Barker PB, Bluemke DA, et al. Benign and malignant breast lesions: diagnosis with multiparametric MR imaging. Radiology 2003; 229:225–232. 857. Jacobs MA, Barker PB, Bottomley PA, Bhujwalla Z, Bluemke DA. Proton magnetic resonance spectroscopic imaging of human breast cancer: a preliminary study. J Magn Reson Imaging 2004; 19:68–75.  

334

858. Jacobs MA, Ouwerkerk R, Wolff AC, et al. Multiparametric and multinuclear magnetic resonance imaging of human breast cancer: current applications. Technol Cancer Res Treat 2004; 3:543–550. 859. Jagannathan NR, Kumar M, Seenu V, et al. Evaluation of total choline from in-vivo volume localized proton MR spectroscopy and its response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in locally advanced breast cancer. Br J Cancer 2001; 84:1016–1022. 860. Jakovljevic B, Stevanovic O, Bacic G. Metastases to the breast from small-cell lung cancer: MR findings. A case report. Acta Radiol 2003; 44:485–488. 861. James D, Clymer BD, Schmalbrock P. Texture detection of simulated microcalcification susceptibility effects in magnetic resonance imaging of breasts. J Magn Reson Imaging 2001; 13:876–881. 862. Jatoi I. MRI in breast cancer management: potential for benefit and harm. Int J Fertil Womens Med 2005; 50:281–284. 863. Jenne JW, Rastert R, Rademaker G, Divkovic G, Debus J, Huber PE. [MRI-guided surgery with high intensity focused ultrasound]. Z Med Phys 2003; 13:193–197. 864. Jenner C, Filshie J. Galactorrhoea following acupuncture. Acupunct Med 2002; 20:107–108. 865. Jerbi M, Hidar S, Sdiri S, et al. [Cavernous hemangioma of the breast: a case report]. Gynecol Obstet Fertil 2005; 33:884–886. 866. Jinguji M, Kajiya Y, Kamimura K, et al. Rim enhancement of breast cancers on contrast-enhanced MR imaging: relationship with prognostic factors. Breast Cancer 2006; 13:64–73. 867. Jochelson M. Breast cancer imaging: the future. Semin Oncol 2001; 28:221–228. 868. Jochems L, Tjalma WA. Primary small cell neuroendocrine tumour of the breast. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2004; 115:231–233. 869. Johansen J, Taagehoj F, Christensen T, Overgaard J, Overgaard M. Quantitative magnetic resonance for assessment of radiation fibrosis after post-mastectomy radiotherapy. Br J Radiol 1994; 67:1238–1242. 870. Johns JB, Odunsi KO, Fleischman S, Azodi M, Schwartz PE. Serous adenocarcinoma of the uterus presenting as paraneoplastic cerebellar degeneration. Gynecol Oncol 1999; 73:326–330. 871. Joseph KA, El-Tamer M, Ditkoff BA, et al. Synchronous presentation of breast cancer and pheochromocytoma in a 57-year-old woman. Breast J 2004; 10:63–64. 872. Julian TB. MRI: a role in clinical trials. J Magn Reson Imaging 2001; 13:837–841. 873. Julius T, Kemp SE, Kneeshaw PJ, Chaturvedi A, Drew PJ, Turnbull LW. MRI and conservative treatment of locally advanced breast cancer. Eur J Surg Oncol 2005; 31:1129–1134. 874. Jun P, Garcia J, Tihan T, McDermott MW, Cha S. Perfusion MR imaging of an intracranial collision tumor confirmed by image-guided biopsy. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2006; 27:94–97. 875. Jun YW, Huh YM, Choi JS, et al. Nanoscale size effect of magnetic nanocrystals and their utilization for cancer diagnosis via magnetic resonance imaging. J Am Chem Soc 2005; 127:5732–5733. 876. Jung Y, Jashnani Y, Kijowski R, Block WF. Consistent non-cartesian off-axis MRI quality: calibrating and removing multiple sources of demodulation phase errors. Magn Reson Med 2007; 57:206–212. 877. Junkermann H, von Fournier D. [Imaging methods for evaluating the response of breast carcinoma to preoperative chemotherapy]. Radiologe 1997; 37:726–732. 878. Kaas R, Muller SH, Hart AA, Rutgers EJ. Stage of breast cancers found during the surveillance of women with a familial or hereditary risk. Eur J Surg Oncol 2007. 879. Kacher DF, Jolesz FA. MR imaging – guided breast ablative therapy. Radiol Clin North Am 2004; 42:947–962, vii. 880. Kacl GM, Liu P, Debatin JF, Garzoli E, Caduff RF, Krestin GP. Detection of breast cancer with conventional mammography and contrast-enhanced MR imaging. Eur Radiol 1998; 8:194–200. 881. Kaiser A, Werner M, Daldrup-Link HE. [Atypical mycobacteriosis of the breast: MR diagnosis]. Rofo 2002; 174:236–237. 882. Kaiser W. MRI of the female breast. First clinical results. Arch Int Physiol Biochim 1985; 93:67–76. 883. Kaiser W, Zeitler E. [Nuclear magnetic resonance tomography of the breast: diagnosis, differential diagnosis, problems and possible solutions. II: Diagnosis]. Rofo 1986; 144:572–579. 884. Kaiser WA. [Magnetic resonance tomography of the breast. The results of 253 examinations]. Dtsch Med Wochenschr 1989; 114:1351–1357. 885. Kaiser WA. MRM promises earlier breast cancer diagnosis. Diagn Imaging (San Franc) 1992; 14:88–93.  

335

 

a  References

886. Kaiser WA. False-positive results in dynamic MR mammography. Causes, frequency, and methods to avoid. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 1994; 2:539–555. 887. Kaiser WA. [MR mammography – a critical stocktaking]. Rofo 1996; 165:425–427. 888. Kaiser WA. Dynamic spiral MR mammography. Radiology 2000; 215:919–920. 889. Kaiser WA, Deimling M. [A new multislice measurement sequence for the complete dynamic MR examination of the larger organs: application to the breast]. Rofo 1990; 152:577–582. 890. Kaiser WA, Diedrich K, Reiser M, Krebs D. [Modern diagnostics of the breast]. Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd 1993; 53:1–14. 891. Kaiser WA, Fischer H, Vagner J, Selig M. Robotic system for biopsy and therapy of breast lesions in a high-field whole-body magnetic resonance tomography unit. Invest Radiol 2000; 35:513–519. 892. Kaiser WA, Kess H. [A prototype double coil for MR breast measurement]. Rofo 1989; 151:103–105. 893. Kaiser WA, Mittelmeier O. [MR mammography in patients at risk]. Rofo 1992; 156:576–581. 894. Kaiser WA, Zeitler E. MR imaging of the breast: fast imaging sequences with and without Gd-DTPA. Preliminary observations. Radiology 1989; 170:681–686. 895. Kaltenborn H, Schadmand S, Beck T, Thelen M. [Gadolinium-DTPA (Magnevist) as contrast medium for galactography]. Rofo 1995; 163:457–459. 896. Kamm BL. Breast procedures and imaging techniques. Radiol Technol 1999; 71:58–72; quiz 77–80. 897. Kanazawa T, Akashi-Tanaka S, Iwamoto E, et al. Diagnosis of complete response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy using diagnostic imaging in primary breast cancer patients. Breast J 2005; 11:311–316. 898. Kanemaki Y, Kurihara Y, Itoh D, et al. MR mammary ductography using a microscopy coil for assessment of intraductal lesions. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2004; 182:1340–1342. 899. Kang BJ, Jung JI, Park C, et al. Breast MRI findings after modified radical mastectomy and transverse rectus abdominis myocutaneous flap in patients with breast cancer. J Magn Reson Imaging 2005; 21:784–791. 900. Kangarlu A, Shellock FG, Chakeres DW. 8.0-Tesla human MR system: temperature changes associated with radiofrequency-induced heating of a head phantom. J Magn Reson Imaging 2003; 17:220–226. 901. Karcaaltincaba M, Demirkazik FB, Imamoglu T, Firat A, Ariyurek M. Breast abscess mimicking malignant mass due to retained penrose drain: diagnosis by mammography and MRI. Clin Imaging 2004; 28:278–279. 902. Karczmar GS, Du W, Medved M, et al. Spectrally inhomogeneous effects of contrast agents in breast lesion detected by high spectral and spatial resolution MRI. Acad Radiol 2002; 9 Suppl 2:S352–354. 903. Kariya S, Ogawa Y, Nishioka A, et al. Relationship between hormonal receptors, HER-2, p53 protein, Bcl-2, and MIB-1 status and the antitumor effects of neoadjuvant anthracycline-based chemotherapy in invasive breast cancer patients. Radiat Med 2005; 23:189–194. 904. Kasamaki S, Tsurumaru M, Kamano T, Kobayashi S, Hino M, Kuwatsuru R. A case of inflammatory breast cancer following augmentation mammoplasty with silicone gel implants. Breast Cancer 2000; 7:71–74. 905. Katz MS, Schapira L, Harisinghani MG, Hughes KS. Palpable right breast mass in a pregnant woman. Nat Clin Pract Oncol 2005; 2:218–221; quiz 211 p following 222. 906. Katz-Brull R, Lavin PT, Lenkinski RE. Clinical utility of proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy in characterizing breast lesions. J Natl Cancer Inst 2002; 94:1197–1203. 907. Kaufman BM, Lamarche J, Schultze-Haakh H. Imaging the augmented breast. Radiol Technol 2007; 78:187–190. 908. Kawahara S, Hyakusoku H, Ogawa R, Ohkubo S, Igarashi H, Hirakawa K. Clinical imaging diagnosis of implant materials for breast augmentation. Ann Plast Surg 2006; 57:6–12. 909. Kawashima H. [Fat suppressed dynamic MR imaging of breast cancer: radiologic-pathologic correlation]. Nippon Igaku Hoshasen Gakkai Zasshi 1996; 56:459–469. 910. Kawashima H, Matsui O, Suzuki M, et al. Breast cancer in dense breast: detection with contrast-enhanced dynamic MR imaging. J Magn Reson Imaging 2000; 11:233–243. 911. Kawashima H, Tawara M, Suzuki M, Matsui O, Kadoya M. Effectiveness of dynamic MRI for diagnosing pericicatricial minimal residual breast cancer following excisional biopsy. Eur J Radiol 2001; 40:2–9. 912. Kawashima M, Tamaki Y, Nonaka T, et al. MR imaging of mucinous carcinoma of the breast. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2002; 179:179–183. 913. Kazama T, Nakamura S, Doi O, Suzuki K, Hirose M, Ito H. Prospective evaluation of pectoralis muscle invasion of breast cancer by MR imaging. Breast Cancer 2005; 12:312–316.  

336

914. Kelcz F, Furman-Haran E, Grobgeld D, Degani H. Clinical testing of high-spatial-resolution parametric contrast-enhanced MR imaging of the breast. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2002; 179:1485–1492. 915. Kelcz F, Santyr G. Gadolinium-enhanced breast MRI. Crit Rev Diagn Imaging 1995; 36:287–338. 916. Kelcz F, Santyr GE, Cron GO, Mongin SJ. Application of a quantitative model to differentiate benign from malignant breast lesions detected by dynamic, gadolinium-enhanced MRI. J Magn Reson Imaging 1996; 6:743–752. 917. Kenney PJ, Sobol WT, Smith JK, Morgan DE. Computed model of gadolinium enhanced MRI of breast disease. Eur J Radiol 1997; 24:109–119. 918. Kenzel PP, Hadijuana J, Hosten N, et al. Boeck sarcoidosis of the breast: mammographic, ultrasound, and MR findings. J Comput Assist Tomogr 1997; 21:439–441. 919. Kepple J, Layeeque R, Klimberg VS, et al. Correlation of magnetic resonance imaging and pathologic size of infiltrating lobular carcinoma of the breast. Am J Surg 2005; 190:623–627. 920. Kepple J, Van Zee KJ, Dowlatshahi K, Henry-Tillman RS, Israel PZ, Klimberg VS. Minimally invasive breast surgery. J Am Coll Surg 2004; 199:961–975. 921. Kerslake RW, Carleton PJ, Fox JN, et al. Dynamic gradient-echo and fat-suppressed spin-echo contrast-enhanced MRI of the breast. Clin Radiol 1995; 50:440–454. 922. Kerslake RW, Fox JN, Carleton PJ, et al. Dynamic contrast-enhanced and fat suppressed magnetic resonance imaging in suspected recurrent carcinoma of the breast: preliminary experience. Br J Radiol 1994; 67:1158–1168. 923. Kessler L, Brenner RJ. Serendipitous breast lesions on magnetic resonance imaging: why is this lesion different from all other lesions? J Natl Cancer Inst 1998; 90:1760–1761. 924. Kessler M. [Diagnosis of breast cancer]. Krankenpfl J 1989; 27:22–29. 925. Kessler M, Milz P, Sittek H, Reiser M. [Imaging methods in diagnosis and differential diagnosis of breast cancer]. Bildgebung 1995; 62:160–172. 926. Kessler M, Milz P, Sittek H, et al. [Diagnosis of the site and extent of breast carcinoma]. Aktuelle Radiol 1995; 5:47–52. 927. Kessler M, Sittek H, Reiser M. [Magnetic resonance mammography – open questions]. Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd 1996; 56:M107–115. 928. Ketene M, Saray A, Kara SA. Unilateral osmotic swelling in textured, single-lumen, saline-filled mammary implants: clinical and MRI findings. Aesthetic Plast Surg 2002; 26:206–210. 929. Khalkhali I. Differentiation between benign and malignant breast lesions with MR imaging and scintimammography. Radiology 1997; 205:284–285; author reply 285–286. 930. Khamapirad T, Hennan K, Leonard M, Jr., Eltorky M, Qiu S. Granulomatous lobular mastitis: two case reports with focus on radiologic and histopathologic features. Ann Diagn Pathol 2007; 11:109–112. 931. Khatri VP, Stuppino JJ, Espinosa MH, Pollack MS. Improved accuracy in differentiating malignant from benign mammographic abnormalities: a simple, improved magnetic resonance imaging method. Cancer 2001; 92:471–478. 932. Khong PL, Ho LW, Chan JH, Leong LL. MR imaging of breast paraffinomas. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1999; 173:929– 932. 933. Kido C. [Mass screening of breast cancer with imaging diagnosis]. Gan To Kagaku Ryoho 1991; 18:2217–2222. 934. Kido C. [Early diagnosis of breast cancer]. Gan To Kagaku Ryoho 1994; 21 Suppl 2:153–157. 935. Kievit HC, Sikkenk AC, Thelissen GR, Merchant TE. Magnetic resonance image appearance of hamartoma of the breast. Magn Reson Imaging 1993; 11:293–298. 936. Kikawa Y, Konishi Y, Nakamoto Y, et al. Angiosarcoma of the breast - specific findings of MRI. Breast Cancer 2006; 13:369–373. 937. Kilciksiz S, Gokce T, Kinay M. Isolated inguinal lymph node metastasis from breast carcinoma – case report and review of the literature. J Buon 2006; 11:229–232. 938. Killian JK, Merino M, Bondy C, Bakalov V, Chow C. MRI of angiolipoma of the breast in Turner’s syndrome. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2004; 183:1843–1844. 939. Kim do Y, Moon WK, Cho N, et al. MRI of the breast for the detection and assessment of the size of ductal carcinoma in situ. Korean J Radiol 2007; 8:32–39. 940. Kim SJ, Morris EA, Liberman L, et al. Observer variability and applicability of BI-RADS terminology for breast MR imaging: invasive carcinomas as focal masses. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2001; 177:551–557. 941. Kim SM, Kim HH, Shin HJ, Gong G, Ahn SH. Cavernous haemangioma of the breast. Br J Radiol 2006; 79:e177–180.  

337

 

a  References

942. Kinkel K, Helbich TH, Esserman LJ, et al. Dynamic high-spatial-resolution MR imaging of suspicious breast lesions: diagnostic criteria and interobserver variability. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2000; 175:35–43. 943. Kinkel K, Hylton NM. Challenges to interpretation of breast MRI. J Magn Reson Imaging 2001; 13:821–829. 944. Kinkel K, Vlastos G. MR imaging: breast cancer staging and screening. Semin Surg Oncol 2001; 20:187–196. 945. Kinoshita M, McDannold N, Jolesz FA, Hynynen K. Noninvasive localized delivery of Herceptin to the mouse brain by MRI-guided focused ultrasound-induced blood-brain barrier disruption. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2006; 103:11719–11723. 946. Kinoshita S, Kyoda S, Tsuboi K, et al. Huge cavernous hemangioma arising in a male breast. Breast Cancer 2005; 12:231–233. 947. Kinoshita T, Fukutomi T, Kubochi K. Magnetic resonance imaging of benign phyllodes tumors of the breast. Breast J 2004; 10:232–236. 948. Kinoshita T, Odagiri K, Andoh K, et al. Evaluation of small internal mammary lymph node metastases in breast cancer by MRI. Radiat Med 1999; 17:189–193. 949. Kinoshita T, Yashiro N, Ihara N, Funatu H, Fukuma E, Narita M. Diffusion-weighted half-Fourier single-shot turbo spin echo imaging in breast tumors: differentiation of invasive ductal carcinoma from fibroadenoma. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2002; 26:1042–1046. 950. Kinoshita T, Yashiro N, Ihara N, Yokogawa M. MR finding of seat belt injury in the breast. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2002; 26:1054–1056. 951. Kinoshita T, Yashiro N, Yoshigi J, Ihara N, Fukuma E, Narita M. Inflammatory intramammary lymph node mimicking the malignant lesion in dynamic MRI: a case report. Clin Imaging 2002; 26:258–262. 952. Kinoshita T, Yashiro N, Yoshigi J, Ihara N, Narita M. Fat necrosis of breast: a potential pitfall in breast MRI. Clin Imaging 2002; 26:250–253. 953. Kinoshita T, Yokokawa M, Yashiro N. Multicentric granulocytic sarcoma of the breast: mammographic, sonographic, and MR findings. Clin Imaging 2006; 30:271–274. 954. Kirchin MA, Salerio I, La Noce A. Gadobenate dimeglumine (Multihance) in magnetic resonance mammography. Acad Radiol 2002; 9 Suppl 2:S348–351. 955. Kiresi DA, Karabacakoglu A, Odev K, Karakose S. Uncommon locations of hydatid cysts. Acta Radiol 2003; 44:622–636. 956. Kirkpatrick UJ, Burrows C, Loughran CF. Imaging appearances of pseudoangiomatous hyperplasia of mammary stroma. Clin Radiol 2000; 55:576–578. 957. Kishimoto R, Watanabe Y, Shimizu M. Best cases from the AFIP: invasive ductal carcinoma with osteoclast-like giant cells. Radiographics 2002; 22:691–695. 958. Kita Y, Tohno E, Highnam R, Brady M. A CAD system for the 3D location of lesions in mammograms. Med Image Anal 2002; 6:267–273. 959. Kitagawa K, Sakuma H, Ishida N, Hirano T, Ishihara A, Takeda K. Contrast-enhanced high-resolution MRI of invasive breast cancer: correlation with histopathologic subtypes. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2004; 183:1805–1809. 960. Kitajima A, Amano S, Sakurai K, et al. [A case of breast cancer detected by MRI mammography after Hollywood syndrome]. Gan To Kagaku Ryoho 2005; 32:1786–1788. 961. Kitamura K, Makino S, Yoshimura H, Jyouko T, Yoshioka H, Hanai J. [Phyllodes tumor of the breast with cystic portion: MR imaging with histopathological correlation]. Nippon Igaku Hoshasen Gakkai Zasshi 1999; 59:239–244. 962. Kitamura K, Yoshioka H, Yoshimura H, et al. [Changes in MR imaging appearance of breast cancer after intra-arterial infusion chemotherapy]. Nippon Igaku Hoshasen Gakkai Zasshi 2000; 60:312–319. 963. Kiyozuka Y, Koyama H, Nakata M, et al. Diagnostic cytopathology in type II angiosarcoma of the breast: a case report. Acta Cytol 2005; 49:560–566. 964. Klein S. Evaluation of palpable breast masses. Am Fam Physician 2005; 71:1731–1738. 965. Klein Zeggelink WF, Deurloo EE, Muller SH, Schultze Kool LJ, Gilhuijs KG. Reproducibility of mammary gland structure during repeat setups in a supine position. Med Phys 2002; 29:2062–2069. 966. Klengel S, Hietschold V, Schreiber M, Kohler K. [Quantitative dynamic contrast breast-MRI with the 0.5 tesla equipment]. Rontgenpraxis 1994; 47:223–228. 967. Klifa C, Carballido-Gamio J, Wilmes L, et al. Quantification of breast tissue index from MR data using fuzzy clustering. Conf Proc IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc 2004; 3:1667–1670.  

338

968. Klifa CS, Shimakawa A, Siraj Z, et al. Characterization of breast lesions using the 3D FIESTA sequence and contrastenhanced magnetic resonance imaging. J Magn Reson Imaging 2007; 25:82–88. 969. Klimberg VS. Advances in the diagnosis and excision of breast cancer. Am Surg 2003; 69:11–14. 970. Klimberg VS, Harms S, Korourian S. Assessing margin status. Surg Oncol 1999; 8:77–84. 971. Klimberg VS, Harms SE, Henry-Tillman RS. Not all MRI techniques are created equal. Ann Surg Oncol 2000; 7:404–405. 972. Klimberg VS, Henry-Tillman R, Julian TB, et al. Report of the Working Groups on Breast MRI: report of the Biopsy and Intervention Working Group. Breast J 2004; 10 Suppl 2:S13–16. 973. Kluttig A, Trocchi P, Heinig A, et al. Reliability and validity of needle biopsy evaluation of breast-abnormalities using the B-categorization – design and objectives of the Diagnosis Optimisation Study (DIOS). BMC Cancer 2007; 7:100. 974. Kneeshaw PJ, Lowry M, Manton D, Hubbard A, Drew PJ, Turnbull LW. Differentiation of benign from malignant breast disease associated with screening detected microcalcifications using dynamic contrast enhanced magnetic resonance imaging. Breast 2006; 15:29–38. 975. Kneeshaw PJ, Turnbull LW, Drew PJ. Current applications and future direction of MR mammography. Br J Cancer 2003; 88:4–10. 976. Kneeshaw PJ, Turnbull LW, Drew PJ. Role of magnetic resonance imaging in the diagnosis and single-stage surgical resection of invasive lobular carcinoma of the breast (Br J Surg 2002; 89: 1296–1301). Br J Surg 2003; 90:248. 977. Kneeshaw PJ, Turnbull LW, Smith A, Drew PJ. Dynamic contrast enhanced magnetic resonance imaging aids the surgical management of invasive lobular breast cancer. Eur J Surg Oncol 2003; 29:32–37. 978. Knelson MH, el Yousef SJ, Goldberg RE, Ballance W. Intracystic papillary carcinoma of the breast: mammographic, sonographic, and MR appearance with pathologic correlation. J Comput Assist Tomogr 1987; 11:1074–1076. 979. Knopp M. [Response evaluation with functional magnetic resonance mammography]. Zentralbl Gynakol 1996; 118:571–572. 980. Knopp MV, Bourne MW, Sardanelli F, et al. Gadobenate dimeglumine-enhanced MRI of the breast: analysis of dose response and comparison with gadopentetate dimeglumine. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2003; 181:663–676. 981. Knopp MV, Brix G, Junkermann HJ, Sinn HP. MR mammography with pharmacokinetic mapping for monitoring of breast cancer treatment during neoadjuvant therapy. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 1994; 2:633–658. 982. Knopp MV, Himmelhan N, Radeleff J, et al. [Comparison of methods for quantifying contrast enhancement exemplified by dynamic MRI mammography]. Radiologe 2002; 42:280–290. 983. Knopp MV, Hoffmann U, Brix G, Hawighorst H, Junkermann HJ, van Kaick G. [Fast MRI contrast medium dynamics for characterization of tumors. Experiences with functional MR-mammography]. Radiologe 1995; 35:964–972. 984. Knopp MV, Junkermann H, Sinn HP. [Monstrous breast tumor]. Radiologe 1995; 35:363–366. 985. Knopp MV, Metzner R, Brix G, van Kaick G. [Safety considerations to avoid current-induced skin burns in MRI procedures]. Radiologe 1998; 38:759–763. 986. Knopp MV, Obier C, Zuna I, et al. [Multiple reader analysis for evaluation of functional MR mammography]. Radiologe 1998; 38:307–314. 987. Knopp MV, von Tengg-Kobligk H, Choyke PL. Functional magnetic resonance imaging in oncology for diagnosis and therapy monitoring. Mol Cancer Ther 2003; 2:419–426. 988. Knopp MV, Weiss E, Sinn HP, et al. Pathophysiologic basis of contrast enhancement in breast tumors. J Magn Reson Imaging 1999; 10:260–266. 989. Kobayashi H, Kawamoto S, Bernardo M, Brechbiel MW, Knopp MV, Choyke PL. Delivery of gadolinium-labeled nanoparticles to the sentinel lymph node: comparison of the sentinel node visualization and estimations of intranodal gadolinium concentration by the magnetic resonance imaging. J Control Release 2006; 111:343–351. 990. Kobayashi H, Kawamoto S, Sakai Y, et al. Lymphatic drainage imaging of breast cancer in mice by micro-magnetic resonance lymphangiography using a nano-size paramagnetic contrast agent. J Natl Cancer Inst 2004; 96:703–708. 991. Kocaoglu M, Somuncu I, Ors F, Bulakbasi N, Tayfun C, Ilkbahar S. Imaging findings in idiopathic granulomatous mastitis. A review with emphasis on magnetic resonance imaging. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2004; 28:635–641. 992. Koh TS, Cheong LH, Hou Z, Soh YC. A physiologic model of capillary-tissue exchange for dynamic contrast-enhanced imaging of tumor microcirculation. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 2003; 50:159–167. 993. Kohashi T, Kataoka T, Haruta R, et al. Granular cell tumor of the breast: report of a case. Hiroshima J Med Sci 1999; 48:31–33.  

339

 

a  References

994. Komatsu S, Lee CJ, Hosokawa Y, et al. A case of occult contralateral breast cancer incidentally detected by contrastenhanced MRI; report of a case with review of literature. Breast Cancer 2005; 12:341–345. 995. Komatsu S, Lee CJ, Hosokawa Y, et al. Comparison of intraductal spread on dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI with clinicopathologic features in breast cancer. Jpn J Clin Oncol 2004; 34:515–518. 996. Komatsu S, Lee CJ, Ichikawa D, et al. Predictive value of the time-intensity curves on dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging for lymphatic spreading in breast cancer. Surg Today 2005; 35:720–724. 997. Komenaka IK, Ditkoff BA, Schnabel F, Marboe CC, Mercado C. Free silicone injection causing polyarthropathy and septic shock. Breast J 2004; 10:160–161. 998. Komu M, Kormano M. Breast coil design for low-field MRI. Magn Reson Med 1992; 27:165–170. 999. Kondziolka D, Martin JJ, Flickinger JC, et al. Long-term survivors after gamma knife radiosurgery for brain metastases. Cancer 2005; 104:2784–2791. 1000. Konig R, Schonberger W, Grimm W. [Mediastinal teratocarcinoma and hypophyseal stalk germinoma in a patient with Klinefelter syndrome]. Klin Padiatr 1990; 202:53–56. 1001. Konyer NB, Ramsay EA, Bronskill MJ, Plewes DB. Comparison of MR imaging breast coils. Radiology 2002; 222:830–834. 1002. Koomen M, Pisano ED, Kuzmiak C, Pavic D, McLelland R. Future directions in breast imaging. J Clin Oncol 2005; 23:1674–1677. 1003. Kopans DB. Nonmammographic breast imaging techniques. Current status and future developments. Obstet Gynecol Clin North Am 1987; 14:651–665. 1004. Kopans DB. Detecting breast cancer not visible by mammography. J Natl Cancer Inst 1992; 84:745–747. 1005. Korourian S, Klimberg S, Henry-Tillman R, et al. Assessment of proliferating cell nuclear antigen activity using digital image analysis in breast carcinoma following magnetic resonance-guided interstitial laser photocoagulation. Breast J 2003; 9:409–413. 1006. Kosaka Y, Mitsumori M, Araki N, et al. Avascular necrosis of bilateral femoral head as a result of long-term steroid administration for radiation pneumonitis after tangential irradiation of the breast. Int J Clin Oncol 2006; 11:482–486. 1007. Koshiishi T, Isomoto I, Nakamura K, Kajiwara Y, Izawa K. [Differentiation between benign and malignant breast lesions using fat-suppressed dynamic MR imaging]. Nippon Igaku Hoshasen Gakkai Zasshi 1998; 58:433–440. 1008. Kovacs L, Eder M, Hollweck R, et al. Comparison between breast volume measurement using 3D surface imaging and classical techniques. Breast 2007; 16:137–145. 1009. Kovar DA, Al-Hallaq HA, Zamora MA, River JN, Karczmar GS. Fast spectroscopic imaging of water and fat resonances to improve the quality of MR images. Acad Radiol 1998; 5:269–275. 1010. Kover G, Romvari R, Horn P, Berenyi E, Jensen JF, Sorensen P. In vivo assessment of breast muscle, abdominal fat and total fat volume in meat-type chickens by magnetic resonance imaging. Acta Vet Hung 1998; 46:135–144. 1011. Kramer S, Schulz-Wendtland R, Hagedorn K, Bautz W, Lang N. Magnetic resonance imaging and its role in the diagnosis of multicentric breast cancer. Anticancer Res 1998; 18:2163–2164. 1012. Kramer S, Schulz-Wendtland R, Hagedorn K, Bautz W, Lang N. Magnetic resonance imaging in the diagnosis of local recurrences in breast cancer. Anticancer Res 1998; 18:2159–2161. 1013. Kramer S, Schulz-Wendtland R, Lang N. [Quality assurance in stereotactic punch biopsy using a phantom]. Aktuelle Radiol 1996; 6:153–155. 1014. Kramer SC, Rieber A, Gorich J, et al. Diagnosis of papillomas of the breast: value of magnetic resonance mammography in comparison with galactography. Eur Radiol 2000; 10:1733–1736. 1015. Krause A, Gerber B, Rohde E, Kuchenmeister I. [Sarcoid tumor of the breast]. Zentralbl Gynakol 1996; 118:299–302. 1016. Krauss DJ, Kestin LL, Raff G, et al. MRI-based volumetric assessment of cardiac anatomy and dose reduction via active breathing control during irradiation for left-sided breast cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2005; 61:1243–1250. 1017. Kremer S, Grand S, Berger F, et al. Dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI: differentiating melanoma and renal carcinoma metastases from high-grade astrocytomas and other metastases. Neuroradiology 2003; 45:44–49. 1018. Kremer S, Grand S, Remy C, et al. Contribution of dynamic contrast MR imaging to the differentiation between dural metastasis and meningioma. Neuroradiology 2004; 46:642–648. 1019. Kriege M, Brekelmans CT, Boetes C, et al. Efficacy of MRI and mammography for breast-cancer screening in women with a familial or genetic predisposition. N Engl J Med 2004; 351:427–437.  

340

1020. Kriege M, Brekelmans CT, Boetes C, et al. Differences between first and subsequent rounds of the MRISC breast cancer screening program for women with a familial or genetic predisposition. Cancer 2006; 106:2318–2326. 1021. Kriege M, Brekelmans CT, Boetes C, et al. MRI screening for breast cancer in women with familial or genetic predisposition: design of the Dutch National Study (MRISC). Fam Cancer 2001; 1:163–168. 1022. Kriege M, Brekelmans CT, Obdeijn IM, et al. Factors affecting sensitivity and specificity of screening mammography and MRI in women with an inherited risk for breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2006; 100:109–119. 1023. Krishnan S, Chenevert TL. Spatio-temporal bandwidth-based acquisition for dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging. J Magn Reson Imaging 2004; 20:129–137. 1024. Krishnan S, Chenevert TL, Helvie MA, Londy FL. Linear motion correction in three dimensions applied to dynamic gadolinium enhanced breast imaging. Med Phys 1999; 26:707–714. 1025. Kristoffersen Wiberg M, Aspelin P, Perbeck L, Bone B. Value of MR imaging in clinical evaluation of breast lesions. Acta Radiol 2002; 43:275–281. 1026. Kristoffersen Wiberg M, Aspelin P, Sylvan M, Bone B. Comparison of lesion size estimated by dynamic MR imaging, mammography and histopathology in breast neoplasms. Eur Radiol 2003; 13:1207–1212. 1027. Kristoffersen Wiberg M, Bone B, Aspelin P. The potential influence of fine-needle aspiration on MR imaging of the breast. Acta Radiol 2000; 41:222–226. 1028. Kruggel JL. MRI for diagnosis of breast implant rupture. Plast Reconstr Surg 1994; 94:741–742. 1029. Kubota K, Gomi N, Wakita T, Shibuya H, Kakimoto M, Osanai T. Magnetic resonance imaging of the metal clip in a breast: safety and its availability as a negative marker. Breast Cancer 2004; 11:55–59. 1030. Kubota K, Ogawa Y, Nishioka A, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of mammography, ultrasonography and magnetic resonance imaging in the detection of intraductal spread of breast cancer following neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Oncol Rep 2007; 17:915–918. 1031. Kudawara I, Ueda T, Araki N, Mori S. Malignant hemangiopericytoma of the breast. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2001; 25:319–321. 1032. Kuerer HM, Hunt KK, Newman LA, Ross MI, Ames FC, Singletary SE. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy in women with invasive breast carcinoma: conceptual basis and fundamental surgical issues. J Am Coll Surg 2000; 190:350–363. 1033. Kuhl C. [New breast cancer diagnosis. False positive findings should become less frequent (interview by Petra Eiden)]. MMW Fortschr Med 2001; 143:10. 1034. Kuhl C. The current status of breast MR imaging. Part I. Choice of technique, image interpretation, diagnostic accuracy, and transfer to clinical practice. Radiology 2007; 244:356–378. 1035. Kuhl CK. MRI of breast tumors. Eur Radiol 2000; 10:46–58. 1036. Kuhl CK. High-risk screening: multi-modality surveillance of women at high risk for breast cancer (proven or suspected carriers of a breast cancer susceptibility gene). J Exp Clin Cancer Res 2002; 21:103–106. 1037. Kuhl CK. MR imaging for surveillance of women at high familial risk for breast cancer. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 2006; 14:391–402, vii. 1038. Kuhl CK. Concepts for differential diagnosis in breast MR imaging. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 2006; 14:305–328, v. 1039. Kuhl CK. [Familial breast cancer: what the radiologist needs to know]. Rofo 2006; 178:680–687. 1040. Kuhl CK, Bieling H, Gieseke J, et al. Breast neoplasms: T2* susceptibility-contrast, first-pass perfusion MR imaging. Radiology 1997; 202:87–95. 1041. Kuhl CK, Bieling HB, Gieseke J, et al. Healthy premenopausal breast parenchyma in dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging of the breast: normal contrast medium enhancement and cyclical-phase dependency. Radiology 1997; 203:137–144. 1042. Kuhl CK, Bieling HB, Lutterbey G, Sommer T, Keller E, Schild HH. [Standardization and acceleration of quantitative analysis of dynamic MR mammographies via parametric images and automatized ROI definition]. Rofo 1996; 164:475–482. 1043. Kuhl CK, Elevelt A, Leutner CC, Gieseke J, Pakos E, Schild HH. Interventional breast MR imaging: clinical use of a stereotactic localization and biopsy device. Radiology 1997; 204:667–675. 1044. Kuhl CK, Jost P, Morakkabati N, Zivanovic O, Schild HH, Gieseke J. Contrast-enhanced MR imaging of the breast at 3.0 and 1.5 T in the same patients: initial experience. Radiology 2006; 239:666–676.  

341

 

a  References

1045. Kuhl CK, Klaschik S, Mielcarek P, Gieseke J, Wardelmann E, Schild HH. Do T2-weighted pulse sequences help with the differential diagnosis of enhancing lesions in dynamic breast MRI? J Magn Reson Imaging 1999; 9:187–196. 1046. Kuhl CK, Kreft BP, Hauswirth A, et al. [MR mammography at 0.5 tesla. I. Comparison of image quality and sensitivity of MR mammography at 0.5 and 1.5 T.]. Rofo 1995; 162:381–389. 1047. Kuhl CK, Kreft BP, Hauswirth A, et al. [MR mammography at 0.5 tesla. II. The capacity to differentiate malignant and benign lesions in MR mammography at 0.5 and 1.5 T]. Rofo 1995; 162:482–491. 1048. Kuhl CK, Kuhn W, Schild H. Management of women at high risk for breast cancer: new imaging beyond mammography. Breast 2005; 14:480–486. 1049. Kuhl CK, Mielcareck P, Klaschik S, et al. Dynamic breast MR imaging: are signal intensity time course data useful for differential diagnosis of enhancing lesions? Radiology 1999; 211:101–110. 1050. Kuhl CK, Schild HH. Dynamic image interpretation of MRI of the breast. J Magn Reson Imaging 2000; 12:965–974. 1051. Kuhl CK, Schild HH, Morakkabati N. Dynamic bilateral contrast-enhanced MR imaging of the breast: trade-off between spatial and temporal resolution. Radiology 2005; 236:789–800. 1052. Kuhl CK, Schmutzler RK, Leutner CC, et al. Breast MR imaging screening in 192 women proved or suspected to be carriers of a breast cancer susceptibility gene: preliminary results. Radiology 2000; 215:267–279. 1053. Kuhl CK, Schrading S, Leutner CC, et al. Mammography, breast ultrasound, and magnetic resonance imaging for surveillance of women at high familial risk for breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2005; 23:8469–8476. 1054. Kuhl CK, Schrading S, Weigel S, et al. [The „EVA“ Trial: Evaluation of the Efficacy of Diagnostic Methods (Mammography, Ultrasound, MRI) in the secondary and tertiary prevention of familial breast cancer. Preliminary results after the first half of the study period]. Rofo 2005; 177:818–827. 1055. Kuhl CK, Seibert C, Sommer T, Kreft B, Gieseke J, Schild HH. [Focal and diffuse lesions in dynamic MR-mammography of healthy probands]. Rofo 1995; 163:219–224. 1056. Kulakov VI, Panov VO, Volobuev AI, Rudneva TV, Stashuk GA. [Methodological features of magnetic resonance imaging mammography]. Vestn Rentgenol Radiol 2006:4–18. 1057. Kulmala I, Boice JD, Jr., McLaughlin JK, et al. A feasibility study of magnetic resonance imaging of silicone breast implants in Finland. J Long Term Eff Med Implants 2005; 15:9–14. 1058. Kumagai H, Ito H, Hashimoto S. [Plain MR imaging of breast lesions: a study using 3 mm slice thickness]. Nippon Igaku Hoshasen Gakkai Zasshi 1993; 53:801–805. 1059. Kumar AS, Chen DF, Au A, et al. Biologic significance of false-positive magnetic resonance imaging enhancement in the setting of ductal carcinoma in situ. Am J Surg 2006; 192:520–524. 1060. Kumar G, Redick M, Dixon GD. New techniques for mammography screening: advantages and limitations. Mo Med 2005; 102:138–141. 1061. Kumar L, Pokharel YH, Dawar R, Thulkar S. Cervical cancer metastatic to the breast: a case report and review of the literature. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol) 1999; 11:414–416. 1062. Kumar NA, Schnall MD. MR imaging: its current and potential utility in the diagnosis and management of breast cancer. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 2000; 8:715–728. 1063. Kuperman VY, Alley MT. Differentiation between the effects of T1 and T2* shortening in contrast-enhanced MRI of the breast. J Magn Reson Imaging 1999; 9:172–176. 1064. Kurian AW, Hartman AR, Mills MA, Ford JM, Daniel BL, Plevritis SK. Opinions of women with high inherited breast cancer risk about prophylactic mastectomy: an initial evaluation from a screening trial including magnetic resonance imaging and ductal lavage. Health Expect 2005; 8:221–233. 1065. Kurian AW, Mills MA, Jaffee M, et al. Ductal lavage of fluid-yielding and non-fluid-yielding ducts in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers and other women at high inherited breast cancer risk. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2005; 14:1082–1089. 1066. Kurkjian C, Armor JF, Kamble R, Ozer H, Kharfan-Dabaja MA. Symptomatic metastases to the pituitary infundibulum resulting from primary breast cancer. Int J Clin Oncol 2005; 10:191–194. 1067. Kuroki Y, Nasu K, Kuroki S, et al. Diffusion-weighted imaging of breast cancer with the sensitivity encoding technique: analysis of the apparent diffusion coefficient value. Magn Reson Med Sci 2004; 3:79–85. 1068. Kuroki Y, Nawano S, Hasebe T, et al. Efficacy of MR mammography (MRM) in providing preoperative locoregional information on breast cancer: correlation between MRM and histological findings. Magn Reson Med Sci 2002; 1:73–80.  

342

1069. Kuroki-Suzuki S, Kuroki Y, Nasu K, Nawano S, Moriyama N, Okazaki M. Detecting breast cancer with non-contrast MR imaging: combining diffusion-weighted and STIR imaging. Magn Reson Med Sci 2007; 6:21–27. 1070. Kurtz B, Achten C, Audretsch W, Rezai M, Urban P, Zocholl G. [MR-mammography assessment of tumor response after neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy of locally advanced breast carcinoma]. Rofo 1996; 164:469–474. 1071. Kurtz B, Audretsch W, Rezai M, Achten C, Zocholl G. [Initial experiences with MR-mammography in after-care following surgical flap treatment of breast carcinoma]. Rofo 1996; 164:295–300. 1072. Kurtz JM, Kinkel K. Breast conservation in the 21st century. Eur J Cancer 2000; 36:1919–1924. 1073. Kurtzman SH, MacGillivray DC, Deckers PJ. Evolving strategies for the management of non-palpable breast abnormalities. Surg Oncol 1995; 4:1–14. 1074. Kusama R, Takayama F, Tsuchiya S. MRI of the breast: comparison of MRI signals and histological characteristics of the same slices. Med Mol Morphol 2005; 38:204–215. 1075. Kuwabara M. [MRI of breast tumors with emphasis on histopathologic correlation]. Nippon Igaku Hoshasen Gakkai Zasshi 1991; 51:1366–1374. 1076. Kuwada T, Tozaki M, Harada J. [Evaluation of enhancement patterns using three-dimensional dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging in 209 cases of breast cancer]. Nippon Igaku Hoshasen Gakkai Zasshi 2004; 64:544–551. 1077. Kuzin MI, Shkrob OS, Belichenko OI, et al. [Magnetic resonance tomography in the diagnosis of surgical diseases]. Khirurgiia (Mosk) 1991:107–113. 1078. Kvistad KA, Lundgren S, Fjosne HE, Smenes E, Smethurst HB, Haraldseth O. Differentiating benign and malignant breast lesions with T2*-weighted first pass perfusion imaging. Acta Radiol 1999; 40:45–51. 1079. Kvistad KA, Rydland J, Smethurst HB, Lundgren S, Fjosne HE, Haraldseth O. Axillary lymph node metastases in breast cancer: preoperative detection with dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI. Eur Radiol 2000; 10:1464–1471. 1080. Kvistad KA, Rydland J, Vainio J, et al. Breast lesions: evaluation with dynamic contrast-enhanced T1-weighted MR imaging and with T2*-weighted first-pass perfusion MR imaging. Radiology 2000; 216:545–553. 1081. Kvistad KA, Smenes E, Thuomas KA, Gribbestad IS, Samdal F. [Magnetic tomography in diagnosis of breast implant rupture]. Tidsskr Nor Laegeforen 1997; 117:3226–3228. 1082. Kwek JW, Choi H, Ma J, Miller MJ. Gel-gel double-lumen silicone breast implant: mimic of intracapsular implant rupture. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2006; 187:W436–437. 1083. Kwock L, Smith JK, Castillo M, et al. Clinical role of proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy in oncology: brain, breast, and prostate cancer. Lancet Oncol 2006; 7:859–868. 1084. Kwong MS, Chung GG, Horvath LJ, et al. Postchemotherapy MRI overestimates residual disease compared with histopathology in responders to neoadjuvant therapy for locally advanced breast cancer. Cancer J 2006; 12:212–221. 1085. Laderoute MP. Improved safety and effectiveness of imaging predicted for MR mammography. Br J Cancer 2004; 90:278–279; author reply 280. 1086. Lagerburg V, Moerland MA, van Vulpen M, Lagendijk JJ. A new robotic needle insertion method to minimise attendant prostate motion. Radiother Oncol 2006; 80:73–77. 1087. Lalonde L, David J, Trop I. Magnetic resonance imaging of the breast: current indications. Can Assoc Radiol J 2005; 56:301–308. 1088. Lamarque JL, Pujol J, Rodiere MJ, Mourou MY. [Methods of breast disease diagnosis. Value and limits]. Soins Gynecol Obstet Pueric Pediatr 1990:13–15. 1089. Lamarque JL, Rodiere MJ, Prat X, et al. Breast pathology in MRI. First results. Eur J Radiol 1986; 6:42–47. 1090. Lampe D, Hefler L, Alberich T, et al. The clinical value of preoperative wire localization of breast lesions by magnetic resonance imaging – a multicenter study. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2002; 75:175–179. 1091. Lamy O, von Bremen K, Burckhardt P. Breast plasmacytoma. Leuk Lymphoma 2000; 37:611–615. 1092. Landheer ML, Veltman J, van Eekeren R, Zeillemaker AM, Boetes C, Wobbes T. MRI-guided preoperative wire localization of nonpalpable breast lesions. Clin Imaging 2006; 30:229–233. 1093. Langen HJ, Kugel H, Grewe S, et al. [MRI-controlled preoperative wire marking of uncertain breast lesions]. Rofo 2000; 172:764–769. 1094. Langen HJ, Kugel H, Landwehr P. MR-guided core biopsies using a closed 1.0 T imager. First clinical results. Eur J Radiol 2002; 41:19–25. 1095. Langen HJ, Walter C, Ernst S, Kugel H, Lackner K. [MR-compatible and conventional marker wires in breast diagnosis – experimental studies on their dislocatability and artifact size in MRT]. Rofo 1999; 170:310–315.  

343

 

a  References

1096. Langer M. [Digital mammography. An alternative to current screening?]. MMW Fortschr Med 2004; 146:14. 1097. Langer SA, Horst KC, Ikeda DM, Daniel BL, Kong CS, Dirbas FM. Pathologic correlates of false positive breast magnetic resonance imaging findings: which lesions warrant biopsy? Am J Surg 2005; 190:633–640. 1098. Laor T, Collins MH, Emery KH, Donnelly LF, Bove KE, Ballard ET. MRI appearance of accessory breast tissue: a diagnostic consideration for an axillary mass in a peripubertal or pubertal girl. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2004; 183:1779– 1781. 1099. Larkman DJ, deSouza NM, Bydder M, Hajnal JV. An investigation into the use of sensitivity-encoded techniques to increase temporal resolution in dynamic contrast-enhanced breast imaging. J Magn Reson Imaging 2001; 14:329–335. 1100. Larson BT, Erdman AG, Tsekos NV, Yacoub E, Tsekos PV, Koutlas IG. Design of an MRI-compatible robotic stereotactic device for minimally invasive interventions in the breast. J Biomech Eng 2004; 126:458–465. 1101. Lawrence WF, Liang W, Mandelblatt JS, et al. Serendipity in diagnostic imaging: magnetic resonance imaging of the breast. J Natl Cancer Inst 1998; 90:1792–1800. 1102. Leach MO. Application of magnetic resonance imaging to angiogenesis in breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res 2001; 3:22–27. 1103. Leach MO. Assessing response to treatment in breast cancer using magnetic resonance. J Exp Clin Cancer Res 2002; 21:39–45. 1104. Leach MO. MRI for breast cancer screening. Ann Oncol 2006; 17 Suppl 10:x325–331. 1105. Leach MO, Boggis CR, Dixon AK, et al. Screening with magnetic resonance imaging and mammography of a UK population at high familial risk of breast cancer: a prospective multicentre cohort study (MARIBS). Lancet 2005; 365:1769–1778. 1106. Leach MO, Eeles RA, Turnbull LW, et al. The UK national study of magnetic resonance imaging as a method of screening for breast cancer (MARIBS). J Exp Clin Cancer Res 2002; 21:107–114. 1107. Lee BI, Oh SH, Kim TS, et al. Basic setup for breast conductivity imaging using magnetic resonance electrical impedance tomography. Phys Med Biol 2006; 51:443–455. 1108. Lee CH. Problem solving MR imaging of the breast. Radiol Clin North Am 2004; 42:919–934, vii. 1109. Lee CH, Smith RC, Levine JA, Troiano RN, Tocino I. Clinical usefulness of MR imaging of the breast in the evaluation of the problematic mammogram. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1999; 173:1323–1329. 1110. Lee CH, Weinreb JC. The use of magnetic resonance imaging in breast cancer screening. J Am Coll Radiol 2004; 1:176–182. 1111. Lee CJ, Park JH, Park IS, Lee SI. A case report of prefilled polysaccharide hydrogel breast implant rupture: clinical, MRI, and pathologic findings. Aesthetic Plast Surg 2004; 28:401–404. 1112. Lee EK, Kook SH, Kwag HJ, Park YL, Bae WG. Schwannoma of the breast showing massive exophytic growth: a case report. Breast 2006; 15:562–566. 1113. Lee JM, Kaplan JB, Murray MP, et al. Underestimation of DCIS at MRI-guided vacuum-assisted breast biopsy. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2007; 189:468–474. 1114. Lee JM, Orel SG, Czerniecki BJ, Solin LJ, Schnall MD. MRI before reexcision surgery in patients with breast cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2004; 182:473–480. 1115. Lee KC, Moffat BA, Schott AF, et al. Prospective early response imaging biomarker for neoadjuvant breast cancer chemotherapy. Clin Cancer Res 2007; 13:443–450. 1116. Lee KW, Chung SY, Yang I, et al. Inflammatory breast cancer: imaging findings. Clin Imaging 2005; 29:22–25. 1117. Lee NA, Rusinek H, Weinreb J, et al. Fatty and fibroglandular tissue volumes in the breasts of women 20–83 years old: comparison of X-ray mammography and computer-assisted MR imaging. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1997; 168:501–506. 1118. Lee SG, Orel SG, Woo IJ, et al. MR imaging screening of the contralateral breast in patients with newly diagnosed breast cancer: preliminary results. Radiology 2003; 226:773–778. 1119. Lehman CD. Role of MRI in screening women at high risk for breast cancer. J Magn Reson Imaging 2006; 24:964–970. 1120. Lehman CD. Screening MRI for women at high risk for breast cancer. Semin Ultrasound CT MR 2006; 27:333–338. 1121. Lehman CD, Aikawa T. MR-guided vacuum-assisted breast biopsy: accuracy of targeting and success in sampling in a phantom model. Radiology 2004; 232:911–914.  

344

1122. Lehman CD, Blume JD, Thickman D, et al. Added cancer yield of MRI in screening the contralateral breast of women recently diagnosed with breast cancer: results from the International Breast Magnetic Resonance Consortium (IBMC) trial. J Surg Oncol 2005; 92:9–15; discussion 15–16. 1123. Lehman CD, Blume JD, Weatherall P, et al. Screening women at high risk for breast cancer with mammography and magnetic resonance imaging. Cancer 2005; 103:1898–1905. 1124. Lehman CD, Deperi ER, Peacock S, McDonough MD, Demartini WB, Shook J. Clinical experience with MRI-guided vacuum-assisted breast biopsy. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2005; 184:1782–1787. 1125. Lehman CD, Eby PR, Chen X, Dee KE, Thursten B, McCloskey J. MR imaging-guided breast biopsy using a coaxial technique with a 14-gauge stainless steel core biopsy needle and a titanium sheath. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2003; 181:183–185. 1126. Lehman CD, Isaacs C, Schnall MD, et al. Cancer yield of mammography, MR, and US in high-risk women: prospective multi-institution breast cancer screening study. Radiology 2007; 244:381–388. 1127. Lehman CD, Peacock S, DeMartini WB, Chen X. A new automated software system to evaluate breast MR examinations: improved specificity without decreased sensitivity. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2006; 187:51–56. 1128. Lehman CD, Schnall MD. Imaging in breast cancer: magnetic resonance imaging. Breast Cancer Res 2005; 7:215–219. 1129. Lehman CD, Schnall MD, Kuhl CK, Harms SE. Report of the Working Groups on Breast MRI: report of the HighRisk Screening Group. Breast J 2004; 10 Suppl 2:S9–S12. 1130. Leibman AJ. Imaging of complications of augmentation mammaplasty. Plast Reconstr Surg 1994; 93:1134–1140. 1131. Leinsinger G, Schlossbauer T, Scherr M, Lange O, Reiser M, Wismuller A. Cluster analysis of signal-intensity time course in dynamic breast MRI: does unsupervised vector quantization help to evaluate small mammographic lesions? Eur Radiol 2006; 16:1138–1146. 1132. Leinsinger GL, Friedl L, Tiling R, et al. Comparison of dynamic MR imaging of the breast and sestamibi scintimammography for evaluation of indeterminate mammographic lesions. Eur Radiol 2001; 11:2050–2057. 1133. Leinung S, Wurl P, Preusse C, Schneider JP, Borner P, Schonfelder M. [Quality assurance in excision of suspected malignant, preoperatively marked and unmarked, breast lesions. A one-year analysis]. Zentralbl Chir 2000; 125 Suppl 2:182–184. 1134. Leinung S, Wurl P, Preusse C, Schneider JP, Borner P, Schonfelder M. [Improved prognosis in breast carcinoma by excision of non-palpable carcinoma-suspected lesions. Analysis of 319 ambulatory surgery operations]. Zentralbl Chir 2000; 125:661–665. 1135. Lemke AJ, Senfft von Pilsach MI, Lubbe A, Bergemann C, Riess H, Felix R. MRI after magnetic drug targeting in patients with advanced solid malignant tumors. Eur Radiol 2004; 14:1949–1955. 1136. Leonard GD, Swain SM. Ductal carcinoma in situ, complexities and challenges. J Natl Cancer Inst 2004; 96:906–920. 1137. Leong CS, Daniel BL, Herfkens RJ, et al. Characterization of breast lesion morphology with delayed 3DSSMT: an adjunct to dynamic breast MRI. J Magn Reson Imaging 2000; 11:87–96. 1138. Le-Petross HT. Breast MRI as a screening tool: the appropriate role. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 2006; 4:523–526. 1139. Lepori D, Meuli R, Meuwly JY, Schnyder P. [Magnetic resonance imaging of the breast]. Rev Med Suisse Romande 2003; 123:291–294. 1140. Lernevall A. Imaging of axillary lymph nodes. Acta Oncol 2000; 39:277–281. 1141. Leung JW, Sickles EA. Developing asymmetry identified on mammography: correlation with imaging outcome and pathologic findings. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2007; 188:667–675. 1142. Levin M. Multidisciplinary approach to breast cancer management. Drug News Perspect 2004; 17:206–212. 1143. Levrini G, Nicoli F, Borasi G, Mori CA, Zompatori M. MRI patterns of invasive lobular breast cancer. Eur J Radiol 2006; 59:472. 1144. Lewis-Jones HG, Whitehouse GH, Leinster SJ. The role of magnetic resonance imaging in the assessment of local recurrent breast carcinoma. Clin Radiol 1991; 43:197–204. 1145. Li Y, Wang JX, Holloway C, Plewes DB. A positive contrast, tri-modality tissue marker for breast tumour localization. Phys Med Biol 2007; 52:N61–66. 1146. Liang W, Lawrence WF, Burnett CB, et al. Acceptability of diagnostic tests for breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2003; 79:199–206. 1147. Liberman L. Percutaneous image-guided core breast biopsy. Radiol Clin North Am 2002; 40:483–500, vi.  

345

 

a  References

1148. Liberman L. Breast cancer screening with MRI – what are the data for patients at high risk? N Engl J Med 2004; 351:497–500. 1149. Liberman L. Breast MR imaging in assessing extent of disease. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 2006; 14:339–349, vi. 1150. Liberman L, Bracero N, Morris E, Thornton C, Dershaw DD. MRI-guided 9-gauge vacuum-assisted breast biopsy: initial clinical experience. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2005; 185:183–193. 1151. Liberman L, Dershaw DD, Kaufman RJ, Rosen PP. Angiosarcoma of the breast. Radiology 1992; 183:649–654. 1152. Liberman L, Holland AE, Marjan D, et al. Underestimation of atypical ductal hyperplasia at MRI-guided 9-gauge vacuum assisted breast biopsy. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2007; 188:684–690. 1153. Liberman L, Mason G, Morris EA, Dershaw DD. Does size matter? Positive predictive value of MRI-detected breast lesions as a function of lesion size. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2006; 186:426–430. 1154. Liberman L, Morris EA, Benton CL, Abramson AF, Dershaw DD. Probably benign lesions at breast magnetic resonance imaging: preliminary experience in high-risk women. Cancer 2003; 98:377–388. 1155. Liberman L, Morris EA, Dershaw DD, Abramson AF, Tan LK. Ductal enhancement on MR imaging of the breast. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2003; 181:519–525. 1156. Liberman L, Morris EA, Dershaw DD, Abramson AF, Tan LK. MR imaging of the ipsilateral breast in women with percutaneously proven breast cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2003; 180:901–910. 1157. Liberman L, Morris EA, Dershaw DD, Thornton CM, Van Zee KJ, Tan LK. Fast MRI-guided vacuum-assisted breast biopsy: initial experience. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2003; 181:1283–1293. 1158. Liberman L, Morris EA, Kim CM, et al. MR imaging findings in the contralateral breast of women with recently diagnosed breast cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2003; 180:333–341. 1159. Liberman L, Morris EA, Lee MJ, et al. Breast lesions detected on MR imaging: features and positive predictive value. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2002; 179:171–178. 1160. Lilienstein J, Daniel BL, Ikeda DM. In vivo sonography through an open MRI breast coil to correlate sonographic and MRI findings. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2005; 184:S49–52. 1161. Liney GP, Gibbs P, Hayes C, Leach MO, Turnbull LW. Dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI in the differentiation of breast tumors: user-defined versus semi-automated region-of-interest analysis. J Magn Reson Imaging 1999; 10:945–949. 1162. Liney GP, Sreenivas M, Gibbs P, Garcia-Alvarez R, Turnbull LW. Breast lesion analysis of shape technique: semiautomated vs. manual morphological description. J Magn Reson Imaging 2006; 23:493–498. 1163. Liney GP, Tozer DJ, van Hulten HB, Beerens EG, Gibbs P, Turnbull LW. Bilateral open breast coil and compatible intervention device. J Magn Reson Imaging 2000; 12:984–990. 1164. Ling H, Gu YJ, Wang XH, et al. [Value of magnetic resonance imaging in diagnosing breast lesions which need biopsy]. Zhonghua Wai Ke Za Zhi 2006; 44:1036–1039. 1165. Lingawi SS, Bilbey JH, Munk PL, et al. MR imaging of brachial plexopathy in breast cancer patients without palpable recurrence. Skeletal Radiol 1999; 28:318–323. 1166. Liu HT, Sun LZ, Wang G, Vannier MW. Analytic modeling of breast elastography. Med Phys 2003; 30:2340–2349. 1167. Liu JM, Wu HW, Tiu CM, et al. Comprehensive breast cancer adjuvant digital summary. J Digit Imaging 2006; 19:264–269. 1168. Liu PF, Debatin JF, Caduff RF, Kacl G, Garzoli E, Krestin GP. Improved diagnostic accuracy in dynamic contrast enhanced MRI of the breast by combined quantitative and qualitative analysis. Br J Radiol 1998; 71:501–509. 1169. Lloyd MS, Nash AG. ‘Occult’ breast cancer. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 2001; 83:420–424. 1170. Lo JL, Brady M, Moore N. Simultaneous multiple image registration method for T1 estimation in breast MRI images. Med Image Comput Comput Assist Interv Int Conf Med Image Comput Comput Assist Interv 2006; 9:865–872. 1171. Lo LD, Orel SG, Schnall MD. MR imaging-guided interventions in the breast. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 2001; 9:373–380, vii. 1172. Lomasney LM, Posniak HV. Magnetic resonance imaging of the sternum with a dedicated breast coil. Can Assoc Radiol J 1998; 49:55–56. 1173. Lombardi R, Costantini M, Malaspina C, Gaudino S, Terribile D, Belli P. Combined diagnostic imaging and management of a breast tumor in a young woman. Rays 2005; 30:239–244.

 

346

1174. Londero V, Bazzocchi M, Del Frate C, et al. Locally advanced breast cancer: comparison of mammography, sonography and MR imaging in evaluation of residual disease in women receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Eur Radiol 2004; 14:1371–1379. 1175. Long BW. Image-guided percutaneous needle biopsy: an overview. Radiol Technol 2000; 71:335–359; quiz 360–333. 1176. Lopez-Ruiz J, Ruiz M, Echevarria JJ, Lopez S, Imaz I. Mammary fibromatosis mimicking recurrent breast cancer: radiological findings. Eur Radiol 2005; 15:2034–2036. 1177. Lorenzen J, Sinkus R, Schrader D, et al. [Imaging of breast tumors using MR elastography]. Rofo 2001; 173:12–17. 1178. Lorenzen J, Welger J, Lisboa BW, Krupski G, Adam G. [MR-imaging of the breast at 0.5 Tesla: menstrual-cycle dependency of parenchymal contrast enhancement in healthy volunteers with oral contraceptive use?]. Rofo 2003; 175:502–506. 1179. Lucas-Quesada FA, Sinha U, Sinha S. Segmentation strategies for breast tumors from dynamic MR images. J Magn Reson Imaging 1996; 6:753–763. 1180. Lucht R, Delorme S, Brix G. Neural network-based segmentation of dynamic MR mammographic images. Magn Reson Imaging 2002; 20:147–154. 1181. Lucht R, Knopp MV, Brix G. Elastic matching of dynamic MR mammographic images. Magn Reson Med 2000; 43:9–16. 1182. Lucht RE, Delorme S, Hei J, et al. Classification of signal-time curves obtained by dynamic magnetic resonance mammography: statistical comparison of quantitative methods. Invest Radiol 2005; 40:442–447. 1183. Lucht RE, Knopp MV, Brix G. Classification of signal-time curves from dynamic MR mammography by neural networks. Magn Reson Imaging 2001; 19:51–57. 1184. Luciani A, Dao TH, Lapeyre M, et al. Simultaneous bilateral breast and high-resolution axillary MRI of patients with breast cancer: preliminary results. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2004; 182:1059–1067. 1185. Luciani A, Itti E, Rahmouni A, Meignan M, Clement O. Lymph node imaging: basic principles. Eur J Radiol 2006; 58:338–344. 1186. Luckmann R. Magnetic resonance imaging was more sensitive than mammography for detecting breast cancer in high-risk women. ACP J Club 2005; 142:23. 1187. Luo JD, Liu YY, Zhang XL, Shi LC. [Application of diffusion weighted magnetic resonance imaging to differential diagnosis of breast diseases]. Ai Zheng 2007; 26:168–171. 1188. Ma J, Choi H, Stafford RJ, Miller MJ. Silicone-specific imaging using an inversion-recovery-prepared fast three-point Dixon technique. J Magn Reson Imaging 2004; 19:298–302. 1189. Ma J, Son JB, Bankson JA, Stafford RJ, Choi H, Ragan D. A fast spin echo two-point Dixon technique and its combination with sensitivity encoding for efficient T2-weighted imaging. Magn Reson Imaging 2005; 23:977–982. 1190. Ma J, Vu AT, Son JB, Choi H, Hazle JD. Fat-suppressed three-dimensional dual echo Dixon technique for contrast agent enhanced MRI. J Magn Reson Imaging 2006; 23:36–41. 1191. Mack MG, Straub R, Eichler K, Sollner O, Lehnert T, Vogl TJ. Breast cancer metastases in liver: laser-induced interstitial thermotherapy – local tumor control rate and survival data. Radiology 2004; 233:400–409. 1192. Macura KJ, Ouwerkerk R, Jacobs MA, Bluemke DA. Patterns of enhancement on breast MR images: interpretation and imaging pitfalls. Radiographics 2006; 26:1719–1734; quiz 1719. 1193. Mahfouz AE, Sherif H, Saad A, et al. Gadolinium-enhanced MR angiography of the breast: is breast cancer associated with ipsilateral higher vascularity? Eur Radiol 2001; 11:965–969. 1194. Maier CF, Nikolov HN, Chu KC, Chronik BA, Rutt BK. Practical design of a high-strength breast gradient coil. Magn Reson Med 1998; 39:392–401. 1195. Maier CF, Paran Y, Bendel P, Rutt BK, Degani H. Quantitative diffusion imaging in implanted human breast tumors. Magn Reson Med 1997; 37:576–581. 1196. Maki DD, Grossman RI. Patterns of disease spread in metastatic breast carcinoma: influence of estrogen and progesterone receptor status. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2000; 21:1064–1066. 1197. Makkat S, Luypaert R, Sourbron S, Stadnik T, De Mey J. Quantification of perfusion and permeability in breast tumors with a deconvolution-based analysis of second-bolus T1-DCE data. J Magn Reson Imaging 2007; 25:1159–1167. 1198. Malaspina C, Costantini M, Romani M, Gaudino S, Masetti R, Belli P. A case of intracystic breast cancer. Rays 2005; 30:245–250.  

347

 

a  References

1199. Malich A, Boehm T, Facius M, et al. Differentiation of mammographically suspicious lesions: evaluation of breast ultrasound, MRI mammography and electrical impedance scanning as adjunctive technologies in breast cancer detection. Clin Radiol 2001; 56:278–283. 1200. Malich A, Fischer DR, Wurdinger S, et al. Potential MRI interpretation model: differentiation of benign from malignant breast masses. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2005; 185:964–970. 1201. Malich A, Fritsch T, Anderson R, et al. Electrical impedance scanning for classifying suspicious breast lesions: first results. Eur Radiol 2000; 10:1555–1561. 1202. Malur S, Wurdinger S, Moritz A, Michels W, Schneider A. Comparison of written reports of mammography, sonography and magnetic resonance mammography for preoperative evaluation of breast lesions, with special emphasis on magnetic resonance mammography. Breast Cancer Res 2001; 3:55–60. 1203. Malyon AD, Dunn R, Weiler-Mithoff EM. Expanding silicone granuloma. Br J Plast Surg 2001; 54:257–259. 1204. Manduca A, Lake DS, Kruse SA, Ehman RL. Spatio-temporal directional filtering for improved inversion of MR elastography images. Med Image Anal 2003; 7:465–473. 1205. Manduca A, Oliphant TE, Dresner MA, et al. Magnetic resonance elastography: non-invasive mapping of tissue elasticity. Med Image Anal 2001; 5:237–254. 1206. Mankoff D. Imaging in breast cancer - breast cancer imaging revisited. Breast Cancer Res 2005; 7:276–278. 1207. Mankoff DA, Dunnwald LK, Kinahan P. Are we ready for dedicated breast imaging approaches? J Nucl Med 2003; 44:594–595. 1208. Mann RM, Veltman J, Barentsz JO, Wobbes T, Blickman JG, Boetes C. The value of MRI compared to mammography in the assessment of tumour extent in invasive lobular carcinoma of the breast. Eur J Surg Oncol 2007. 1209. Manna P, Giuseppetti GM, Latini L, Baldassarre S, Antognoli S. [A case of leiomyoma of the breast]. Radiol Med (Torino) 1993; 86:155–158. 1210. Manning HC, Goebel T, Thompson RC, Price RR, Lee H, Bornhop DJ. Targeted molecular imaging agents for cellular-scale bimodal imaging. Bioconjug Chem 2004; 15:1488–1495. 1211. Mansour AM, Dinowitz K, Chaljub G, Guinto FC. Metastatic lesion of the optic nerve. J Clin Neuroophthalmol 1993; 13:102–104. 1212. Manton DJ, Chaturvedi A, Hubbard A, et al. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer: early response prediction with quantitative MR imaging and spectroscopy. Br J Cancer 2006; 94:427–435. 1213. Marchant LK, Orel SG, Perez-Jaffe LA, Reynolds C, Schnall MD. Bilateral angiosarcoma of the breast on MR imaging. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1997; 169:1009–1010. 1214. Marchioni D, Monzani D, Rossi G, Rivasi F, Presutti L. Breast carcinoma metastases in paranasal sinuses, a rare occurrence mimicking a primary nasal malignancy. case report. Acta Otorhinolaryngol Ital 2004; 24:87–91. 1215. Marcus PM. MRI evaluation of breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2007; 357:192; author reply 193. 1216. Marcy PY, Magne N, Castadot P, Bailet C, Namer M. Ultrasound-guided percutaneous radiofrequency ablation in elderly breast cancer patients: preliminary institutional experience. Br J Radiol 2007; 80:267–273. 1217. Mariano MN, van den Bosch MA, Daniel BL, et al. Contrast-enhanced MRI of ductal carcinoma in situ: characteristics of a new intensity-modulated parametric mapping technique correlated with histopathologic findings. J Magn Reson Imaging 2005; 22:520–526. 1218. Maril N, Collins CM, Greenman RL, Lenkinski RE. Strategies for shimming the breast. Magn Reson Med 2005; 54:1139–1145. 1219. Marini C, Iacconi C, Giannelli M, Cilotti A, Moretti M, Bartolozzi C. Quantitative diffusion-weighted MR imaging in the differential diagnosis of breast lesion. Eur Radiol 2007. 1220. Mariscal A, Balliu E, Diaz R, Casas JD, Gallart AM. Primary oat cell carcinoma of the breast: imaging features. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2004; 183:1169–1171. 1221. Marklund M, Moller JM, Burchard AJ, et al. Is 0.6T magnetic resonance mammography adequate in the detection of breast cancer? Acta Radiol 2006; 47:446–453. 1222. Marklund M, Torp-Pedersen S, Bentzon N, Thomsen C, Roslind A, Nolsoe CP. Contrast kinetics of the malignant breast tumour-Border versus centre enhancement on dynamic midfield MRI. Eur J Radiol 2007. 1223. Martel AL. A fast method of generating pharmacokinetic maps from dynamic contrast-enhanced images of the breast. Med Image Comput Comput Assist Interv Int Conf Med Image Comput Comput Assist Interv 2006; 9:101–108.  

348

1224. Martincich L, Montemurro F, Cirillo S, et al. Role of Magnetic Resonance Imaging in the prediction of tumor response in patients with locally advanced breast cancer receiving neoadjuvant chemo-therapy. Radiol Med (Torino) 2003; 106:51–58. 1225. Martincich L, Montemurro F, De Rosa G, et al. Monitoring response to primary chemotherapy in breast cancer using dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2004; 83:67–76. 1226. Marzola P, Ramponi S, Nicolato E, et al. Effect of tamoxifen in an experimental model of breast tumor studied by dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging and different contrast agents. Invest Radiol 2005; 40:421–429. 1227. Mason AC, White CS, McAvoy MA, Goldberg N. MR imaging of slipped stacked breast implants: a potential pitfall in the diagnosis of intracapsular rupture. Magn Reson Imaging 1995; 13:339–342. 1228. Maspes F, Gandini R, Pocek M, et al. [Breath-hold gadolinium enhanced tree-dimensional MR angiography: personal experience in the thoracic-abdominal area]. Radiol Med (Torino) 1999; 98:275–282. 1229. Massuet A, Fernandez S, Rimola J, Andreu FJ, Tortajada L, Sentis M. [Metaplastic carcinoma of the breast: magnetic resonance and radiophatologic correlation]. Radiologia 2006; 48:155–163. 1230. Matsubayashi R, Matsuo Y, Edakuni G, Satoh T, Tokunaga O, Kudo S. Breast masses with peripheral rim enhancement on dynamic contrast-enhanced MR images: correlation of MR findings with histologic features and expression of growth factors. Radiology 2000; 217:841–848. 1231. Matsubayashi RN, Adachi A, Yasumori K, et al. Adenoma of the nipple: correlation of magnetic resonance imaging findings with histologic features. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2006; 30:148–150. 1232. Matsui Y, Sugino Y, Iwamura H, Oka H, Fukuzawa S, Takeuchi H. Ductal adenocarcinoma of the prostate associated with prostatic multilocular cyst. Int J Urol 2002; 9:413–415. 1233. Matsushima S, Sasaki F, Kinosada Y, et al. Saturation transfer ratio imaging in invasive ductal carcinomas of the breast. Magn Reson Imaging 2000; 18:379–385. 1234. Maurer J, Busch M, Matthaei D, Helwig A, Duhmke E. [Diabetes insipidus and breast carcinoma – the importance of NMR tomography (MRT) in therapy planning]. Strahlenther Onkol 1993; 169:126–128. 1235. Mauro S, Eugenio F, Roberto B. Late recurrent capsular hematoma after augmentation mammaplasty: case report. Aesthetic Plast Surg 2005; 29:10–12. 1236. Mautner BD, Schmidt KV, Brennan MB. New diagnostic techniques and treatments for early breast cancer. Semin Oncol Nurs 2000; 16:185–196. 1237. Mazaki T, Tanak T, Suenaga Y, Tomioka K, Takayama T. Liposarcoma of the breast: a case report and review of the literature. Int Surg 2002; 87:164–170. 1238. Mazooz G, Mehlman T, Lai TS, Greenberg CS, Dewhirst MW, Neeman M. Development of magnetic resonance imaging contrast material for in vivo mapping of tissue transglutaminase activity. Cancer Res 2005; 65:1369–1375. 1239. Mazzara GP, Briggs RW, Wu Z, Steinbach BG. Use of a modified polysaccharide gel in developing a realistic breast phantom for MRI. Magn Reson Imaging 1996; 14:639–648. 1240. McDannold N, Hynynen K, Oshio K, Mulkern RV. Temperature monitoring with line scan echo planar spectroscopic imaging. Med Phys 2001; 28:346–355. 1241. McLauglin SA, Thiel DD, Smith SL, Wehle MJ, Menke DM. Solitary breast mass as initial presentation of clinically silent metastatic renal cell carcinoma. Breast 2006; 15:427–429. 1242. McMahon K, Medoro L, Kennedy D. Breast magnetic resonance imaging: an essential role in malignant axillary lymphadenopathy of unknown origin. Australas Radiol 2005; 49:382–389. 1243. McMahon KE, Osborne DR, Davidson AL. Role of breast magnetic resonance imaging in difficult diagnostic situations. Med J Aust 2001; 175:494–497. 1244. Medved M, Newstead GM, Abe H, Zamora MA, Olopade OI, Karczmar GS. High spectral and spatial resolution MRI of breast lesions: preliminary clinical experience. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2006; 186:30–37. 1245. Meeuwis C, van den Bosch MA, Houwert KA, Fernandez-Gallardo AM, van Hillegersberg R, Mali WP. [MRI-guided biopsy of suspicious abnormalities in the breast]. Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd 2006; 150:1780–1787. 1246. Meisamy S, Bolan PJ, Baker EH, et al. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy of locally advanced breast cancer: predicting response with in vivo (1)H MR spectroscopy – a pilot study at 4 T. Radiology 2004; 233:424–431.

 

349

 

a  References

1247. Meisamy S, Bolan PJ, Baker EH, et al. Adding in vivo quantitative 1H MR spectroscopy to improve diagnostic accuracy of breast MR imaging: preliminary results of observer performance study at 4.0 T. Radiology 2005; 236:465–475. 1248. Melani E, Sardanelli F, Ottonello C, Parodi RC, Castaldi A, Succi S. [Magnetic resonance mammography in suspected tumor recurrences]. Radiol Med (Torino) 1995; 89:219–224. 1249. Memarsadeghi M, Riedl CC, Kaneider A, et al. Axillary lymph node metastases in patients with breast carcinomas: assessment with nonenhanced versus uspio-enhanced MR imaging. Radiology 2006; 241:367–377. 1250. Menell JH, Morris EA, Dershaw DD, Abramson AF, Brogi E, Liberman L. Determination of the presence and extent of pure ductal carcinoma in situ by mammography and magnetic resonance imaging. Breast J 2005; 11:382–390. 1251. Merchant TE. MR spectroscopy of the breast. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 1994; 2:691–703. 1252. Merchant TE, de Graaf PW, Nieuwenhuizen CW, Kievit HC, Bakker CJ, Den Otter W. Fibroadenoma of the breast: in vivo magnetic resonance characterization. Eur J Radiol 1991; 13:91–95. 1253. Merchant TE, Kasimos JN, Vroom T, et al. Malignant breast tumor phospholipid profiles using (31)P magnetic resonance. Cancer Lett 2002; 176:159–167. 1254. Merchant TE, Kievit HC, Beijerink D, van der Putte SC, de Graaf PW. MRI appearance of multiple papilloma of the breast. Breast Cancer Res Treat 1991; 19:63–67. 1255. Merchant TE, Obertop H, de Graaf PW. Advantages of magnetic resonance imaging in breast surgery treatment planning. Breast Cancer Res Treat 1993; 25:257–264. 1256. Merchant TE, Thelissen GR, de Graaf PW, Nieuwenhuizen CW, Kievit HC, Den Otter W. Application of a mixed imaging sequence for MR imaging characterization of human breast disease. Acta Radiol 1993; 34:356–361. 1257. Merchant TE, Thelissen GR, Kievit HC, Oosterwaal LJ, Bakker CJ, de Graaf PW. Breast disease evaluation with fat-suppressed magnetic resonance imaging. Magn Reson Imaging 1992; 10:335–340. 1258. Merck B, Cansado Martinez P, Perez Ramos M, Martinez Banaclocha N, Lacueva Gomez FJ, Calpena R. Infiltrating ductal carcinoma and synchronous malignant phyllodes tumour. Diagnostic and therapeutic approaches. Clin Transl Oncol 2006; 8:830–832. 1259. Merrill CF, Kaufman DI, Dimitrov NV. Breast cancer metastatic to the eye is a common entity. Cancer 1991; 68:623–627. 1260. Mesurolle B, Leconte I, Fellah L, Feger C, Nakazono T, Kudo S. Dynamic breast MRI in recurrent fibromatosis. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2005; 184:696–697; author reply 697. 1261. Metz S, Daldrup-Unk HE, Richter T, et al. Detection and quantification of breast tumor necrosis with MR imaging: value of the necrosis-avid contrast agent Gadophrin-3. Acad Radiol 2003; 10:484–490. 1262. Meunier A, Tristant H, Sinna R, Delay E. [Mammary implants and breast cancer]. Ann Chir Plast Esthet 2005; 50:595–604. 1263. Meunier M, Debard I. [Breast imaging]. J Radiol 1999; 80:531–533. 1264. Meunier M, Stoppa-Lyonnet D. [MRI for breast-cancer screening in women with predisposition: an advance in detection?]. Med Sci (Paris) 2005; 21:26–27. 1265. Meyer DR, Bui HX, Carlson JA, et al. Silicon granulomas and dermatomyositis-like changes associated with chronic eyelid edema after silicone breast implant. Ophthal Plast Reconstr Surg 1998; 14:182–188. 1266. Miaux Y, Lemarchand-Venencie F, Cyna-Gorse F, et al. MR imaging of breast hemangioma in female infants. Pediatr Radiol 1992; 22:463–464. 1267. Michel SC, Keller TM, Frohlich JM, et al. Preoperative breast cancer staging: MR imaging of the axilla with ultrasmall superparamagnetic iron oxide enhancement. Radiology 2002; 225:527–536. 1268. Middleton MS. Magnetic resonance evaluation of breast implants and soft-tissue silicone. Top Magn Reson Imaging 1998; 9:92–137. 1269. Miga MI. A new approach to elastography using mutual information and finite elements. Phys Med Biol 2003; 48:467–480. 1270. Milano F, Rosselli Del Turco M, Maggi E, Certo N, Morrone D, Lazzeri B. [The procedures and results of a quality control program in mammography carried out on a regional basis]. Radiol Med (Torino) 1996; 91:187–193. 1271. Miller M. Cancer imaging: changing focus in the 21st century. J Natl Cancer Inst 1999; 91:759–760. 1272. Miller RW, Harms S, Alvarez A. Mucinous carcinoma of the breast: potential false-negative MR imaging interpretation. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1996; 167:539–540.  

350

1273. Mills TD, Vinnicombe SJ, Wells CA, Carpenter R. Angiosarcoma of the breast after wide local excision and radiotherapy for breast carcinoma. Clin Radiol 2002; 57:63–66. 1274. Milosevic Z, Spasic N. [Magnetic resonance imaging of the breasts: perspectives in clinical use]. Srp Arh Celok Lek 2004; 132:260–266. 1275. Mineyev M, Kramer D, Kaufman L, Carlson J, Frankel S. Measurement of breast implant volume with magnetic resonance imaging. Ann Plast Surg 1995; 34:348–351. 1276. Mironchik Y, Winnard PT, Jr., Vesuna F, et al. Twist overexpression induces in vivo angiogenesis and correlates with chromosomal instability in breast cancer. Cancer Res 2005; 65:10801–10809. 1277. Misra LK, Parihar AL, el-Nagar AK. Exclusion of residual angiosarcoma of the breast by MRI. Breast Cancer Res Treat 1992; 21:221–224. 1278. Mitchell ML, Napoletano J, Penman EJ. The MRI appearance of Paget’s disease of the nipple: images from a single case. Del Med J 2006; 78:105–106. 1279. Mitka M. Researchers seek mammography alternatives. Jama 2003; 290:450–451. 1280. Miyaguni T, Deguchi S, Teruya J, et al. Phyllodes Tumor of the Breast with a Grossly Malignant Appearance: A Case Report. Breast Cancer 1998; 5:205–208. 1281. Miyazaki I, Ishizaki K, Kobayashi K, Katou M. [Assessment of image display of contrast enhanced T1W images with fat suppression]. Nippon Hoshasen Gijutsu Gakkai Zasshi 2006; 62:513–521. 1282. Moate PJ, Dougherty L, Schnall MD, Landis RJ, Boston RC. A modified logistic model to describe gadolinium kinetics in breast tumors. Magn Reson Imaging 2004; 22:467–473. 1283. Modi N, Thomas EL, Harrington TA, Uthaya S, Dore CJ, Bell JD. Determinants of adiposity during preweaning postnatal growth in appropriately grown and growth-restricted term infants. Pediatr Res 2006; 60:345–348. 1284. Mokbel K, Elkak AE. Magnetic resonance imaging for screening of women at high risk for hereditary breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2001; 19:4184. 1285. Moller P, Maehle L, Apold J. [Hereditary breast cancer]. Tidsskr Nor Laegeforen 2005; 125:3136–3138. 1286. Montemurro F, Martincich L, De Rosa G, et al. Dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI and sonography in patients receiving primary chemotherapy for breast cancer. Eur Radiol 2005; 15:1224–1233. 1287. Montemurro F, Martincich L, Sarotto I, et al. Relationship between DCE-MRI morphological and functional features and histopathological characteristics of breast cancer. Eur Radiol 2007; 17:1490–1497. 1288. Montemurro F, Russo F, Martincich L, et al. Dynamic contrast enhanced magnetic resonance imaging in monitoring bone metastases in breast cancer patients receiving bisphosphonates and endocrine therapy. Acta Radiol 2004; 45:71–74. 1289. Montet X, Montet-Abou K, Reynolds F, Weissleder R, Josephson L. Nanoparticle imaging of integrins on tumor cells. Neoplasia 2006; 8:214–222. 1290. Monticciolo DL, Nelson RC, Dixon WT, Bostwick J, 3rd, Mukundan S, Hester TR. MR detection of leakage from silicone breast implants: value of a silicone-selective pulse sequence. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1994; 163:51–56. 1291. Moore NR, Dixon AK, Wheeler TK, Freer CE, Hall LD, Sims C. Axillary fibrosis or recurrent tumour. An MRI study in breast cancer. Clin Radiol 1990; 42:42–46. 1292. Mooyaart EA, Veltman J, Boetes C, Blickman JG. [Feasibility of MRI imaging in patients with breast cancer]. Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd 2005; 149:1521–1527. 1293. Morakkabati N, Leutner CC, Schmiedel A, Schild HH, Kuhl CK. Breast MR imaging during or soon after radiation therapy. Radiology 2003; 229:893–901. 1294. Morakkabati-Spitz N, Leutner C, Schild H, Traeber F, Kuhl C. Diagnostic usefulness of segmental and linear enhancement in dynamic breast MRI. Eur Radiol 2005; 15:2010–2017. 1295. Morakkabati-Spitz N, Schild HH, Leutner CC, von Falkenhausen M, Lutterbey G, Kuhl CK. Dynamic contrast-enhanced breast MR imaging in men: preliminary results. Radiology 2006; 238:438–445. 1296. Morakkabati-Spitz N, Sondermann E, Schmiedel A, et al. [Prevalence and type of incidental extramammary findings in MRI of the breast]. Rofo 2003; 175:199–202. 1297. Morgan DE, Kenney PJ, Meeks MC, Pile NS. MR imaging of breast implants and their complications. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1996; 167:1271–1275. 1298. Morin J, Traore A, Dionne G, et al. Magnetic resonance-guided percutaneous cryosurgery of breast carcinoma: technique and early clinical results. Can J Surg 2004; 47:347–351.  

351

 

a  References

1299. Moris G, Perez-Pena M, Miranda E, Lopez Anglada J, Ribacoba R, Gonzalez C. Trigeminal mononeuropathy: first clinical manifestation of breast cancer. Eur Neurol 2005; 54:212–213. 1300. Morrell GR. Rapid fat suppression in MRI of the breast with short binomial pulses. J Magn Reson Imaging 2006; 24:1172–1176. 1301. Morris EA. Cancer staging with breast MR imaging. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 2001; 9:333–344, vi–vii. 1302. Morris EA. Illustrated breast MR lexicon. Semin Roentgenol 2001; 36:238–249. 1303. Morris EA. Review of breast MRI: indications and limitations. Semin Roentgenol 2001; 36:226–237. 1304. Morris EA. Breast cancer imaging with MRI. Radiol Clin North Am 2002; 40:443–466. 1305. Morris EA. Screening for breast cancer with MRI. Semin Ultrasound CT MR 2003; 24:45–54. 1306. Morris EA. Breast MR imaging lexicon updated. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 2006; 14:293–303, v. 1307. Morris EA, Liberman L, Ballon DJ, et al. MRI of occult breast carcinoma in a high-risk population. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2003; 181:619–626. 1308. Morris EA, Liberman L, Dershaw DD, et al. Preoperative MR imaging-guided needle localization of breast lesions. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2002; 178:1211–1220. 1309. Morris EA, Schwartz LH, Dershaw DD, van Zee KJ, Abramson AF, Liberman L. MR imaging of the breast in patients with occult primary breast carcinoma. Radiology 1997; 205:437–440. 1310. Morris EA, Schwartz LH, Drotman MB, et al. Evaluation of pectoralis major muscle in patients with posterior breast tumors on breast MR images: early experience. Radiology 2000; 214:67–72. 1311. Morrow M. Magnetic resonance imaging in breast cancer: one step forward, two steps back? Jama 2004; 292:2779–2780. 1312. Morrow M. Magnetic resonance imaging in the preoperative evaluation of breast cancer: primum non nocere. J Am Coll Surg 2004; 198:240–241. 1313. Morrow M. Limiting breast surgery to the proper minimum. Breast 2005; 14:523–526. 1314. Morrow M. Magnetic resonance imaging in breast cancer: is seeing always believing? Eur J Cancer 2005; 41:1368–1369. 1315. Morrow M, Berger D, Thelmo W. Diffuse cystic angiomatosis of the breast. Cancer 1988; 62:2392–2396. 1316. Morrow M, Freedman G. A clinical oncology perspective on the use of breast MR. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 2006; 14:363–378, vi. 1317. Morrow M, Keeney K, Scholtens D, Wei J, Steel J, Khan SA. Selecting patients for breast-conserving therapy: the importance of lobular histology. Cancer 2006; 106:2563–2568. 1318. Mountford C, Lean C, Malycha P, Russell P. Proton spectroscopy provides accurate pathology on biopsy and in vivo. J Magn Reson Imaging 2006; 24:459–477. 1319. Muller-Schimpfle M, Noack F, Oettling G, et al. [Influence of histopathological factors on dynamic MR mammography]. Rofo 2000; 172:894–900. 1320. Muller-Schimpfle M, Ohmenhauser K, Claussen CD. [Effect of age and menstrual cycle on mammography and MR mammography]. Radiologe 1997; 37:718–725. 1321. Muller-Schimpfle M, Ohmenhauser K, Sand J, Stoll P, Claussen CD. Dynamic 3D-MR mammography: is there a benefit of sophisticated evaluation of enhancement curves for clinical routine? J Magn Reson Imaging 1997; 7:236–240. 1322. Muller-Schimpfle M, Ohmenhauser K, Stoll P, Dietz K, Claussen CD. Menstrual cycle and age: influence on parenchymal contrast medium enhancement in MR imaging of the breast. Radiology 1997; 203:145–149. 1323. Muller-Schimpfle M, Rieber A, Kurz S, Stern W, Claussen CD. [Dynamic 3D MR mammography using a rapid gradient-echo sequence]. Rofo 1995; 162:13–19. 1324. Muller-Schimpfle M, Stoll P, Stern W, Huppert PE, Claussen CD. [Precise MR-guided preoperative marking of breast lesions with an embolization coil using a standard MR coil]. Rofo 1998; 168:195–199. 1325. Muller-Schimpfle M, Stoll P, Stern W, Kurz S, Dammann F, Claussen CD. Do mammography, sonography, and MR mammography have a diagnostic benefit compared with mammography and sonography? AJR Am J Roentgenol 1997; 168:1323–1329. 1326. Mumtaz H, Davidson T, Hall-Craggs MA, et al. Comparison of magnetic resonance imaging and conventional triple assessment in locally recurrent breast cancer. Br J Surg 1997; 84:1147–1151. 1327. Mumtaz H, Davidson T, Spittle M, et al. Breast surgery after neoadjuvant treatment. Is it necessary? Eur J Surg Oncol 1996; 22:335–341.  

352

1328. Mumtaz H, Hall-Craggs MA, Davidson T, et al. Staging of symptomatic primary breast cancer with MR imaging. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1997; 169:417–424. 1329. Mumtaz H, Hall-Craggs MA, Wotherspoon A, et al. Laser therapy for breast cancer: MR imaging and histopathologic correlation. Radiology 1996; 200:651–658. 1330. Mumtaz H, Harms SE. Biopsy and Intervention Working Group report. J Magn Reson Imaging 1999; 10:1010–1015. 1331. Mund DF, Farria DM, Gorczyca DP, et al. MR imaging of the breast in patients with silicone-gel implants: spectrum of findings. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1993; 161:773–778. 1332. Munot K, Dall B, Achuthan R, Parkin G, Lane S, Horgan K. Role of magnetic resonance imaging in the diagnosis and single-stage surgical resection of invasive lobular carcinoma of the breast. Br J Surg 2002; 89:1296–1301. 1333. Munoz A, Ricart Y, Castell M, et al. [Nonmetastatic accumulations in bone radionuclide scans in a patient with breast neoplasm]. Rev Esp Med Nucl 1998; 17:365–367. 1334. Murakam S, Nagano H, Okubo K, et al. Angiosarcoma of the breast: report of a case and its findings of MRI. Breast Cancer 2001; 8:254–258. 1335. Murakami K, Nawano S, Moriyama N, Onuma Y. Usefulness of magnetic resonance imaging with dynamic contrast enhancement and fat suppression in detecting a pancreatic tumor. Jpn J Clin Oncol 1998; 28:107–111. 1336. Murakami M, Kuroda Y, Sano A, et al. Validity of local treatment including intraarterial infusion chemotherapy and radiotherapy for fungating adenocarcinoma of the breast: case report of more than 8-year survival. Am J Clin Oncol 2001; 24:388–391. 1337. Murakami Y, Aoki M, Harada J. [Subtraction and dynamic MR images of breast cancer]. Nippon Igaku Hoshasen Gakkai Zasshi 1993; 53:375–386. 1338. Murat A, Kansiz F, Kabakus N, Kazez A, Ozercan R. Neurofibroma of the breast in a boy with neurofibromatosis type 1. Clin Imaging 2004; 28:415–417. 1339. Murata T, Ihara S, Kato H, et al. Matrix-producing carcinoma of the breast: case report with radiographical and cytopathological features. Pathol Int 1998; 48:824–828. 1340. Murata Y, Ogawa Y, Yoshida S, et al. Utility of initial MRI for predicting extent of residual disease after neoadjuvant chemotherapy: analysis of 70 breast cancer patients. Oncol Rep 2004; 12:1257–1262. 1341. Muro I, Nishiki N, Hattori A, Matsuhara K. [Review article for breast imaging & treatment]. Nippon Hoshasen Gijutsu Gakkai Zasshi 2003; 59:673. 1342. Murphy TJ, Piccoli CW, Mitchell DG. Correlation of single-lumen silicone implant integrity with chemical shift artifact on T2-weighted magnetic resonance images. J Magn Reson Imaging 2002; 15:159–164. 1343. Murray AD, Redpath TW, Needham G, Gilbert FJ, Brookes JA, Eremin O. Dynamic magnetic resonance mammography of both breasts following local excision and radiotherapy for breast carcinoma. Br J Radiol 1996; 69:594–600. 1344. Murray AD, Staff RT, Redpath TW, et al. Dynamic contrast enhanced MRI of the axilla in women with breast cancer: comparison with pathology of excised nodes. Br J Radiol 2002; 75:220–228. 1345. Mussurakis S, Buckley DL, Bowsley SJ, et al. Dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging of the breast combined with pharmacokinetic analysis of gadolinium-DTPA uptake in the diagnosis of local recurrence of early stage breast carcinoma. Invest Radiol 1995; 30:650–662. 1346. Mussurakis S, Buckley DL, Coady AM, Turnbull LW, Horsman A. Observer variability in the interpretation of contrast enhanced MRI of the breast. Br J Radiol 1996; 69:1009–1016. 1347. Mussurakis S, Buckley DL, Drew PJ, et al. Dynamic MR imaging of the breast combined with analysis of contrast agent kinetics in the differentiation of primary breast tumours. Clin Radiol 1997; 52:516–526. 1348. Mussurakis S, Buckley DL, Horsman A. Dynamic MR imaging of invasive breast cancer: correlation with tumour grade and other histological factors. Br J Radiol 1997; 70:446–451. 1349. Mussurakis S, Buckley DL, Horsman A. Dynamic MRI of invasive breast cancer: assessment of three region-of-interest analysis methods. J Comput Assist Tomogr 1997; 21:431–438. 1350. Mussurakis S, Buckley DL, Horsman A. Prediction of axillary lymph node status in invasive breast cancer with dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging. Radiology 1997; 203:317–321. 1351. Mussurakis S, Carleton PJ, Turnbull LW. Case report: MR imaging of juvenile papillomatosis of the breast. Br J Radiol 1996; 69:867–870. 1352. Mussurakis S, Carleton PJ, Turnbull LW. MR imaging of primary non-Hodgkin’s breast lymphoma. A case report. Acta Radiol 1997; 38:104–107.  

353

 

a  References

1353. Mussurakis S, Gibbs P, Horsman A. Primary breast abnormalities: selective pixel sampling on dynamic gadoliniumenhanced MR images. Radiology 1998; 206:465–473. 1354. Mussurakis S, Gibbs P, Horsman A. Peripheral enhancement and spatial contrast uptake heterogeneity of primary breast tumours: quantitative assessment with dynamic MRI. J Comput Assist Tomogr 1998; 22:35–46. 1355. Musumeci R. Radiologic procedures for the diagnosis of distant recurrences of breast cancer. Ann Oncol 1995; 6 Suppl 2:27–29. 1356. Muuller RD, Barkhausen J, Sauerwein W, Langer R. Assessment of local recurrence after breast-conserving therapy with MRI. J Comput Assist Tomogr 1998; 22:408–412. 1357. Nachbar JM, Orrison WW, Jr. Validation of quantification of breast implant capsule surface area and volume using magnetic resonance imaging. Ann Plast Surg 1991; 27:321–326. 1358. Naganawa S, Endo T, Aoyama H, Ichihara S. MR lmaging of the Primary Breast Lymphoma: A Case Report. Breast Cancer 1996; 3:209–213. 1359. Nagashima T, Sakakibara M, Nakamura R, et al. Dynamic enhanced MRI predicts chemosensitivity in breast cancer patients. Eur J Radiol 2006; 60:270–274. 1360. Nagashima T, Suzuki M, Yagata H, et al. Dynamic-enhanced MRI predicts metastatic potential of invasive ductal breast cancer. Breast Cancer 2002; 9:226–230. 1361. Naggara O, Brami-Zylberberg F, Rodrigo S, et al. [Imaging of intracranial metastases in adults]. J Radiol 2006; 87:792–806. 1362. Nagy ZP, Berenyi E, Bogner P, Mendly J, Viski A, Repa I. [Dynamic MR examination of the breast – histological correlations]. Orv Hetil 2000; 141:119–123. 1363. Nakahara H, Namba K, Fukami A, et al. Three-dimensional MR imaging of mammographically detected suspicious microcalcifications. Breast Cancer 2001; 8:116–124. 1364. Nakahara H, Namba K, Wakamatsu H, et al. Extension of breast cancer: comparison of CT and MRI. Radiat Med 2002; 20:17–23. 1365. Nakahara H, Namba K, Watanabe R, et al. A comparison of MR imaging, galactography and ultrasonography in patients with nipple discharge. Breast Cancer 2003; 10:320–329. 1366. Nakamura S. [Magnetic resonance imaging for diagnosis of breast cancers]. Nippon Rinsho 2000; 58 Suppl:61–65. 1367. Nakamura S. [Image-guided breast conserving surgery based on 3D-MRI]. Nippon Geka Gakkai Zasshi 2002; 103:794–798. 1368. Nakamura S. Present role and future perspectives of the evaluation of the effect of primary chemotherapy by breast imaging. Breast Cancer 2004; 11:134–138. 1369. Nakamura S. [Breast MRI – principal role and future perspectives]. Nippon Rinsho 2006; 64:497–503. 1370. Nakamura S, Kenjo H, Nishio T, Kazama T, Do O, Suzuki K. 3D-MR mammography-guided breast conserving surgery after neoadjuvant chemotherapy: clinical results and future perspectives with reference to FDG-PET. Breast Cancer 2001; 8:351–354. 1371. Nakamura S, Kenjo H, Nishio T, Kazama T, Doi O, Suzuki K. Efficacy of 3D-MR mammography for breast conserving surgery after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Breast Cancer 2002; 9:15–19. 1372. Nakano T, Wenner M, Inagaki M, et al. Relationship between distressing cancer-related recollections and hippocampal volume in cancer survivors. Am J Psychiatry 2002; 159:2087–2093. 1373. Nakayama S, Kakizaki D, Kaise H, et al. [Three-dimentional volumetric interpolated breath-hold magnetic resonance imaging for the diagnosis of breast tumors]. Nippon Rinsho 2004; 62:790–798. 1374. Nakazono T, Satoh T, Hamamoto T, Kudo S. Dynamic MRI of fibromatosis of the breast. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2003; 181:1718–1719. 1375. Namasivayam S, Martin DR, Saini S. Imaging of liver metastases: MRI. Cancer Imaging 2007; 7:2–9. 1376. Nardelli E, Curro-Dossi B, Rizzuto N, Graus F. Autoimmune paraneoplastic cerebellar degeneration: immunohistological localization of antibody-binding sites. Clin Neurol Neurosurg 1995; 97:89–94. 1377. Narimatsu H. [High-resolution MR mammography: MR features and technique]. Nippon Hoshasen Gijutsu Gakkai Zasshi 2005; 61:1475–1485. 1378. Narisada H, Aoki T, Sasaguri T, et al. Correlation between numeric gadolinium-enhanced dynamic MRI ratios and prognostic factors and histologic type of breast carcinoma. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2006; 187:297–306.  

354

1379. Nascimento AB, Mitchell DG, Rubin R, Weaver E. Diffuse desmoplastic breast carcinoma metastases to the liver simulating cirrhosis at MR imaging: report of two cases. Radiology 2001; 221:117–121. 1380. Nash I. MRI evaluation of breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2007; 357:192; author reply 193. 1381. Nasu K, Arima K, Yoshimatsu J, Miyakawa I. Adenomyomatous polyp of the uterus in a patient receiving tamoxifen. Jpn J Clin Oncol 1997; 27:350–352. 1382. Nattkemper TW, Arnrich B, Lichte O, et al. Evaluation of radiological features for breast tumour classification in clinical screening with machine learning methods. Artif Intell Med 2005; 34:129–139. 1383. Nattkemper TW, Wismuller A. Tumor feature visualization with unsupervised learning. Med Image Anal 2005; 9:344–351. 1384. Navas Canete A, Olcoz Monreal FJ, Garcia Laborda E, Perez Aznar JM. [Pseudoangiomatous stromal hyperplasia: magnetic resonance findings in two cases.]. Radiologia 2007; 49:275–278. 1385. Nelson R. MRI better than mammography for detection of breast cancer? Lancet Oncol 2004; 5:520. 1386. Netscher DT, Weizer G, Malone RS, Walker LE, Thornby J, Patten BM. Diagnostic value of clinical examination and various imaging techniques for breast implant rupture as determined in 81 patients having implant removal. South Med J 1996; 89:397–404. 1387. Netter E, Troufleau P, Stines J. [Ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast: role of imaging]. J Radiol 1998; 79:651–658. 1388. Neubauer H, Li M, Kuehne-Heid R, Schneider A, Kaiser WA. High grade and non-high grade ductal carcinoma in situ on dynamic MR mammography: characteristic findings for signal increase and morphological pattern of enhancement. Br J Radiol 2003; 76:3–12. 1389. Newman J. Mammographic evaluation of the augmented breast. Radiol Technol 1998; 69:319–338; quiz 339–342. 1390. Newman J. Recent advances in breast cancer imaging. Radiol Technol 1999; 71:35–54; quiz 55–37. 1391. Newman LA, Kuerer HM. Advances in breast conservation therapy. J Clin Oncol 2005; 23:1685–1697. 1392. Newman MK, Zemmel NJ, Bandak AZ, Kaplan BJ. Primary breast lymphoma in a patient with silicone breast implants: a case report and review of the literature. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 2007. 1393. Newman NJ, Grossniklaus HE, Wojno TH. Breast carcinoma metastatic to the optic nerve. Arch Ophthalmol 1996; 114:102–103. 1394. Newstead G. When and when not to biopsy the breast. Diagn Imaging (San Franc) 1993; 15:111, 115–116. 1395. Newstead GM. MR imaging in the management of patients with breast cancer. Semin Ultrasound CT MR 2006; 27:320–332. 1396. Newstead GM, Weinreb JC. Critical pathways for the future: MR imaging and digital mammography. Radiographics 1995; 15:951–962. 1397. Niitsu M, Tohno E, Itai Y. Fat suppression strategies in enhanced MR imaging of the breast: comparison of SPIR and water excitation sequences. J Magn Reson Imaging 2003; 18:310–314. 1398. Nishida H, Kinoshita T, Yashiro N, Ikeda Y, O’Uchi T. MR findings of granulocytic sarcoma of the breasts. Br J Radiol 2006; 79:e112–115. 1399. Nishiki S. [Fundamental explanation of MR pulse sequence table]. Nippon Hoshasen Gijutsu Gakkai Zasshi 2003; 59:707–718. 1400. Noguchi M. Minimally invasive surgery for small breast cancer. J Surg Oncol 2003; 84:94–101; discussion 102. 1401. Noguchi M, Katev N, Miyazaki I. Clinical and histologic determinations of adequate breast resection in breast-conserving surgery. A review. Int Surg 1996; 81:309–315. 1402. Noguchi M, Tsugawa K, Taniya T, Miwa K. The Role of Internal Mammary Lymph Node Metastases in the Management of Breast Cancer. Breast Cancer 1998; 5:117–125. 1403. Nokes SR, Pierce WB. Radiological case of the month. Intracapsular implant rupture. J Ark Med Soc 1995; 92:51–52. 1404. Nokes SR, Pierce WB, Abraham DC, Harms SE. Radiology. Infiltrating lobular carcinoma. J Ark Med Soc 1999; 96:176–177. 1405. Noone TC, Semelka RC, Balci NC, Graham ML. Common occurrence of benign liver lesions in patients with newly diagnosed breast cancer investigated by MRI for suspected liver metastases. J Magn Reson Imaging 1999; 10:165–169. 1406. Norman RP, Evans DG, Easton DF, Young KC. The cost-utility of magnetic resonance imaging for breast cancer in BRCA1 mutation carriers aged 30–49. Eur J Health Econ 2007; 8:137–144. 1407. Norris LK, Grossman SA, Olivi A. Neoplastic meningitis following surgical resection of isolated cerebellar metastasis: a potentially preventable complication. J Neurooncol 1997; 32:215–223.  

355

 

a  References

1408. Norris TG. Benign breast disease. Radiol Technol 2001; 72:245–267; quiz 268–271, 243. 1409. Ntziachristos V, Hielscher AH, Yodh AG, Chance B. Diffuse optical tomography of highly heterogeneous media. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 2001; 20:470–478. 1410. Ntziachristos V, Yodh AG, Schnall M, Chance B. Concurrent MRI and diffuse optical tomography of breast after indocyanine green enhancement. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2000; 97:2767–2772. 1411. Nunes LW. Architectural-based interpretations of breast MR imaging. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 2001; 9:303–320, vi. 1412. Nunes LW, Englander SA, Charafeddine R, Schnall MD. Optimal post-contrast timing of breast MR image acquisition for architectural feature analysis. J Magn Reson Imaging 2002; 16:42–50. 1413. Nunes LW, Schnall MD, Orel SG. Update of breast MR imaging architectural interpretation model. Radiology 2001; 219:484–494. 1414. Nunes LW, Schnall MD, Orel SG, et al. Breast MR imaging: interpretation model. Radiology 1997; 202:833–841. 1415. Nunes LW, Schnall MD, Orel SG, et al. Correlation of lesion appearance and histologic findings for the nodes of a breast MR imaging interpretation model. Radiographics 1999; 19:79–92. 1416. Nunes LW, Schnall MD, Siegelman ES, et al. Diagnostic performance characteristics of architectural features revealed by high spatial-resolution MR imaging of the breast. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1997; 169:409–415. 1417. Obdeijn IM, Brouwers-Kuyper EM, Tilanus-Linthorst MM, Wiggers T, Oudkerk M. MR imaging-guided sonography followed by fine-needle aspiration cytology in occult carcinoma of the breast. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2000; 174:1079–1084. 1418. Obdeijn IM, Kuijpers TJ, van Dijk P, Wiggers T, Oudkerk M. MR lesion detection in a breast cancer population. J Magn Reson Imaging 1996; 6:849–854. 1419. Obenauer S, Dammert S. Palpable masses in breast during lactation. Clin Imaging 2007; 31:1–5. 1420. Obenauer S, Fischer U, Baum F, Dammert S, Fuzesi L, Grabbe E. [Stereotactic vacuum core biopsy of clustered microcalcifications classified as B1-RADS 3]. Rofo 2001; 173:696–701. 1421. Obenauer S, Grabbe E, Knollmann F. [Value of MR-guided localization and biopsy in breast lesions]. Rofo 2006; 178:477–483. 1422. Obenauer S, Schorn C, Stelter B, Fischer U, Grabbe E. Contrast-enhanced high in-plane resolution dynamic MRI of the breast. Are there advantages in comparison to standard dynamic MRI? Clin Imaging 2002; 26:161–165. 1423. O’Boyle MK, Wechsler RJ, Conant EF, Lev-Toaff AS, Sagerman J. Breast implants: incidental findings on CT. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1994; 162:311–313. 1424. Obuchowski NA. Sample size calculations in studies of test accuracy. Stat Methods Med Res 1998; 7:371–392. 1425. Oellinger H, Blohmer JU, Siewert C, et al. [Optimal use of MRI mammography from the economic viewpoint]. Zentralbl Chir 1998; 123 Suppl 5:42–46. 1426. Offodile RS, Daniel BL, Jeffrey SS, Wapnir I, Dirbas FM, Ikeda DM. Magnetic resonance imaging of suspicious breast masses seen on one mammographic view. Breast J 2004; 10:416–422. 1427. Oga M, Takenaga K, Sato Y, et al. Inhibition of metastatic brain tumor growth by intramuscular administration of the endostatin gene. Int J Oncol 2003; 23:73–79. 1428. Ogawa Y, Nishioka A, Tsuboi N, et al. Dynamic MR appearance of benign phyllodes tumor of the breast in a 20-year-old woman. Radiat Med 1997; 15:247–250. 1429. Ohmenhauser K, Muller-Schimpfle M, Claussen CD. [The nipple in MR mammography – the normal findings and the signs of disease]. Rofo 1999; 171:20–25. 1430. Ohmori N, Ashida K, Fujita O. [Estimation of glandular content rate and statistical analysis of the influence of age group and compressed breast thickness on the estimated value]. Nippon Hoshasen Gijutsu Gakkai Zasshi 2003; 59:737–745. 1431. Ohta H. Accessory breast cancer. Ann Nucl Med 2003; 17:358. 1432. Okada K, Ozeki K, Ti, Isomoto II, Matsuo T, Mochinaga N. Granular Cell Tumor of the Breast: A Case Report Describing Dynamic MR Mammography. Breast Cancer 1998; 5:179–182. 1433. Okada Y, Yoshikawa K, Nashiro N, Makita K, Iio M, Yoshimoto M. [Magnetic resonance imaging of breast tumors]. Rinsho Hoshasen 1987; 32:1087–1091. 1434. Okafuji T, Yabuuchi H, Sakai S, et al. MR imaging features of pure mucinous carcinoma of the breast. Eur J Radiol 2006; 60:405–413.  

356

1435. Okamoto Y, Sumiyama Y, Arima Y, et al. A case of adenoid cystic carcinoma (ACC) of the breast and review of the utility of preoperative imaging diagnose. Breast Cancer 2001; 8:84–89. 1436. Okazaki A, Hirata K, Okazaki M, Svane G, Azavedo E. Nipple discharge disorders: current diagnostic management and the role of fiber-ductoscopy. Eur Radiol 1999; 9:583–590. 1437. Olson JA, Jr., Morris EA, Van Zee KJ, Linehan DC, Borgen PI. Magnetic resonance imaging facilitates breast conservation for occult breast cancer. Ann Surg Oncol 2000; 7:411–415. 1438. Opere E, Oleaga L, Ibanez T, Grande D. Localized scleroderma of the breast. Eur Radiol 2002; 12:1483–1485. 1439. Orang-Khadivi K, Pierce BL, Ollom CM, Floyd LJ, Siegle RL, Williams RF. New magnetic resonance imaging techniques for the detection of breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat 1994; 32:119–135. 1440. Orel S. Re: Detection with MR imaging of residual tumor in the breast soon after surgery. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1997; 169:909–910. 1441. Orel SG. High-resolution MR imaging of the breast. Semin Ultrasound CT MR 1996; 17:476–493. 1442. Orel SG. High-resolution MR imaging for the detection, diagnosis, and staging of breast cancer. Radiographics 1998; 18:903–912. 1443. Orel SG. Differentiating benign from malignant enhancing lesions identified at MR imaging of the breast: are timesignal intensity curves an accurate predictor? Radiology 1999; 211:5–7. 1444. Orel SG. MR imaging of the breast. Radiol Clin North Am 2000; 38:899–913. 1445. Orel SG. MR imaging of the breast. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 2001; 9:273–288, v. 1446. Orel SG, Dougherty CS, Reynolds C, Czerniecki BJ, Siegelman ES, Schnall MD. MR imaging in patients with nipple discharge: initial experience. Radiology 2000; 216:248–254. 1447. Orel SG, Hochman MG, Schnall MD, Reynolds C, Sullivan DC. High-resolution MR imaging of the breast: clinical context. Radiographics 1996; 16:1385–1401. 1448. Orel SG, Mendonca MH, Reynolds C, Schnall MD, Solin LJ, Sullivan DC. MR imaging of ductal carcinoma in situ. Radiology 1997; 202:413–420. 1449. Orel SG, Reynolds C, Schnall MD, Solin LJ, Fraker DL, Sullivan DC. Breast carcinoma: MR imaging before re-excisional biopsy. Radiology 1997; 205:429–436. 1450. Orel SG, Rosen M, Mies C, Schnall MD. MR imaging-guided 9-gauge vacuum-assisted core-needle breast biopsy: initial experience. Radiology 2006; 238:54–61. 1451. Orel SG, Schnall MD. High Risk Screening Working Group report. J Magn Reson Imaging 1999; 10:995–1005. 1452. Orel SG, Schnall MD. MR imaging of the breast for the detection, diagnosis, and staging of breast cancer. Radiology 2001; 220:13–30. 1453. Orel SG, Schnall MD, LiVolsi VA, Troupin RH. Suspicious breast lesions: MR imaging with radiologic-pathologic correlation. Radiology 1994; 190:485–493. 1454. Orel SG, Schnall MD, Newman RW, Powell CM, Torosian MH, Rosato EF. MR imaging-guided localization and biopsy of breast lesions: initial experience. Radiology 1994; 193:97–102. 1455. Orel SG, Schnall MD, Powell CM, et al. Staging of suspected breast cancer: effect of MR imaging and MR-guided biopsy. Radiology 1995; 196:115–122. 1456. Orel SG, Troupin RH. Nonmammographic imaging of the breast: current issues and future prospects. Semin Roentgenol 1993; 28:231–241. 1457. Orel SG, Weinstein SP, Schnall MD, et al. Breast MR imaging in patients with axillary node metastases and unknown primary malignancy. Radiology 1999; 212:543–549. 1458. Oshida K, Nagashima T, Ueda T, et al. Pharmacokinetic analysis of ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast using dynamic MR mammography. Eur Radiol 2005; 15:1353–1360. 1459. Osman MM, Cohade C, Nakamoto Y, Marshall LT, Leal JP, Wahl RL. Clinically significant inaccurate localization of lesions with PET/CT: frequency in 300 patients. J Nucl Med 2003; 44:240–243. 1460. O’Toole M, Caskey CI. Imaging spectrum of breast implant complications: mammography, ultrasound, and magnetic resonance imaging. Semin Ultrasound CT MR 2000; 21:351–361. 1461. Ozturk M, Mavili E, Kahriman G, Akcan AC, Ozturk F. Granulomatous mastitis: radiological findings. Acta Radiol 2007; 48:150–155. 1462. Paakko E, Reinikainen H, Lindholm EL, Rissanen T. Low-field versus high-field MRI in diagnosing breast disorders. Eur Radiol 2005; 15:1361–1368.  

357

 

a  References

1463. Pabst T, Kenn W, Kaiser WA, Hahn D. Understanding why contrast enhancement in dynamic MRI is not reproducible: illustration with a simple phantom. Breast J 2001; 7:166–170. 1464. Pacini S, Vannelli GB, Barni T, et al. Effect of 0.2 T static magnetic field on human neurons: remodeling and inhibition of signal transduction without genome instability. Neurosci Lett 1999; 267:185–188. 1465. Padhani AR, Ah-See ML, Makris A. MRI in the detection and management of breast cancer. Expert Rev Anticancer Ther 2005; 5:239–252. 1466. Padhani AR, Hayes C, Assersohn L, et al. Prediction of clinicopathologic response of breast cancer to primary chemotherapy at contrast-enhanced MR imaging: initial clinical results. Radiology 2006; 239:361–374. 1467. Padhani AR, Yarnold J, Regan J, Husband JE. Dynamic MRI of breast hardness following radiation treatment. J Magn Reson Imaging 2003; 17:427–434. 1468. Padhani AR, Yarnold JR, Regan J, Husband JE. Magnetic resonance imaging of induration in the irradiated breast. Radiother Oncol 2002; 64:157–162. 1469. Panizza P, De Cobelli F, De Gaspari A, Gusmini S, Zanello A, Del Maschio A. [MR-guided stereotactic breast biopsy: technical aspects and preliminary results]. Radiol Med (Torino) 2003; 106:232–244. 1470. Paran Y, Bendel P, Margalit R, Degani H. Water diffusion in the different microenvironments of breast cancer. NMR Biomed 2004; 17:170–180. 1471. Parekh J, Visser BC, Leong SP. Image of the month: angiosarcoma of the breast. Arch Surg 2005; 140:809–810. 1472. Park CA, David LR, Argenta LC. Breast asymmetry: presentation of a giant fibroadenoma. Breast J 2006; 12:451–461. 1473. Park JM, Ikeda DM. Promising techniques for breast cancer detection, diagnosis, and staging using non-ionizing radiation imaging techniques. Phys Med 2006; 21 Suppl 1:7–10. 1474. Park JY, DelaBarre L, Garwood M. Improved gradient-echo 3D magnetic resonance imaging using pseudo-echoes created by frequency-swept pulses. Magn Reson Med 2006; 55:848–857. 1475. Parker SH, Stavros AT, Dennis MA. Needle biopsy techniques. Radiol Clin North Am 1995; 33:1171–1186. 1476. Partain CL, Kulkarni MV, Price RR, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging of the breast: functional T1 and three-dimensional imaging. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 1986; 8:292–299. 1477. Partridge SC, Gibbs JE, Lu Y, Esserman LJ, Sudilovsky D, Hylton NM. Accuracy of MR imaging for revealing residual breast cancer in patients who have undergone neoadjuvant chemotherapy. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2002; 179:1193– 1199. 1478. Partridge SC, Gibbs JE, Lu Y, et al. MRI measurements of breast tumor volume predict response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy and recurrence-free survival. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2005; 184:1774–1781. 1479. Partridge SC, Heumann EJ, Hylton NM. Semi-automated analysis for MRI of breast tumors. Stud Health Technol Inform 1999; 62:259–260. 1480. Partridge SC, McKinnon GC, Henry RG, Hylton NM. Menstrual cycle variation of apparent diffusion coefficients measured in the normal breast using MRI. J Magn Reson Imaging 2001; 14:433–438. 1481. Pathak AP, Artemov D, Neeman M, Bhujwalla ZM. Lymph node metastasis in breast cancer xenografts is associated with increased regions of extravascular drain, lymphatic vessel area, and invasive phenotype. Cancer Res 2006; 66:5151–5158. 1482. Pathak AP, Artemov D, Ward BD, Jackson DG, Neeman M, Bhujwalla ZM. Characterizing extravascular fluid transport of macromolecules in the tumor interstitium by magnetic resonance imaging. Cancer Res 2005; 65:1425–1432. 1483. Patlas M, McCready D, Kulkarni S, Dill-Macky MJ. Synchronous development of breast cancer and chest wall fibrosarcoma after previous mantle radiation for Hodgkin’s disease. Eur Radiol 2005; 15:2018–2020. 1484. Patterson SA, Khalil HI, Panicek DM. MRI evaluation of small hepatic lesions in women with breast cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2006; 187:307–312. 1485. Pauciulo A, Polito R, Masini V, Del Ciello A, Tartaglione T, Campioni P. Mucinous metastases from occult breast carcinoma. Rays 2005; 30:11–17. 1486. Pavic D, Koomen MA, Kuzmiak CM, Lee YH, Pisano ED. The role of magnetic resonance imaging in diagnosis and management of breast cancer. Technol Cancer Res Treat 2004; 3:527–541. 1487. Pediconi F, Catalano C, Occhiato R, et al. Breast lesion detection and characterization at contrast-enhanced MR mammography: gadobenate dimeglumine versus gadopentetate dimeglumine. Radiology 2005; 237:45–56.  

358

1488. Pediconi F, Catalano C, Roselli A, et al. Contrast-enhanced MR mammography for evaluation of the contralateral breast in patients with diagnosed unilateral breast cancer or high-risk lesions. Radiology 2007; 243:670–680. 1489. Pediconi F, Catalano C, Venditti F, et al. Color-coded automated signal intensity curves for detection and characterization of breast lesions: preliminary evaluation of a new software package for integrated magnetic resonance-based breast imaging. Invest Radiol 2005; 40:448–457. 1490. Pediconi F, Occhiato R, Venditti F, et al. Radial scars of the breast: contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance mammography appearance. Breast J 2005; 11:23–28. 1491. Pediconi F, Venditti F, Padula S, et al. CE-Magnetic Resonance Mammography for the evaluation of the contralateral breast in patients with diagnosed breast cancer. Radiol Med (Torino) 2005; 110:61–68. 1492. Pekar V, Gladilin E, Rohr K. An adaptive irregular grid approach for 3D deformable image registration. Phys Med Biol 2006; 51:361–377. 1493. Peller M, Stehling MK, Sittek H, Kessler M, Reiser M. Effects of partial volume and phase shift between fat and water in gradient-echo magnetic resonance-mammography. Magma 1996; 4:105–113. 1494. Pels H, Montesinos-Rongen M, Schaller C, et al. Clonal evolution as pathogenetic mechanism in relapse of primary CNS lymphoma. Neurology 2004; 63:167–169. 1495. Peng HL, Wu CC, Choi WM, Hui MS, Lu TN, Chen LK. Breast cancer detection using magnetic resonance imaging in breasts injected with liquid silicone. Plast Reconstr Surg 1999; 104:2116–2120. 1496. Peng Q, McColl RW, Wang J, Weatherall PT. Novel rapid fat suppression strategy with spectrally selective pulses. Magn Reson Med 2005; 54:1569–1574. 1497. Pera A, Freimanis AK. The choice of radiologic procedures in the diagnosis of breast disease. Obstet Gynecol Clin North Am 1987; 14:635–650. 1498. Perez Aznar JM, Urbano J, Garcia Laborda E, Quevedo Moreno P, Ferrer Vergara L. Breast and pectoralis muscle hypoplasia. A mild degree of Poland’s syndrome. Acta Radiol 1996; 37:759–762. 1499. Pergolizzi S, Settineri N, Ascenti G, et al. Enlarged axillary nodes and position of the arms in axillary irradiation – a computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging evaluation. Acta Oncol 2004; 43:182–185. 1500. Perignon F, Brauner R, Argyropoulou M, Brunelle F. Precocious puberty in girls: pituitary height as an index of hypothalamo-pituitary activation. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 1992; 75:1170–1172. 1501. Perlet C, Heinig A, Prat X, et al. Multicenter study for the evaluation of a dedicated biopsy device for MR-guided vacuum biopsy of the breast. Eur Radiol 2002; 12:1463–1470. 1502. Perlet C, Heywang-Kobrunner SH, Heinig A, et al. Magnetic resonance-guided, vacuum-assisted breast biopsy: results from a European multicenter study of 538 lesions. Cancer 2006; 106:982–990. 1503. Perlet C, Sittek H, Forstpointner R, Kessler M, Reiser M. Metastases to the breast from rhabdomyosarcoma: appearances on MRI. Eur Radiol 1999; 9:1113–1116. 1504. Perman WH, Heiberg EM, Grunz J, Herrmann VM, Janney CG. A fast 3D-imaging technique for performing dynamic Gd-enhanced MRI of breast lesions. Magn Reson Imaging 1994; 12:545–551. 1505. Perman WH, Heiberg EV, Herrmann VM. Half-Fourier, three-dimensional technique for dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging of both breasts and axillae: initial characterization of breast lesions. Radiology 1996; 200:263–269. 1506. Persellin ST, Vogler JB, 3rd, Brazis PW, Moy OJ. Detection of migratory silicone pseudotumor with use of magnetic resonance imaging. Mayo Clin Proc 1992; 67:891–895. 1507. Peters W, Smith D, Lugowski S. The life span of silicone gel breast implants and a comparison of mammography, ultrasonography, and magnetic resonance imaging in detecting implant rupture: a meta-analysis. Ann Plast Surg 1999; 43:97–99. 1508. Petrillo R, Balzarini L, Bargellini A, et al. The role of magnetic resonance imaging in the evaluation of neoplastic lesions of the breast. Tumori 1989; 75:14–17. 1509. Pfleiderer B, Heindel W. [MRI and MR spectroscopy after silicone breast implants in the female breast]. Rofo 2001; 173:571–579. 1510. Pfleiderer SO, Marx C, Vagner J, Franke RP, Reichenbach JR, Kaiser WA. Magnetic resonance-guided large-core breast biopsy inside a 1.5-T magnetic resonance scanner using an automatic system: in vitro experiments and preliminary clinical experience in four patients. Invest Radiol 2005; 40:458–463. 1511. Pfleiderer SO, Reichenbach JR, Azhari T, et al. A manipulator system for 14-gauge large core breast biopsies inside a high-field whole-body MR scanner. J Magn Reson Imaging 2003; 17:493–498.  

359

 

a  References

1512. Pfleiderer SO, Reichenbach JR, Azhari T, Marx C, Wurdinger S, Kaiser WA. Dedicated double breast coil for magnetic resonance mammography imaging, biopsy, and preoperative localization. Invest Radiol 2003; 38:1–8. 1513. Pfleiderer SO, Reichenbach JR, Wurdinger S, et al. [Interventional MR-mammography: manipulator-assisted large core biopsy and interstitial laser therapy of tumors of the female breast]]. Z Med Phys 2003; 13:198–202. 1514. Pfleiderer SO, Sachse S, Sauner D, et al. Changes in magnetic resonance mammography due to hormone replacement therapy. Breast Cancer Res 2004; 6:R232–238. 1515. Pham CD, Roberts TP, van Bruggen N, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging detects suppression of tumor vascular permeability after administration of antibody to vascular endothelial growth factor. Cancer Invest 1998; 16:225–230. 1516. Phelps ME. Inaugural article: positron emission tomography provides molecular imaging of biological processes. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2000; 97:9226–9233. 1517. Philpotts LE. Will improved vascular mapping achieved with gadobenate dimeglumine aid in interpretation of breast MR images? Radiology 2005; 235:717–718. 1518. Piccoli CW. The specificity of contrast-enhanced breast MR imaging. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 1994; 2:557–571. 1519. Piccoli CW. Contrast-enhanced breast MRI: factors affecting sensitivity and specificity. Eur Radiol 1997; 7 Suppl 5:281–288. 1520. Piccoli CW. Imaging of the patient with silicone gel breast implants. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 2001; 9:393– 408, vii–viii. 1521. Piccoli CW, Feig SA, Palazzo JP. Developing asymmetric breast tissue. Radiology 1999; 211:111–117. 1522. Piccoli CW, Greer JG, Mitchell DG. Breast MR imaging for cancer detection and implant evaluation: potential pitfalls. Radiographics 1996; 16:63–75. 1523. Pickles MD, Gibbs P, Lowry M, Turnbull LW. Diffusion changes precede size reduction in neoadjuvant treatment of breast cancer. Magn Reson Imaging 2006; 24:843–847. 1524. Pickles MD, Lowry M, Manton DJ, Gibbs P, Turnbull LW. Role of dynamic contrast enhanced MRI in monitoring early response of locally advanced breast cancer to neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2005; 91:1–10. 1525. Pierce WB, Harms SE, Flamig DP, Griffey RH, Evans WP, Hagans JE. Three-dimensional gadolinium-enhanced MR imaging of the breast: pulse sequence with fat suppression and magnetization transfer contrast. Work in progress. Radiology 1991; 181:757–763. 1526. Pierrefeu-Lagrange AC, Delay E, Guerin N, Chekaroua K, Delaporte T. [Radiological evaluation of breasts reconstructed with lipomodeling]. Ann Chir Plast Esthet 2006; 51:18–28. 1527. Pilatus U, Aboagye E, Artemov D, Mori N, Ackerstaff E, Bhujwalla ZM. Real-time measurements of cellular oxygen consumption, pH, and energy metabolism using nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy. Magn Reson Med 2001; 45:749–755. 1528. Pilecki S, Bandurski T, Lasek W, Purzycka-Jazdon A, Lass P. [Scintimammography in breast cancer imaging]. Pol Merkur Lekarski 2002; 13:516–519. 1529. Pineda V, Caceres J, Pernas JC, Catala J. Retromammary fluid collection as a late complication of breast implants: magnetic resonance imaging findings. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2004; 28:386–389. 1530. Pinho MC, Souza F, Endo E, Chala LF, Carvalho FM, de Barros N. Nonnecrotizing systemic granulomatous panniculitis involving the breast: imaging correlation of a breast cancer mimicker. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2007; 188:1573– 1576. 1531. Piron CA, Causer P, Jong R, Shumak R, Plewes DB. A hybrid breast biopsy system combining ultrasound and MRI. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 2003; 22:1100–1110. 1532. Pitkaranta A, Markkola A, Malmberg H. Breast cancer metastasis presenting as ethmoiditis. Rhinology 2001; 39:107–108. 1533. Plevritis SK. A framework for evaluating the cost-effectiveness of MRI screening for breast cancer. Eur Radiol 2000; 10 Suppl 3:S430–432. 1534. Plevritis SK, Ikeda DM. Ethical issues in contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging screening for breast cancer. Top Magn Reson Imaging 2002; 13:79–84. 1535. Plevritis SK, Kurian AW, Sigal BM, et al. Cost-effectiveness of screening BRCA1/2 mutation carriers with breast magnetic resonance imaging. Jama 2006; 295:2374–2384.  

360

1536. Plewes DB, Bishop J, Samani A, Sciarretta J. Visualization and quantification of breast cancer biomechanical properties with magnetic resonance elastography. Phys Med Biol 2000; 45:1591–1610. 1537. Plewes DB, Bishop J, Soutar I, Cohen E. Errors in quantitative dynamic three-dimensional keyhole MR imaging of the breast. J Magn Reson Imaging 1995; 5:361–364. 1538. Po J, Margolis DJ, Cunningham CH, Herfkens RJ, Ikeda DM, Daniel BL. Water-selective spectral-spatial contrast-enhanced breast MRI for cancer detection in patients with extracapsular and injected free silicone. Magn Reson Imaging 2006; 24:1363–1367. 1539. Podo F, Sardanelli F, Canese R, et al. The Italian multi-centre project on evaluation of MRI and other imaging modalities in early detection of breast cancer in subjects at high genetic risk. J Exp Clin Cancer Res 2002; 21:115–124. 1540. Polgar C, Forrai G, Szabo E, et al. [Radiologic follow-up after breast-conserving surgery: value of MRI examination of the breast]. Orv Hetil 1999; 140:2619–2625. 1541. Poon CS, Bronskill MJ, Henkelman RM, Boyd NF. Quantitative magnetic resonance imaging parameters and their relationship to mammographic pattern. J Natl Cancer Inst 1992; 84:777–781. 1542. Port ER, Park A, Borgen PI, Morris E, Montgomery LL. Results of MRI screening for breast cancer in high-risk patients with LCIS and atypical hyperplasia. Ann Surg Oncol 2007; 14:1051–1057. 1543. Port RE, Knopp MV, Brix G. Dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI using Gd-DTPA: interindividual variability of the arterial input function and consequences for the assessment of kinetics in tumors. Magn Reson Med 2001; 45:1030–1038. 1544. Port RE, Knopp MV, Hoffmann U, Milker-Zabel S, Brix G. Multicompartment analysis of gadolinium chelate kinetics: blood-tissue exchange in mammary tumors as monitored by dynamic MR imaging. J Magn Reson Imaging 1999; 10:233–241. 1545. Poster RB, Katz DS. Leydig cell tumor of the testis in Klinefelter syndrome: MR detection. J Comput Assist Tomogr 1993; 17:480–481. 1546. Potterton AJ, Coulthard A. Value of magnetic resonance imaging of the breast as a screening tool remains uncertain. Bmj 1997; 314:521. 1547. Potterton AJ, Yuille F, Tinkler S, et al. MRI appearances of the axilla in treated breast cancer. Br J Radiol 1999; 72:250–257. 1548. Povoski SP, Spigos DG. Partial tear of pectoralis major muscle masquerading as a breast mass in an 87-year-old woman. A case report. Acta Radiol 2002; 43:615–616. 1549. Povoski SP, Spigos DG, Marsh WL. An unusual case of cat-scratch disease from Bartonella quintana mimicking inflammatory breast cancer in a 50-year-old woman. Breast J 2003; 9:497–500. 1550. Powell DE, Stelling CB. Magnetic resonance imaging of the human female breast. Current status and pathologic correlations. Pathol Annu 1988; 23 Pt 1:159–194. 1551. Preda A, Novikov V, Moglich M, et al. Magnetic resonance characterization of tumor microvessels in experimental breast tumors using a slow clearance blood pool contrast agent (carboxymethyldextran-A2-Gd-DOTA) with histopathological correlation. Eur Radiol 2005; 15:2268–2275. 1552. Preda A, Novikov V, Moglich M, et al. MRI monitoring of Avastin antiangiogenesis therapy using B22956/1, a new blood pool contrast agent, in an experimental model of human cancer. J Magn Reson Imaging 2004; 20:865–873. 1553. Preda A, Turetschek K, Daldrup H, et al. The choice of region of interest measures in contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance image characterization of experimental breast tumors. Invest Radiol 2005; 40:349–354. 1554. Preda L, Villa G, Rizzo S, et al. Magnetic resonance mammography in the evaluation of recurrence at the prior lumpectomy site after conservative surgery and radiotherapy. Breast Cancer Res 2006; 8:R53. 1555. Presant CA, Wolf W, Albright MJ, et al. Human tumor fluorouracil trapping: clinical correlations of in vivo 19F nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy pharmacokinetics. J Clin Oncol 1990; 8:1868–1873. 1556. Pretner E, Amri H, Li W, et al. Cancer-related overexpression of the peripheral-type benzodiazepine receptor and cytostatic anticancer effects of Ginkgo biloba extract (EGb 761). Anticancer Res 2006; 26:9–22. 1557. Pretorius ES, Hruban RH, Fishman EK. Recurrent fibromatosis in a patient with breast carcinoma. Computed tomography findings with magnetic resonance imaging and pathologic correlation. Invest Radiol 1995; 30:381–383. 1558. Prosperi Porta R, Montruccoli-Salmi D, Lalle M, et al. Pregnancy-associated breast cancer. Eur J Gynaecol Oncol 1998; 19:401–404. 1559. Pugh PA, Burnett KR. Scanner design assists MRI of the breast. Diagn Imaging (San Franc) 1995; Suppl:MR7–9.  

361

 

a  References

1560. Pusztaszeri M, Vlastos G, Kinkel K, Pelte MF. Histopathological study of breast cancer and normal breast tissue after magnetic resonance-guided cryotherapy ablation. Cryobiology 2007; 55:44–51. 1561. Qayyum A, Birdwell RL, Daniel BL, et al. MR imaging features of infiltrating lobular carcinoma of the breast: histopathologic correlation. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2002; 178:1227–1232. 1562. Quan ML, Sclafani L, Heerdt AS, Fey JV, Morris EA, Borgen PI. Magnetic resonance imaging detects unsuspected disease in patients with invasive lobular cancer. Ann Surg Oncol 2003; 10:1048–1053. 1563. Quinn SF, Neubauer NM, Sheley RC, Demlow TA, Szumowski J. MR imaging of silicone breast implants: evaluation of prospective and retrospective interpretations and interobserver agreement. J Magn Reson Imaging 1996; 6:213–218. 1564. Raatschen HJ, Fu Y, Shames DM, Wendland MF, Brasch RC. Magnetic resonance imaging enhancement of normal tissues and tumors using macromolecular Gd-based cascade polymer contrast agents: preclinical evaluations. Invest Radiol 2006; 41:860–867. 1565. Rakow-Penner R, Daniel B, Yu H, Sawyer-Glover A, Glover GH. Relaxation times of breast tissue at 1.5T and 3T measured using IDEAL. J Magn Reson Imaging 2006; 23:87–91. 1566. Ralleigh G, Given-Wilson R. Breast cancer risk and possible screening strategies for young women following supradiaphragmatic irradiation for Hodgkin’s disease. Clin Radiol 2004; 59:647–650. 1567. Ralleigh G, Walker AE, Hall-Craggs MA, Lakhani SR, Saunders C. MR imaging of the skin and nipple of the breast: differentiation between tumour recurrence and post-treatment change. Eur Radiol 2001; 11:1651–1658. 1568. Ramsay E, Causer P, Hill K, Plewes D. Adaptive bilateral breast MRI using projection reconstruction time-resolved imaging of contrast kinetics. J Magn Reson Imaging 2006; 24:617–624. 1569. Rankin SC. MRI of the breast. Br J Radiol 2000; 73:806–818. 1570. Rausch DR, Hendrick RE. How to optimize clinical breast MR imaging practices and techniques on Your 1.5-T system. Radiographics 2006; 26:1469–1484. 1571. Ravaioli A, Tassinari D. Staging of breast cancer: recommended standards. Ann Oncol 2000; 11 Suppl 3:3–6. 1572. Reddy DH, Mendelson EB. Incorporating new imaging models in breast cancer management. Curr Treat Options Oncol 2005; 6:135–145. 1573. Redmond OM, Stack JP, O’Connor NG, Codd MB, Ennis JT. In vivo phosphorus-31 magnetic resonance spectroscopy of normal and pathological breast tissues. Br J Radiol 1991; 64:210–216. 1574. Reeder SB, McKenzie CA, Pineda AR, et al. Water-fat separation with IDEAL gradient-echo imaging. J Magn Reson Imaging 2007; 25:644–652. 1575. Reichenbach JR, Hopfe J, Bellemann ME, Kaiser WA. Development and validation of an algorithm for registration of serial 3D MR breast data sets. Magma 2002; 14:249–257. 1576. Reichenbach JR, Hopfe J, Rauscher A, Wurdinger S, Kaiser WA. Subtraction of in-phase and opposed-phase images in dynamic MR mammography. J Magn Reson Imaging 2005; 21:565–575. 1577. Reichenbach JR, Przetak C, Klinger G, Kaiser WA. Assessment of breast tissue changes on hormonal replacement therapy using MRI: a pilot study. J Comput Assist Tomogr 1999; 23:407–413. 1578. Reif E, Moller TB, Bach M. [Magnetic resonance mammography – even today a routine procedure]. Wien Med Wochenschr 1994; 144:392–398. 1579. Reinikainen H, Paakko E, Suramo I, Paivansalo M, Jauhiainen J, Rissanen T. Dynamics of contrast enhancement in MR imaging and power Doppler ultrasonography of solid breast lesions. Acta Radiol 2002; 43:492–500. 1580. Revel D, Ogan M, Paajanen H, et al. [Specific and non-specific contrast media for MRI of tumors. Experimental study of human breast carcinoma]. J Radiol 1989; 70:115–121. 1581. Reynolds HE. Evaluation of the augmented breast. Radiol Clin North Am 1995; 33:1131–1145. 1582. Reynolds HE. Advances in breast imaging. Hematol Oncol Clin North Am 1999; 13:333–348, v. 1583. Reynolds HE, Buckwalter KA, Jackson VP, Siwy BK, Alexander SG. Comparison of mammography, sonography, and magnetic resonance imaging in the detection of silicone-gel breast implant rupture. Ann Plast Surg 1994; 33:247–255; discussion 256–247. 1584. Rhoden SA, Totterman SM. Breast tissue expander: MR imaging artifact. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1995; 164:765. 1585. Ricci P, Cantisani V, Ballesio L, et al. Benign and malignant breast lesions: efficacy of real time contrast-enhanced ultrasound vs. magnetic resonance imaging. Ultraschall Med 2007; 28:57–62.  

362

1586. Rieber A, Brambs HJ, Gabelmann A, Heilmann V, Kreienberg R, Kuhn T. Breast MRI for monitoring response of primary breast cancer to neo-adjuvant chemotherapy. Eur Radiol 2002; 12:1711–1719. 1587. Rieber A, Merkle E, Bohm W, Brambs HJ, Tomczak R. MRI of histologically confirmed mammary carcinoma: clinical relevance of diagnostic procedures for detection of multifocal or contralateral secondary carcinoma. J Comput Assist Tomogr 1997; 21:773–779. 1588. Rieber A, Merkle E, Zeitler H, et al. [Doubtful mammographic findings: the value of negative MR mammography for tumor exclusion]. Rofo 1997; 167:392–398. 1589. Rieber A, Merkle E, Zeitler H, et al. Value of MR mammography in the detection and exclusion of recurrent breast carcinoma. J Comput Assist Tomogr 1997; 21:780–784. 1590. Rieber A, Nussle K, Merkle E, Kreienberg R, Tomczak R, Brambs HJ. MR mammography: influence of menstrual cycle on the dynamic contrast enhancement of fibrocystic disease. Eur Radiol 1999; 9:1107–1112. 1591. Rieber A, Schirrmeister H, Gabelmann A, et al. Pre-operative staging of invasive breast cancer with MR mammography and/or PET: boon or bunk? Br J Radiol 2002; 75:789–798. 1592. Rieber A, Schramm K, Helms G, et al. Breast-conserving surgery and autogenous tissue reconstruction in patients with breast cancer: efficacy of MRI of the breast in the detection of recurrent disease. Eur Radiol 2003; 13:780–787. 1593. Rieber A, Tomczak RJ, Mergo PJ, Wenzel V, Zeitler H, Brambs HJ. MRI of the breast in the differential diagnosis of mastitis versus inflammatory carcinoma and follow-up. J Comput Assist Tomogr 1997; 21:128–132. 1594. Rieber A, Zeitler H, Rosenthal H, et al. MRI of breast cancer: influence of chemotherapy on sensitivity. Br J Radiol 1997; 70:452–458. 1595. Rigauts H, Casselman J, Steyaert L, Devlies F, Pattyn G. Contribution of MRI and color Doppler sonography in breast cancer diagnosis. J Belge Radiol 1993; 76:226–231. 1596. Rijnsburger AJ, Essink-Bot ML, van Dooren S, et al. Impact of screening for breast cancer in high-risk women on health-related quality of life. Br J Cancer 2004; 91:69–76. 1597. Roberts TP, Helbich TH, Ley S, et al. Utility (or not) of Gd-DTPA-based dynamic MRI for breast cancer diagnosis and grading. Acad Radiol 2002; 9 Suppl 1:S261–265. 1598. Roberts TP, Turetschek K, Preda A, et al. Tumor microvascular changes to anti-angiogenic treatment assessed by MR contrast media of different molecular weights. Acad Radiol 2002; 9 Suppl 2:S511–513. 1599. Robson M. Breast cancer surveillance in women with hereditary risk due to BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations. Clin Breast Cancer 2004; 5:260–268; discussion 269–271. 1600. Robson M, Offit K. Clinical practice. Management of an inherited predisposition to breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2007; 357:154–162. 1601. Robson ME, Offit K. Breast MRI for women with hereditary cancer risk. Jama 2004; 292:1368–1370. 1602. Rodenko GN, Harms SE, Pruneda JM, et al. MR imaging in the management before surgery of lobular carcinoma of the breast: correlation with pathology. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1996; 167:1415–1419. 1603. Rodriguez O, Fricke S, Chien C, et al. Contrast-enhanced in vivo imaging of breast and prostate cancer cells by MRI. Cell Cycle 2006; 5:113–119. 1604. Roebuck JR, Cecil KM, Schnall MD, Lenkinski RE. Human breast lesions: characterization with proton MR spectroscopy. Radiology 1998; 209:269–275. 1605. Rofsky NM, Weinreb JC, Litt AW. Quantitative analysis of gadopentetate dimeglumine excreted in breast milk. J Magn Reson Imaging 1993; 3:131–132. 1606. Rohlfing T, Maurer CR, Jr. Nonrigid image registration in shared-memory multiprocessor environments with application to brains, breasts, and bees. IEEE Trans Inf Technol Biomed 2003; 7:16–25. 1607. Rohlfing T, Maurer CR, Jr., Bluemke DA, Jacobs MA. Volume-preserving nonrigid registration of MR breast images using free-form deformation with an incompressibility constraint. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 2003; 22:730–741. 1608. Rohrich RJ, Adams WP, Jr., Beran SJ, et al. An analysis of silicone gel-filled breast implants: diagnosis and failure rates. Plast Reconstr Surg 1998; 102:2304–2308; discussion 2309. 1609. Ronen SM, Leach MO. Imaging biochemistry: applications to breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res 2001; 3:36–40. 1610. Roose L, Mollemans W, Loeckx D, Maes F, Suetens P. Biomechanically based elastic breast registration using mass tensor simulation. Med Image Comput Comput Assist Interv Int Conf Med Image Comput Comput Assist Interv 2006; 9:718–725.  

363

 

a  References

1611. Rosen EL, Blackwell KL, Baker JA, et al. Accuracy of MRI in the detection of residual breast cancer after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2003; 181:1275–1282. 1612. Rosenberg R, Cambron LD, Williamson MR. Magnetic resonance imaging of the breast. West J Med 1996; 165:58–59. 1613. Rosenbloom AL. Permanent brain damage from hypernatremic dehydration in breastfed infants: patient reports. Clin Pediatr (Phila) 2004; 43:855–857. 1614. Rotaru N, Luciani A. Magnetic resonance imaging of the breast: potential for lesion characterization. J Buon 2004; 9:77–82. 1615. Roth Y, Ocherashvilli A, Daniels D, et al. Quantification of water compartmentation in cell suspensions by diffusionweighted and T(2)-weighted MRI. Magn Reson Imaging 2007. 1616. Rothemund Y, Schaefer M, Grusser SM, Flor H. Localization of the human female breast in primary somatosensory cortex. Exp Brain Res 2005; 164:357–364. 1617. Rouse H, Dawson SJ. Images in clinical medicine. Cerebral metastases in breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2005; 353:1724. 1618. Rouviere O, Reynolds C, Le Y, et al. Fiducial markers for MR histological correlation in ex vivo or short-term in vivo animal experiments: a screening study. J Magn Reson Imaging 2006; 23:50–59. 1619. Rovno HD, Siegelman ES, Reynolds C, Orel SG, Schnall MD. Solitary intraductal papilloma: findings at MR imaging and MR galactography. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1999; 172:151–155. 1620. Rowell NP, Glaholm J, Flower MA, Cronin B, McCready VR. Anatomically derived attenuation coefficients for use in quantitative single photon emission tomography studies of the thorax. Eur J Nucl Med 1992; 19:36–40. 1621. Rubens D, Totterman S, Chacko AK, et al. Gadopentetate dimeglumine-enhanced chemical-shift MR imaging of the breast. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1991; 157:267–270. 1622. Rubesova E, Grell AS, De Maertelaer V, Metens T, Chao SL, Lemort M. Quantitative diffusion imaging in breast cancer: a clinical prospective study. J Magn Reson Imaging 2006; 24:319–324. 1623. Rubinstein WS, Latimer JJ, Sumkin JH, Huerbin M, Grant SG, Vogel VG. Prospective screening study of 0.5 Tesla dedicated magnetic resonance imaging for the detection of breast cancer in young, high-risk women. BMC Womens Health 2006; 6:10. 1624. Rueckert D, Sonoda LI, Hayes C, Hill DL, Leach MO, Hawkes DJ. Nonrigid registration using free-form deformations: application to breast MR images. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 1999; 18:712–721. 1625. Ruiter NV, Muller TO, Stotzka R, Gemmeke H, Reichenbach JR, Kaiser WA. Automatic image matching for breast cancer diagnostics by a 3D deformation model of the mamma. Biomed Tech (Berl) 2002; 47 Suppl 1 Pt 2:644–647. 1626. Ruiter NV, Muller TO, Stotzka R, Kaiser WA. Elastic registration of x-ray mammograms and three-dimensional magnetic resonance imaging data. J Digit Imaging 2001; 14:52–55. 1627. Ruiz-Delgado ML, Lopez-Ruiz JA, Eizaguirre B, Saiz A, Astigarraga E, Fernandez-Temprano Z. Benign adenomyoepithelioma of the breast: imaging findings mimicking malignancy and histopathological features. Acta Radiol 2007; 48:27–29. 1628. Ryan MW, Rassekh CH, Chaljub G. Metastatic breast carcinoma presenting as cavernous sinus syndrome. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 1996; 105:666–668. 1629. Rydland J, BjOrnerud A, Haugen O, et al. New intravascular contrast agent applied to dynamic contrast enhanced MR imaging of human breast cancer. Acta Radiol 2003; 44:275–283. 1630. Sabate JM, Gomez A, Torrubia S, Salinas T, Clotet M, Lerma E. Lupus panniculitis involving the breast. Eur Radiol 2006; 16:53–56. 1631. Sabel M, Aichinger H. Recent developments in breast imaging. Phys Med Biol 1996; 41:315–368. 1632. Sabel MS, Edge SB. In-situ ablation of breast cancer. Breast Dis 2001; 12:131–140. 1633. Sachelarie I, Grossbard ML, Chadha M, Feldman S, Ghesani M, Blum RH. Primary systemic therapy of breast cancer. Oncologist 2006; 11:574–589. 1634. Sadowski EA, Kelcz F. Frequency of malignancy in lesions classified as probably benign after dynamic contrast-enhanced breast MRI examination. J Magn Reson Imaging 2005; 21:556–564. 1635. Safir J, Zito JL, Gershwind ME, et al. Contrast-enhanced breast MRI for cancer detection using a commercially available system – a perspective. Clin Imaging 1998; 22:162–179. 1636. Saftlas AF, Byrne C. Fibroglandular breast tissue assessments by mammography and MR imaging. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1998; 170:1397–1398. 1637. Safvi A. Linguine sign. Radiology 2000; 216:838–839.  

364

1638. Sagara Y, Rai Y, Tamada S, et al. [A case of inflammatory breast cancer achieving pathological complete response by primary systemic therapy with CEF (cyclophosphamide, epirubicin, 5-fluorouracil) followed by docetaxel]. Gan To Kagaku Ryoho 2007; 34:77–80. 1639. Sakai Y, Wakamatsu S, Hirakawa K. Identification of foreign material from abscesses after injection mammaplasty, by implant alleged to be collagen. Plast Reconstr Surg 2003; 112:931–933. 1640. Sakorafas GH, Tsiotou AG. Contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging has a high sensitivity for detection of breast lesions. Breast J 2002; 8:121. 1641. Sakuhara Y, Shinozaki T, Hozumi Y, Ogura S, Omoto K, Furuse M. MR imaging of diabetic mastopathy. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2002; 179:1201–1203. 1642. Sakuma T, Yamaguchi T, Abe H, et al. Adrenogenital syndrome caused by an androgen-producing adrenocortical tumor. Intern Med 1994; 33:790–794. 1643. Sakurai T, Oura S, Tanino H, et al. A case of granulomatous mastitis mimicking breast carcinoma. Breast Cancer 2002; 9:265–268. 1644. Salvador R, Lirola JL, Dominguez R, Lopez M, Risueno N. Pseudo-angiomatous stromal hyperplasia presenting as a breast mass: imaging findings in three patients. Breast 2004; 13:431–435. 1645. Salvati M, Cervoni L. Association of breast carcinoma and meningioma: report of nine new cases and review of the literature. Tumori 1996; 82:491–493. 1646. Samani A, Bishop J, Luginbuhl C, Plewes DB. Measuring the elastic modulus of ex vivo small tissue samples. Phys Med Biol 2003; 48:2183–2198. 1647. Samani A, Bishop J, Yaffe MJ, Plewes DB. Biomechanical 3-D finite element modeling of the human breast using MRI data. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 2001; 20:271–279. 1648. Samoszuk M, Leonor L, Espinoza F, Carpenter PM, Nalcioglu O, Su MY. Measuring microvascular density in tumors by digital dissection. Anal Quant Cytol Histol 2002; 24:15–22. 1649. Samuel JC, Ollila DW. Prophylaxis and screening options: recommendations for young women with BRCA mutations. Breast Dis 2005; 23:31–35. 1650. Samuels JB, Rohrich RJ, Weatherall PT, Ho AM, Goldberg KL. Radiographic diagnosis of breast implant rupture: current status and comparison of techniques. Plast Reconstr Surg 1995; 96:865–877. 1651. Samuels TH. Breast imaging. A look at current and future technologies. Postgrad Med 1998; 104:91–94, 97–101. 1652. Sanders LM, Groves AC, Schaefer S. Cutaneous angiosarcoma of the breast on MRI. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2006; 187: W143–146. 1653. Sandrick K. Image guidance brings end to surgical breast biopsy. Diagn Imaging (San Franc) 2000; 22:73–77. 1654. Santyr GE. MR imaging of the breast. Imaging and tissue characterization without intravenous contrast. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 1994; 2:673–690. 1655. Santyr GE, Fairbanks EJ, Kelcz F, Sorenson JA. Off-resonance spin locking for MR imaging. Magn Reson Med 1994; 32:43–51. 1656. Santyr GE, Kelcz F, Schneider E. Pulsed magnetization transfer contrast for MR imaging with application to breast. J Magn Reson Imaging 1996; 6:203–212. 1657. Sardanelli F. MultiHance for dynamic MR imaging of the breast. Eur Radiol 2004; 14 Suppl 7:O65–70; discussion O84–65. 1658. Sardanelli F, Fausto A, Iozzelli A, Rescinito G, Calabrese M. Dynamic breast magnetic resonance imaging. Effect of changing the region of interest on early enhancement using 2D and 3D techniques. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2004; 28:642–646. 1659. Sardanelli F, Giuseppetti GM, Panizza P, et al. Sensitivity of MRI versus mammography for detecting foci of multifocal, multicentric breast cancer in Fatty and dense breasts using the whole-breast pathologic examination as a gold standard. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2004; 183:1149–1157. 1660. Sardanelli F, Iozzelli A, Fausto A. Contrast agents and temporal resolution in breast MR imaging. J Exp Clin Cancer Res 2002; 21:69–75. 1661. Sardanelli F, Iozzelli A, Fausto A. MR imaging of the breast: indications, established technique, and new directions. Eur Radiol 2003; 13 Suppl 3:N28–36.

 

365

 

a  References

1662. Sardanelli F, Iozzelli A, Fausto A, Carriero A, Kirchin MA. Gadobenate dimeglumine-enhanced MR imaging breast vascular maps: association between invasive cancer and ipsilateral increased vascularity. Radiology 2005; 235:791–797. 1663. Sardanelli F, Lupo P, Esseridou A, Fausto A, Quarenghi M. Dynamic breast magnetic resonance imaging without complications in a patient with dual-chamber demand pacemaker. Acta Radiol 2006; 47:24–27. 1664. Sardanelli F, Melani E, Ottonello C, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging of the breast in characterizing positive or uncertain mammographic findings. Cancer Detect Prev 1998; 22:39–42. 1665. Sardanelli F, Podo F. Breast MR imaging in women at high-risk of breast cancer. Is something changing in early breast cancer detection? Eur Radiol 2007; 17:873–887. 1666. Sardanelli F, Podo F, D’Agnolo G, et al. Multicenter comparative multimodality surveillance of women at genetic-familial high risk for breast cancer (HIBCRIT study): interim results. Radiology 2007; 242:698–715. 1667. Sardanelli F, Rescinito G, Giordano GD, Calabrese M, Parodi RC. MR dynamic enhancement of breast lesions: high temporal resolution during the first-minute versus eight-minute study. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2000; 24:724–731. 1668. Saslow D, Boetes C, Burke W, et al. American Cancer Society guidelines for breast screening with MRI as an adjunct to mammography. CA Cancer J Clin 2007; 57:75–89. 1669. Scaranelo AM, Marques AF, Smialowski EB, Lederman HM. Evaluation of the rupture of silicone breast implants by mammography, ultrasonography and magnetic resonance imaging in asymptomatic patients: correlation with surgical findings. Sao Paulo Med J 2004; 122:41–47. 1670. Schackert G, Steinmetz A, Meier U, Sobottka SB. Surgical management of single and multiple brain metastases: results of a retrospective study. Onkologie 2001; 24:246–255. 1671. Schedel H, Oellinger H, Kohlschein P, et al. Magnetic Resonance Female Breast Imaging (MRFBI) - Evaluation of the Changes in Signal Intensity over Time Pre- and Post-administration of 0.2 mmol/kg Gd-DTPA. Zentralbl Gynakol 2002; 124:104–110. 1672. Schelfout K, Kersschot E, Van Goethem M, et al. Breast MR imaging in a patient with unilateral axillary lymphadenopathy and unknown primary malignancy. Eur Radiol 2003; 13:2128–2132. 1673. Schelfout K, Tjalma WA, Cooremans ID, Coeman DC, Colpaert CG, Buytaert PM. Observations of an idiopathic granulomatous mastitis. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2001; 97:260–262. 1674. Schelfout K, Van Goethem M, Kersschot E, et al. Contrast-enhanced MR imaging of breast lesions and effect on treatment. Eur J Surg Oncol 2004; 30:501–507. 1675. Schelfout K, Van Goethem M, Kersschot E, et al. Preoperative breast MRI in patients with invasive lobular breast cancer. Eur Radiol 2004; 14:1209–1216. 1676. Schepps B. Breast imaging: the role of alternative diagnostic modalities. Med Health R I 2005; 88:80–81. 1677. Schilling K, Love N. Screening and diagnostic breast imaging procedures. A look at lesions through a radiologist’s eyes. Postgrad Med 1995; 98:44–46, 51, 56 passim. 1678. Schinina V, Busi Rizzi E, Zaccarelli M, Carvelli C, Bibbolino C. Gynecomastia in male HIV patients MRI and US findings. Clin Imaging 2002; 26:309–313. 1679. Schlemmer M, Lindner LH, Abdel-Rahman S, Issels RD. [Principles, technology and indication of hyperthermia and part body hyperthermia]. Radiologe 2004; 44:301–309. 1680. Schmalbrock P, Hines JV, Lee SM, Ammar GM, Kwok EW. T1 measurements in cell cultures: a new tool for characterizing contrast agents at 1.5T. J Magn Reson Imaging 2001; 14:636–648. 1681. Schmid VJ, Whitcher B, Padhani AR, Taylor NJ, Yang GZ. Bayesian methods for pharmacokinetic models in dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 2006; 25:1627–1636. 1682. Schmid VJ, Whitcher B, Yang GZ. Semi-parametric analysis of dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI using Bayesian P-splines. Med Image Comput Comput Assist Interv Int Conf Med Image Comput Comput Assist Interv 2006; 9:679–686. 1683. Schmid VJ, Whitcher BJ, Yang GZ, Taylor NJ, Padhani AR. Statistical analysis of pharmacokinetic models in dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging. Med Image Comput Comput Assist Interv Int Conf Med Image Comput Comput Assist Interv 2005; 8:886–893. 1684. Schmidt GP, Baur-Melnyk A, Tiling R, Hahn K, Reiser MF, Schoenberg SO. [Comparison of high resolution whole-body MRI using parallel imaging and PET-CT. First experiences with a 32-channel MRI system]. Radiologe 2004; 44:889–898.  

366

1685. Schmitt KP, Boehm T, Fleck M, Kaiser WA. [Cost-effectiveness of MR-imaging in the preoperative work-up of suspicious breast lesions]. Rofo 2001; 173:898–901. 1686. Schmitt R, Helmberger T, Fellner F, Obletter N. [The marking of nonpalpable breast tumors in MRT]. Rofo 1993; 159:484–486. 1687. Schnall M. MR imaging evaluation of cancer extent: is there clinical relevance? Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 2006; 14:379–381, vii. 1688. Schnall M, Orel S. Breast MR imaging in the diagnostic setting. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 2006; 14:329–337, vi. 1689. Schnall MD. An overview of interpretation strategies for breast MR imaging. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 2001; 9:289–294, v–vi. 1690. Schnall MD. Application of magnetic resonance imaging to early detection of breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res 2001; 3:17–21. 1691. Schnall MD. Breast MR imaging. Radiol Clin North Am 2003; 41:43–50. 1692. Schnall MD, Blume J, Bluemke DA, et al. MRI detection of distinct incidental cancer in women with primary breast cancer studied in IBMC 6883. J Surg Oncol 2005; 92:32–38. 1693. Schnall MD, Blume J, Bluemke DA, et al. Diagnostic architectural and dynamic features at breast MR imaging: multicenter study. Radiology 2006; 238:42–53. 1694. Schnall MD, Ikeda DM. Lesion Diagnosis Working Group report. J Magn Reson Imaging 1999; 10:982–990. 1695. Schnall MD, Orel SG. Breast MRI. Breast Dis 1998; 10:97–111. 1696. Schnall MD, Orel SG, Connick TJ. MR guided biopsy of the breast. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 1994; 2:585–589. 1697. Schnall MD, Rosten S, Englander S, Orel SG, Nunes LW. A combined architectural and kinetic interpretation model for breast MR images. Acad Radiol 2001; 8:591–597. 1698. Schneider B, Laubenberger J, Kommoss F, Madjar H, Grone K, Langer M. Multiple giant fibroadenomas: clinical presentation and radiologic findings. Gynecol Obstet Invest 1997; 43:278–280. 1699. Schneider E, Chan TW. Selective MR imaging of silicone with the three-point Dixon technique. Radiology 1993; 187:89–93. 1700. Schneider E, Rohling KW, Schnall MD, Giaquinto RO, Morris EA, Ballon D. An apparatus for MR-guided breast lesion localization and core biopsy: design and preliminary results. J Magn Reson Imaging 2001; 14:243–253. 1701. Schneider JP, Schulz T, Horn LC, Leinung S, Schmidt F, Kahn T. MR-guided percutaneous core biopsy of small breast lesions: first experience with a vertically open 0.5T scanner. J Magn Reson Imaging 2002; 15:374–385. 1702. Schneider JP, Schulz T, Ruger S, et al. [MR-guided preoperative localization and percutaneous core biopsy of suspected breast lesions. Possibilities and experience on the vertically open 0.5-T-system]. Radiologe 2002; 42:33–41. 1703. Schorn C, Fischer U, Doler W, Funke M, Grabbe E. Compression device to reduce motion artifacts at contrast-enhanced MR imaging in the breast. Radiology 1998; 206:279–282. 1704. Schorn C, Fischer U, Luftner-Nagel S, Grabbe E. Diagnostic potential of ultrafast contrast-enhanced MRI of the breast in hypervascularized lesions: are there advantages in comparison with standard dynamic MRI? J Comput Assist Tomogr 1999; 23:118–122. 1705. Schorn C, Fischer U, Luftner-Nagel S, Westerhof JP, Grabbe E. MRI of the breast in patients with metastatic disease of unknown primary. Eur Radiol 1999; 9:470–473. 1706. Schott AF, Roubidoux MA, Helvie MA, et al. Clinical and radiologic assessments to predict breast cancer pathologic complete response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2005; 92:231–238. 1707. Schouten van der Velden AP, Boetes C, Bult P, Wobbes T. The value of magnetic resonance imaging in diagnosis and size assessment of in situ and small invasive breast carcinoma. Am J Surg 2006; 192:172–178. 1708. Schreiber WG, Brix G, Knopp MV, Hess T, Lorenz WJ. Improved visualization of breast lesions with gadolinium-enhanced magnetization transfer MR imaging. Magn Reson Med 1996; 35:861–869. 1709. Schulz-Wendtland R, Aichinger U, Kramer S, Lang N, Bautz W. [Mammography/stereotactically controlled vacuum excisional biopsy. Interventional methods in breast diagnosis]. Radiologe 2001; 41:379–384. 1710. Schwarz GS, Drotman M, Rosenblatt R, Milner L, Shamonki J, Osborne MP. Fibromatosis of the breast: case report and current concepts in the management of an uncommon lesion. Breast J 2006; 12:66–71.  

367

 

a  References

1711. Scoggins CR, Vitola JV, Sandler MP, Atkinson JB, Frexes-Steed M. Occult breast carcinoma presenting as an axillary mass. Am Surg 1999; 65:1–5. 1712. Seckin H, Yigitkanli K, Ilhan O, Han U, Bavbek M. Breast carcinoma metastasis and meningioma. A case report. Surg Neurol 2006; 66:324–327; discussion 327. 1713. Segara D, Krop IE, Garber JE, et al. Does MRI predict pathologic tumor response in women with breast cancer undergoing preoperative chemotherapy? J Surg Oncol 2007. 1714. Seki T, Hachiya J, Nitatori T, Yokoyama K, Fukushima H, Uchigasaki S. [MR imaging for breast cancer]. Nippon Geka Gakkai Zasshi 1996; 97:347–356. 1715. Semple SI, Gilbert FJ, Redpath TW, et al. The relationship between vascular and metabolic characteristics of primary breast tumours. Eur Radiol 2004; 14:2038–2045. 1716. Semple SI, Staff RT, Heys SD, et al. Baseline MRI delivery characteristics predict change in invasive ductal breast carcinoma PET metabolism as a result of primary chemotherapy administration. Ann Oncol 2006; 17:1393–1398. 1717. Sequeiros RB, Reinikainen H, Sequeiros AM, et al. MR-guided breast biopsy and hook wire marking using a low-field (0.23 T) scanner with optical instrument tracking. Eur Radiol 2007; 17:813–819. 1718. Servais F, Blocklet DC, Seret AE, Lenaers A, Schoutens AC. Differentiation between benign and malignant breast lesions with MR imaging and scintimammography. Radiology 1997; 205:283; author reply 285–286. 1719. Setti E, Trecate G, Ferrari M, Mainardi L, Musumeci R. Breast magnetic resonance imaging: a computer-based analysis of enhancement curves. J Digit Imaging 2001; 14:226–228. 1720. Shah SK, Greatrex KV. Current role of magnetic resonance imaging in breast imaging: a primer for the primary care physician. J Am Board Fam Pract 2005; 18:478–490. 1721. Shahar KH, Solaiyappan M, Bluemke DA. Quantitative differentiation of breast lesions based on three-dimensional morphology from magnetic resonance imaging. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2002; 26:1047–1053. 1722. Shaikh N, LaTrenta G, Swistel A, Osborne FM. Detection of recurrent breast cancer after TRAM flap reconstruction. Ann Plast Surg 2001; 47:602–607. 1723. Sharon E, Hochhauser E, Schindel A. [Diabetic mastopathy]. Harefuah 2007; 146:258–259, 320. 1724. Shellock FG. Metallic marking clips used after stereotactic breast biopsy: ex vivo testing of ferromagnetism, heating, and artifacts associated with MR imaging. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1999; 172:1417–1419. 1725. Shen GX, Wu J, Boada FE. Multiple channel phased arrays for echo planar imaging. Magma 2000; 11:138–143. 1726. Sherif H, Mahfouz AE, Oellinger H, et al. Peripheral washout sign on contrast-enhanced MR images of the breast. Radiology 1997; 205:209–213. 1727. Shi AA, Georgian-Smith D, Cornell LD, et al. Radiological reasoning: male breast mass with calcifications. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2005; 185:S205–210. 1728. Shields CL, Stopyra GA, Marr BP, Moster ML, Shields JA. Enophthalmos as initial manifestation of occult, mammogram-negative carcinoma of the breast. Ophthalmic Surg Lasers Imaging 2004; 35:56–57. 1729. Shimada M, Senoo A, Hayashi S, et al. Assessment of breast cancer with dynamic gadolinium-enhanced MR imaging combined with magnetization transfer contrast using a newly developed breast surface coil for the supine position. Radiat Med 1997; 15:85–90. 1730. Shin JH, Choi HY, Lee SN, Kim YJ. Microinvasive ductal carcinoma arising within a fibroadenoma: A case report. Acta Radiol 2006; 47:643–645. 1731. Shinto O, Yashiro M, Yamada N, et al. Primary leiomyosarcoma of the breast: report of a case. Surg Today 2002; 32:716–719. 1732. Shiraishi A, Kurosaki Y, Maehara T, Suzuki M, Kurosumi M. Extension of ductal carcinoma in situ: histopathological association with MR imaging and mammography. Magn Reson Med Sci 2003; 2:159–163. 1733. Shiraishi A, Suzuki M, Nozu S, Suzuki H, Kurosumi M, Katayama H. [Diagnosis of breast cancer extent and enhancement patterns using 3D-dynamic MR imaging: correlation with intraductal component]. Nippon Igaku Hoshasen Gakkai Zasshi 1999; 59:122–130. 1734. Shirakawa K, Kobayashi H, Heike Y, et al. Hemodynamics in vasculogenic mimicry and angiogenesis of inflammatory breast cancer xenograft. Cancer Res 2002; 62:560–566. 1735. Shirakawa K, Kobayashi H, Sobajima J, Hashimoto D, Shimizu A, Wakasugi H. Inflammatory breast cancer: vasculogenic mimicry and its hemodynamics of an inflammatory breast cancer xenograft model. Breast Cancer Res 2003; 5:136–139.  

368

1736. Shtern F. Technology assessment: a perspective from the National Cancer Institute. Acad Radiol 1996; 3 Suppl 1: S84–87. 1737. Sickles EA. Imaging techniques other than mammography for the detection and diagnosis of breast cancer. Recent Results Cancer Res 1990; 119:127–135. 1738. Siegmann KC, Gorriz C, Xydeas T, et al. Preoperative magnetic resonance imaging-guided localization of 131 breast lesions with modified embolization coils. Invest Radiol 2005; 40:368–377. 1739. Siegmann KC, Muller-Schimpfle M, Schick F, et al. MR imaging-detected breast lesions: histopathologic correlation of lesion characteristics and signal intensity data. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2002; 178:1403–1409. 1740. Siewert C, Oellinger H, Sherif HK, Blohmer JU, Hadijuana J, Felix R. Is there a correlation in breast carcinomas between tumor size and number of tumor vessels detected by gadolinium-enhanced magnetic resonance mammography? Magma 1997; 5:29–31. 1741. Sijens PE, Levendag PC, Vecht CJ, van Dijk P, Oudkerk M. 1H MR spectroscopy detection of lipids and lactate in metastatic brain tumors. NMR Biomed 1996; 9:65–71. 1742. Sijens PE, van Dijk P, Oudkerk M. Correlation between choline level and Gd-DTPA enhancement in patients with brain metastases of mammary carcinoma. Magn Reson Med 1994; 32:549–555. 1743. Silverstein MJ, Lagios MD, Recht A, et al. Image-detected breast cancer: state of the art diagnosis and treatment. J Am Coll Surg 2005; 201:586–597. 1744. Sim LS, Hendriks JH, Bult P, Fook-Chong SM. US correlation for MRI-detected breast lesions in women with familial risk of breast cancer. Clin Radiol 2005; 60:801–806. 1745. Simon JH, Szumowski J. Chemical shift imaging with paramagnetic contrast material enhancement for improved lesion depiction. Radiology 1989; 171:539–543. 1746. Simons C, Dondelinger RF. [Breast implants. Evaluation of breast implants using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)]. Rev Med Liege 1998; 53:751–753. 1747. Singletary SE. Minimally invasive ablation techniques in breast cancer treatment. Ann Surg Oncol 2002; 9:319–320. 1748. Singletary SE, Dowlatshahi K, Dooley W, et al. Minimally invasive operation for breast cancer. Curr Probl Surg 2004; 41:394–447. 1749. Sinha S, Gorczyca DP, DeBruhl ND, Shellock FG, Gausche VR, Bassett LW. MR imaging of silicone breast implants: comparison of different coil arrays. Radiology 1993; 187:284–286. 1750. Sinha S, Lucas-Quesada FA, DeBruhl ND, et al. Multifeature analysis of Gd-enhanced MR images of breast lesions. J Magn Reson Imaging 1997; 7:1016–1026. 1751. Sinha S, Lucas-Quesada FA, Sinha U, DeBruhl N, Bassett LW. In vivo diffusion-weighted MRI of the breast: potential for lesion characterization. J Magn Reson Imaging 2002; 15:693–704. 1752. Sinha S, Sinha U. Functional magnetic resonance of human breast tumors: diffusion and perfusion imaging. Ann N Y Acad Sci 2002; 980:95–115. 1753. Sinkus R, Tanter M, Catheline S, et al. Imaging anisotropic and viscous properties of breast tissue by magnetic resonance-elastography. Magn Reson Med 2005; 53:372–387. 1754. Sipkins DA, Cheresh DA, Kazemi MR, Nevin LM, Bednarski MD, Li KC. Detection of tumor angiogenesis in vivo by alphaVbeta3-targeted magnetic resonance imaging. Nat Med 1998; 4:623–626. 1755. Sirimaharaj M, Hunyor AP, Chan WC, Arnold J. Unsual ocular metastasis from breast cancer. Clin Experiment Ophthalmol 2006; 34:74–76. 1756. Sittek H, Heske N, Kessler M, et al. [O-twist marker for post-interventional marking in imaging of suspected breast lesions]. Radiologe 2005; 45:223–229. 1757. Sittek H, Kessler M, Heuck AF, et al. [Morphology and contrast enhancement of ductal carcinoma in situ in dynamic 1.0 T MR mammography]. Rofo 1997; 167:247–251. 1758. Sittek H, Kessler M, Muller-Lisse U, Untch M, Bohmert H, Reiser M. [Technics for the preoperative marking of nonpalpable breast lesions in MRT]. Rofo 1996; 165:84–87. 1759. Sittek H, Linsmeier E, Perlet C, et al. [Preoperative marking and biopsy of nonpalpable breast lesions with a guidance system for the open Magnetom]. Radiologe 2000; 40:1098–1105. 1760. Sittek H, Perlet C, Helmberger T, Kolem H, Kessler M, Reiser M. [Preoperative marking of non-palpable mammary lesions on the magnetic resonance image using a body coil]. Rontgenpraxis 1998; 51:379–384.  

369

 

a  References

1761. Sittek H, Perlet C, Herrmann K, et al. [MR mammography. Preoperative marking of non-palpable breast lesions with the Magnetom open at 0.2 T]. Radiologe 1997; 37:685–691. 1762. Sittek H, Perlet C, Untch M, Kessler M, Reiser M. [Dynamic MR-mammography in invasive lobular breast cancer]. Rontgenpraxis 1998; 51:235–242. 1763. Sivaramakrishna R. 3D breast image registration – a review. Technol Cancer Res Treat 2005; 4:39–48. 1764. Skaane P. [Magnetic tomography of the breast]. Tidsskr Nor Laegeforen 1998; 118:2486–2490. 1765. Skaane P. [Modern technology in the diagnosis of breast diseases – magnetic resonance tomography]. Tidsskr Nor Laegeforen 2000; 120:1399. 1766. Slanetz PJ, Edmister WB, Yeh ED, Talele AC, Kopans DB. Occult contralateral breast carcinoma incidentally detected by breast magnetic resonance imaging. Breast J 2002; 8:145–148. 1767. Smith AP, Hall PA, Marcello DM. Emerging technologies in breast cancer detection. Radiol Manage 2004; 26:16–24; quiz 25–17. 1768. Smith JA, Andreopoulou E. An overview of the status of imaging screening technology for breast cancer. Ann Oncol 2004; 15 Suppl 1:I18-I26. 1769. Smith JP, Hanson J, Dawson J, Porter B, Tickman RJ. Emerging technologies in surgical planning for breast cancer. Am J Surg 2002; 184:377–379. 1770. Smith LF, Henry-Tillman R, Harms S, et al. Hematoma-directed ultrasound-guided breast biopsy. Ann Surg 2001; 233:669–675. 1771. Smith LF, Henry-Tillman R, Mancino AT, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging-guided core needle biopsy and needle localized excision of occult breast lesions. Am J Surg 2001; 182:414–418. 1772. Smith M, Allison K, Shaw de Paredes E. Nonmammographic evaluation of the extent of breast carcinoma. Semin Ultrasound CT MR 2006; 27:308–319. 1773. Smith RA. The evolving role of MRI in the detection and evaluation of breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2007; 356:1362–1364. 1774. Snow RD, Dyess DL, Harpen MD, Kreisberg CN, Tucker JA. Dynamic magnetic resonance imaging in evaluating suspicious breast lesions: correlation with pathologic findings. South Med J 1998; 91:527–532. 1775. Soderstrom CE, Harms SE, Copit DS, et al. Three-dimensional RODEO breast MR imaging of lesions containing ductal carcinoma in situ. Radiology 1996; 201:427–432. 1776. Soderstrom CE, Harms SE, Farrell RS, Jr., Pruneda JM, Flamig DP. Detection with MR imaging of residual tumor in the breast soon after surgery. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1997; 168:485–488. 1777. Soeda H. [Current state of breast tumors imaging]. Nippon Hoshasen Gijutsu Gakkai Zasshi 2002; 58:1311–1319. 1778. Sohn C. [The advantages of spatial, three-dimensional ultrasound imaging in clinical application]. Bildgebung 1994; 61:87–94. 1779. Solomenina RI, Kondrat’eva MA, Lamash NN. [Capacities of contrast enhancement magnetic resonance imaging versus X-ray and ultrasound studies in the detection of enlarged axillary lymph nodes in breast diseases]. Vestn Rentgenol Radiol 2006:35–37. 1780. Solomon B, Orel S, Reynolds C, Schnall M. Delayed development of enhancement in fat necrosis after breast conservation therapy: a potential pitfall of MR imaging of the breast. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1998; 170:966–968. 1781. Song HK, Dougherty L. Dynamic MRI with projection reconstruction and KWIC processing for simultaneous high spatial and temporal resolution. Magn Reson Med 2004; 52:815–824. 1782. Song HK, Dougherty L, Schnall MD. Simultaneous acquisition of multiple resolution images for dynamic contrast enhanced imaging of the breast. Magn Reson Med 2001; 46:503–509. 1783. Song Y, Constantinescu A, Mason RP. Dynamic breast tumor oximetry: the development of prognostic radiology. Technol Cancer Res Treat 2002; 1:471–478. 1784. Soo MS, Kornguth PJ, Walsh R, et al. Intracapsular implant rupture: MR findings of incomplete shell collapse. J Magn Reson Imaging 1997; 7:724–730. 1785. Soo MS, Kornguth PJ, Walsh R, Elenberger CD, Georgiade GS. Complex radial folds versus subtle signs of intracapsular rupture of breast implants: MR findings with surgical correlation. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1996; 166:1421–1427. 1786. Soo MS, Williford ME. Seromas in the breast: imaging findings. Crit Rev Diagn Imaging 1995; 36:385–440. 1787. Soo MS, Williford ME, Walsh R, Bentley RC, Kornguth PJ. Papillary carcinoma of the breast: imaging findings. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1995; 164:321–326.  

370

1788. Sotome K, Ohnishi T, Miyoshi R, et al. An uncommon case of diabetic mastopathy in type II non-insulin dependent diabetes mellitus. Breast Cancer 2006; 13:205–209. 1789. Sousa J, Sharma RR, Delmendo A, Pawar SJ. Primary orbito-cranial adenoid cystic carcinoma with torcular metastasis: a case report and review of the literature. J Clin Neurosci 2001; 8:173–176. 1790. Sowder LL. The case of the floating injection port. Plast Reconstr Surg 2002; 110:991. 1791. Spatola C, Privitera G. Recurrent intracranial hemangiopericytoma with extracranial and unusual multiple metastases: case report and review of the literature. Tumori 2004; 90:265–268. 1792. Spencer JA, Anderson K, Weston M, Wilkinson N, Hewitt M. Image guided biopsy in the management of cancer of the ovary. Cancer Imaging 2006; 6:144–147. 1793. Spinhoven M, De Schepper A, Jr. Breast implant rupture. Jbr-Btr 2006; 89:146–147. 1794. Stack JP, Redmond OM, Codd MB, Dervan PA, Ennis JT. Breast disease: tissue characterization with Gd-DTPA enhancement profiles. Radiology 1990; 174:491–494. 1795. Stadnik TW, Everaert H, Makkat S, Sacre R, Lamote J, Bourgain C. Breast imaging. Preoperative breast cancer staging: comparison of USPIO-enhanced MR imaging and 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDC) positron emission tomography (PET) imaging for axillary lymph node staging – initial findings. Eur Radiol 2006; 16:2153–2160. 1796. Staff RT, Semple SI, Ahearn TS, Redpath TW. Predicting response using MRI enhancement characteristics when response is determined using change in enhancement pattern: a potential for bias? Breast Cancer Res Treat 2006; 97:111. 1797. Stanton AW, Levick JR, Mortimer PS. Current puzzles presented by postmastectomy oedema (breast cancer related lymphoedema). Vasc Med 1996; 1:213–225. 1798. Stanwell P, Gluch L, Clark D, et al. Specificity of choline metabolites for in vivo diagnosis of breast cancer using 1H MRS at 1.5 T. Eur Radiol 2005; 15:1037–1043. 1799. Starzyk J, Starzyk B, Bartnik-Mikuta A, Urbanowicz W, Dziatkowiak H. [Precocious puberty in girls depending on choriogonadotropin - case reports and literature review]. Endokrynol Diabetol Chor Przemiany Materii Wieku Rozw 2001; 7:27–32. 1800. Starzyk J, Starzyk B, Bartnik-Mikuta A, Urbanowicz W, Dziatkowiak H. Gonadotropin releasing hormone-independent precocious puberty in a 5 year-old girl with suprasellar germ cell tumor secreting beta-hCG and alpha-fetoprotein. J Pediatr Endocrinol Metab 2001; 14:789–796. 1801. Stearns V, Gallagher A, Kleer CG, et al. A pilot study to establish a clinical model to perform phase II studies of breast cancer chemopreventive agents in women at high risk with biomarkers as surrogate endpoints for activity. Clin Cancer Res 2004; 10:8332–8340. 1802. Steeves RA. Hyperthermia in cancer therapy: where are we today and where are we going? Bull N Y Acad Med 1992; 68:341–350. 1803. Stehr KG, Lebeau A, Stehr M, Grantzow R. Fibroadenoma of the breast in an 11-year-old girl. Eur J Pediatr Surg 2004; 14:56–59. 1804. Steinbach BG, Hardt NS, Abbitt PL. Mammography: breast implants – types, complications, and adjacent breast pathology. Curr Probl Diagn Radiol 1993; 22:39–86. 1805. Steinbach BG, Hiskes SK, 2nd, Fitzsimmons JR, Lanier L. Phantom evaluation of imaging modalities for silicone breast implants. Invest Radiol 1992; 27:841–846. 1806. Steinbach LS. „MRI in the detection of malignant infiltration of bone marrow“ – a commentary. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2007; 188:1443–1445. 1807. Steiner P, Schoenenberger AW, Penner EA, et al. [Interactive stereotaxic interventions in superconducting, open 0.5-Tesla MRI tomography]. Rofo 1996; 165:276–280. 1808. Stelling CB. Magnetic resonance imaging and spectroscopy of the breast. Curr Opin Radiol 1990; 2:746–750. 1809. Stelling CB. MR imaging of the breast for cancer evaluation. Current status and future directions. Radiol Clin North Am 1995; 33:1187–1204. 1810. Stelling CB. Breast cancer staging with contrast material-enhanced MR imaging: should it change patient treatment? Radiology 1995; 196:16–18. 1811. Stelling CB, Wang PC, Lieber A, Mattingly SS, Griffen WO, Powell DE. Prototype coil for magnetic resonance imaging of the female breast. Work in progress. Radiology 1985; 154:457–462.  

371

 

a  References

1812. Stemmer SM, Stears JC, Burton BS, Jones RB, Simon JH. White matter changes in patients with breast cancer treated with high-dose chemotherapy and autologous bone marrow support. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 1994; 15:1267–1273. 1813. Stephens T. Ambiguity persists over uses for MR of breast. Diagn Imaging (San Franc) 1993; 15:77–82. 1814. Stets C, Brandt S, Wallis F, Buchmann J, Gilbert FJ, Heywang-Kobrunner SH. Axillary lymph node metastases: a statistical analysis of various parameters in MRI with USPIO. J Magn Reson Imaging 2002; 16:60–68. 1815. Steunebrink M, Schnater JM, Storm RK, van Ingen G, Vegt PA, Plaisier PW. Bilateral axillary metastases of occult breast carcinoma: report of a case with a review of the literature. Breast 2005; 14:165–168. 1816. Stibler H, Gylje H, Uller A. A neurodystrophic syndrome resembling carbohydrate-deficient glycoprotein syndrome type III. Neuropediatrics 1999; 30:90–92. 1817. Stines J. [Breast cancers: abnormalities visible on a single view]. J Radiol 2004; 85:2083–2094. 1818. Stomper PC, Herman S, Klippenstein DL, Winston JS, Budnick RM, Stewart CC. Invasive breast carcinoma: analysis of dynamic magnetic resonance imaging enhancement features and cell proliferative activity determined by DNA S-phase percentage. Cancer 1996; 77:1844–1849. 1819. Stomper PC, Herman S, Klippenstein DL, et al. Suspect breast lesions: findings at dynamic gadolinium-enhanced MR imaging correlated with mammographic and pathologic features. Radiology 1995; 197:387–395. 1820. Stomper PC, Mazurchuk RV, Tsangaris TN. Breast MRI as an adjunct in the diagnosis of a carcinoma partially obscured on mammography. Clin Imaging 1994; 18:195–198. 1821. Stomper PC, Waddell BE, Edge SB, Klippenstein DL. Breast MRI in the Evaluation of Patients with Occult Primary Breast Carcinoma. Breast J 1999; 5:230–234. 1822. Stomper PC, Winston JS, Herman S, Klippenstein DL, Arredondo MA, Blumenson LE. Angiogenesis and dynamic MR imaging gadolinium enhancement of malignant and benign breast lesions. Breast Cancer Res Treat 1997; 45:39–46. 1823. Stomper PC, Winston JS, Herman S, Klippenstein DL, Blumenson LE. Cathepsin D and dynamic magnetic resonance imaging gadolinium enhancement in malignant and benign breast lesions. Clin Cancer Res 1997; 3:559–563. 1824. Stoutjesdijk MJ, Barentsz JO. Prophylactic mastectomy in carriers of BRCA mutations. N Engl J Med 2001; 345:1499; author reply 1499–1500. 1825. Stoutjesdijk MJ, Boetes C, Jager GJ, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging and mammography in women with a hereditary risk of breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 2001; 93:1095–1102. 1826. Stoutjesdijk MJ, Futterer JJ, Boetes C, van Die LE, Jager G, Barentsz JO. Variability in the description of morphologic and contrast enhancement characteristics of breast lesions on magnetic resonance imaging. Invest Radiol 2005; 40:355–362. 1827. Stroman PW, Rolland C, Dufour M, Grondin P, Guidoin RG. Appearance of low signal intensity lines in MRI of silicone breast implants. Biomaterials 1996; 17:983–988. 1828. Stucker DT, Ikeda DM, Hartman AR, et al. New bilateral microcalcifications at mammography in a postlactational woman: case report. Radiology 2000; 217:247–250. 1829. Stueber K. A complication of tissue expander breast reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg 1997; 99:1464–1465. 1830. Styner M, Brechbuhler C, Szekely G, Gerig G. Parametric estimate of intensity inhomogeneities applied to MRI. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 2000; 19:153–165. 1831. Su MY, Baik HM, Yu HJ, Chen JH, Mehta RS, Nalcioglu O. Comparison of choline and pharmacokinetic parameters in breast cancer measured by MR spectroscopic imaging and dynamic contrast enhanced MRI. Technol Cancer Res Treat 2006; 5:401–410. 1832. Su MY, Yu H, Chiou JY, et al. Measurement of volumetric and vascular changes with dynamic contrast enhanced MRI for cancer therapy monitoring. Technol Cancer Res Treat 2002; 1:479–488. 1833. Su MY, Yu HJ, Carpenter PM, McLaren CE, Nalcioglu O. Pharmacokinetic parameters analyzed from mr contrast enhancement kinetics of multiple malignant and benign breast lesions detected in the same patients. Technol Cancer Res Treat 2005; 4:255–263. 1834. Subramanian KR, Brockway JP, Carruthers WB. Interactive detection and visualization of breast lesions from dynamic contrast enhanced MRI volumes. Comput Med Imaging Graph 2004; 28:435–444. 1835. Sudfeld F, Saul F, Hufnagel B, Steeg M, Frenzel H, Losse B. [Lipomatous hypertrophy of the interatrial septum]. Z Kardiol 2000; 89:587–591.  

372

1836. Sueyoshi K, Ogura Y, Komori T, et al. [A case of effective bisphosphonate therapy for bone metastasis from breast cancer with multiorganic metastases]. Gan To Kagaku Ryoho 2002; 29:1795–1799. 1837. Suga K, Yuan Y, Ogasawara N, Okada M, Matsunaga N. Localization of breast sentinel lymph nodes by MR lymphography with a conventional gadolinium contrast agent. Preliminary observations in dogs and humans. Acta Radiol 2003; 44:35–42. 1838. Sugiyama Y, Morifuji M, Tatsumoto N, Sasaki M, Naito H, Kai Y. [A case of occult breast carcinoma with irradiation therapy and axillary lymph node dissection]. Gan To Kagaku Ryoho 2006; 33:1287–1289. 1839. Sun L, Olsen JO, Robitaille PM. Design and optimization of a breast coil for magnetic resonance imaging. Magn Reson Imaging 1993; 11:73–80. 1840. Sun Y, Yan CH, Ong SH, Tan ET, Wang SC. Intensity-based volumetric registration of contrast-enhanced MR breast images. Med Image Comput Comput Assist Interv Int Conf Med Image Comput Comput Assist Interv 2006; 9:671–678. 1841. Sundararajan S, Tohno E, Kamma H, Ueno E, Minami M. Detection of intraductal component around invasive breast cancer using ultrasound: correlation with MRI and histopathological findings. Radiat Med 2006; 24:108–114. 1842. Suominen S, Asko-Seljavaara S, Kinnunen J, Sainio P, Alaranta H. Abdominal wall competence after free transverse rectus abdominis musculocutaneous flap harvest: a prospective study. Ann Plast Surg 1997; 39:229–234. 1843. Suominen S, Tervahartiala P, von Smitten K, Asko-Seljavaara S. Magnetic resonance imaging of the TRAM flap donor site. Ann Plast Surg 1997; 38:23–28. 1844. Surry KJ, Austin HJ, Fenster A, Peters TM. Poly(vinyl alcohol) cryogel phantoms for use in ultrasound and MR imaging. Phys Med Biol 2004; 49:5529–5546. 1845. Suryanarayanan R, Dezso A, Ramsden RT, Gillespie JE. Metastatic carcinoma mimicking a facial nerve schwannoma: the role of computerized tomography in diagnosis. J Laryngol Otol 2005; 119:1010–1012. 1846. Suzuma T, Sakurai T, Yoshimura G, et al. Magnetic resonance axillography for preoperative diagnosis of the axillopectoral muscle (Langer’s axillary arch): a case report. Breast Cancer 2003; 10:281–283. 1847. Suzuma T, Sakurai T, Yoshimura G, et al. MR-axillography oriented surgical sampling for assessment of nodal status in the selection of patients with breast cancer for axillary lymph nodes dissection. Breast Cancer 2002; 9:69–74. 1848. Sweeney KJ, Sacchini V. MRI evaluation of breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2007; 357:192; author reply 193. 1849. Szabo BK, Aspelin P, Kristoffersen Wiberg M, Tot T, Bone B. Invasive breast cancer: correlation of dynamic MR features with prognostic factors. Eur Radiol 2003; 13:2425–2435. 1850. Szabo BK, Aspelin P, Wiberg MK. Neural network approach to the segmentation and classification of dynamic magnetic resonance images of the breast: comparison with empiric and quantitative kinetic parameters. Acad Radiol 2004; 11:1344–1354. 1851. Szabo BK, Aspelin P, Wiberg MK, Bone B. Dynamic MR imaging of the breast. Analysis of kinetic and morphologic diagnostic criteria. Acta Radiol 2003; 44:379–386. 1852. Szabo BK, Wiberg MK, Bone B, Aspelin P. Application of artificial neural networks to the analysis of dynamic MR imaging features of the breast. Eur Radiol 2004; 14:1217–1225. 1853. Tahsildar HI, Remler BF, Creger RJ, et al. Delayed, transient encephalopathy after marrow transplantation: case reports and MRI findings in four patients. J Neurooncol 1996; 27:241–250. 1854. Taieb S, Ceugnart L, Chevalier A, et al. [Value of MRI in symptomatic patients treated with tamoxifen]. J Radiol 2003; 84:33–39. 1855. Takeda Y, Yoshikawa K. Contrast-enhanced dynamic MR imaging parameters and histological types of invasive ductal carcinoma of breast. Biomed Pharmacother 2005; 59:115–121. 1856. Takehara M, Tamura M, Kameda H, Ogita M. Examination of breast conserving therapy in lobular carcinoma. Breast Cancer 2004; 11:69–72. 1857. Talele AC, Slanetz PJ, Edmister WB, Yeh ED, Kopans DB. The lactating breast: MRI findings and literature review. Breast J 2003; 9:237–240. 1858. Talmor M, Rothaus KO, Shannahan E, Cortese AF, Hoffman LA. Squamous cell carcinoma of the breast after augmentation with liquid silicone injection. Ann Plast Surg 1995; 34:619–623. 1859. Tan JE, Orel SG, Schnall MD, Schultz DJ, Solin LJ. Role of magnetic resonance imaging and magnetic resonance imaging – guided surgery in the evaluation of patients with early-stage breast cancer for breast conservation treatment. Am J Clin Oncol 1999; 22:414–418.  

373

 

a  References

1860. Tan PH, Lai LM, Carrington EV, et al. Fat necrosis of the breast – a review. Breast 2006; 15:313–318. 1861. Tang AP, Chu WC, Lam WW, Tse GM. Radiological appearance of postirradiation sarcoma of the chest wall after mastectomy. Clin Imaging 2005; 29:185–188. 1862. Tanimoto A, Wakabayashi G, Shinmoto H, Nakatsuka S, Okuda S, Kuribayashi S. Superparamagnetic iron oxideenhanced MR imaging for focal hepatic lesions: a comparison with CT during arterioportography plus CT during hepatic arteriography. J Gastroenterol 2005; 40:371–380. 1863. Tanner C, Schnabel JA, Hill DL, et al. Quantitative evaluation of free-form deformation registration for dynamic contrast-enhanced MR mammography. Med Phys 2007; 34:1221–1233. 1864. Taourel P, Prat X, Boulet P, Valmorin J, Pujol J. [Breast magnetic resonance imaging and breast cancer]. Gynecol Obstet Fertil 2001; 29:249–253. 1865. Tardif-de Gery ST, Zagdanski AM, Merzoug V, et al. [Role of MRI in the diagnosis of breast diseases]. Presse Med 2000; 29:1145–1153. 1866. Tardivon A, Athanasiou A, Ollivier L, Neuenschwander S. [Indications of MRI in the initial local staging of earlystage breast cancer]. Gynecol Obstet Fertil 2007; 35:457–463. 1867. Tardivon AA, Athanasiou A, Thibault F, El Khoury C. Breast imaging and reporting data system (BIRADS): magnetic resonance imaging. Eur J Radiol 2007; 61:212–215. 1868. Tardivon AA, Guinebretiere JM, Dromain C, Vanel D. Imaging and management of nonpalpable lesions of the breast. Eur J Radiol 2002; 42:2–9. 1869. Tardivon AA, Ollivier L, El Khoury C, Thibault F. Monitoring therapeutic efficacy in breast carcinomas. Eur Radiol 2006; 16:2549–2558. 1870. Tark KC, Jeong HS, Roh TS, Choi JW. Analysis of 30 breast implant rupture cases. Aesthetic Plast Surg 2005; 29:460–469; discussion 470–461. 1871. Tausig A, Manthey N, Berger F, Sommer H, Pfluger T, Hahn K. [Advantages and limitations of whole-body bone marrow MRI using Turbo-STIR sequences in comparison to planar bone scans]. Nuklearmedizin 2000; 39:174–179. 1872. Teifke A, Behr O, Schmidt M, et al. Dynamic MR imaging of breast lesions: correlation with microvessel distribution pattern and histologic characteristics of prognosis. Radiology 2006; 239:351–360. 1873. Teifke A, Hlawatsch A, Beier T, et al. Undetected malignancies of the breast: dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging at 1.0 T. Radiology 2002; 224:881–888. 1874. Teifke A, Lehr HA, Vomweg TW, Hlawatsch A, Thelen M. Outcome analysis and rational management of enhancing lesions incidentally detected on contrast-enhanced MRI of the breast. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2003; 181:655–662. 1875. Teifke A, Vomweg TW, Hlawatsch A, et al. [Second reading of breast imaging at the hospital department of radiology: reasonable or waste of money?]. Rofo 2006; 178:330–336. 1876. Tello R, Fenlon HM, Gagliano T, deCarvalho VL, Yucel EK. Prediction rule for characterization of hepatic lesions revealed on MR imaging: estimation of malignancy. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2001; 176:879–884. 1877. Terae S, Yoshida D, Kudo K, Tha KK, Fujino M, Miyasaka K. Contrast-enhanced FLAIR imaging in combination with pre- and postcontrast magnetization transfer T1-weighted imaging: usefulness in the evaluation of brain metastases. J Magn Reson Imaging 2007; 25:479–487. 1878. Terao E, Takeuchi H, Iwamura A, Murakami Y, Harada J, Tada S. [Ability of subtraction and dynamic MR imaging to detect breast tumors: comparison with ultrasonography and mammography]. Nippon Igaku Hoshasen Gakkai Zasshi 1994; 54:950–957. 1879. Terashima M, Ogawa Y, Kariya S, et al. Breast-conservation treatment for patients with ductal carcinoma in situ. Oncol Rep 2000; 7:1247–1252. 1880. Testa A, Patrizio G, Beomonte Zobel B, et al. [MR characterization of breast pathology using inversion recovery sequence]. Radiol Med (Torino) 1989; 78:329–334. 1881. Testempassi E, Ishi C, Yamada T, Fukuda K, Tada S, Nikaido T. Case report: breast hamartoma: MR findings. Radiat Med 1995; 13:187–189. 1882. Teuber SS, Reilly DA, Howell L, Oide C, Gershwin ME. Severe migratory granulomatous reactions to silicone gel in 3 patients. J Rheumatol 1999; 26:699–704. 1883. Tez S, Dener C. Breast carcinoma in women age 25 years or less. Cancer 2003; 97:714; author reply 715. 1884. Theilmann RJ, Borders R, Trouard TP, et al. Changes in water mobility measured by diffusion MRI predict response of metastatic breast cancer to chemotherapy. Neoplasia 2004; 6:831–837.  

374

1885. Thibault F, Benamor M, Tardivon A. [Breast cancer: atlas]. Rev Prat 2004; 54:837–838, 840. 1886. Thibault F, Hagay C, Boyer B. [Breast imaging]. J Radiol 2004; 85:942–950. 1887. Thibault F, Nos C, Meunier M, et al. MRI for surgical planning in patients with breast cancer who undergo preoperative chemotherapy. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2004; 183:1159–1168. 1888. Thiele J, Schneider JP, Franke P, Lieberenz S, Schmidt F. [New method of MR-guided mammary biopsy]. Rofo 1998; 168:374–379. 1889. Thilmann C, Zabel A, Kuhn S, et al. [Inversely planned intensity modulated radiotherapy for irradiation of a woman with breast cancer and funnel chest]. Strahlenther Onkol 2002; 178:637–643. 1890. Thomas MA, Wyckoff N, Yue K, et al. Two-dimensional MR spectroscopic characterization of breast cancer in vivo. Technol Cancer Res Treat 2005; 4:99–106. 1891. Tilanus-Linthorst M, Verhoog L, Obdeijn IM, et al. A BRCA1/2 mutation, high breast density and prominent pushing margins of a tumor independently contribute to a frequent false-negative mammography. Int J Cancer 2002; 102:91–95. 1892. Tilanus-Linthorst MM, Bartels CC, Obdeijn AI, Oudkerk M. Earlier detection of breast cancer by surveillance of women at familial risk. Eur J Cancer 2000; 36:514–519. 1893. Tilanus-Linthorst MM, Kriege M, Boetes C, et al. Hereditary breast cancer growth rates and its impact on screening policy. Eur J Cancer 2005; 41:1610–1617. 1894. Tilanus-Linthorst MM, Obdeijn AI, Bontenbal M, Oudkerk M. MRI in patients with axillary metastases of occult breast carcinoma. Breast Cancer Res Treat 1997; 44:179–182. 1895. Tilanus-Linthorst MM, Obdeijn AI, Oudkerk M. [Expectant management concerning the breast in 5 patients with occult breast carcinoma]. Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd 1996; 140:283. 1896. Tilanus-Linthorst MM, Obdeijn IM, Bartels KC. MARIBS study. Lancet 2005; 366:291–292. 1897. Tilanus-Linthorst MM, Obdeijn IM, Bartels KC, de Koning HJ, Oudkerk M. First experiences in screening women at high risk for breast cancer with MR imaging. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2000; 63:53–60. 1898. Tiling R, Kessler M, Untch M, et al. Breast cancer: monitoring response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy using Tc-99m sestamibi scintimammography. Onkologie 2003; 26:27–31. 1899. Tiling R, Kessler M, Untch M, Sommer H, Linke R, Hahn K. Initial evaluation of breast cancer using Tc-99m sestamibi scintimammography. Eur J Radiol 2005; 53:206–212. 1900. Tiling R, Khalkhali I, Sommer H, et al. Limited value of scintimammography and contrast-enhanced MRI in the evaluation of microcalcification detected by mammography. Nucl Med Commun 1998; 19:55–62. 1901. Tillman GF, Orel SG, Schnall MD, Schultz DJ, Tan JE, Solin LJ. Effect of breast magnetic resonance imaging on the clinical management of women with early-stage breast carcinoma. J Clin Oncol 2002; 20:3413–3423. 1902. Tiwary SK, Singh MK, Prasad R, Sharma D, Kumar M, Shukla VK. Primary angiosarcoma of the breast. Surgery 2007; 141:821–822. 1903. Tjalma WA, Senten LL. The management of ectopic breast cancer – case report. Eur J Gynaecol Oncol 2006; 27:414–416. 1904. Tjalma WA, Verslegers IO. Nipple discharge and the value of MR imaging. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2004; 115:234–236. 1905. Tjalma WA, Verslegers IO. Suspicious nipple discharge and breast magnetic resonance imaging. Breast J 2004; 10:65–66; author reply 66. 1906. Tochika N, Takano A, Yoshimoto T, et al. Intracystic carcinoma of the male breast: report of a case. Surg Today 2001; 31:806–809. 1907. Tofts PS, Berkowitz B, Schnall MD. Quantitative analysis of dynamic Gd-DTPA enhancement in breast tumors using a permeability model. Magn Reson Med 1995; 33:564–568. 1908. Tomanek B, Hoult DI, Chen X, Gordon R. Probe with chest shielding for improved breast MRI. Magn Reson Med 2000; 43:917–920. 1909. Tomczak R, Rieber A, Zeitler H, Rilinger N, Kreienberg R, Brambs HJ. [The value of MR-mammography at 1.5 tesla in the differential diagnosis of non-puerperal mastitis and inflammatory breast carcinoma]. Rofo 1996; 165:148–151. 1910. Tomkovich KR. Breast interventions: a primer for interventional radiologists. Tech Vasc Interv Radiol 2006; 9:30–35. 1911. Tonseth KA, Stubberud K, Tindholdt TT. [Breast implants and radiology]. Tidsskr Nor Laegeforen 2004; 124:1422.  

375

 

a  References

1912. Topping A, George C, Wilson G. Appropriateness of MRI scanning in the detection of ruptured implants used for breast reconstruction. Br J Plast Surg 2003; 56:186–189. 1913. Torheim G, Godtliebsen F, Axelson D, Kvistad KA, Haraldseth O, Rinck PA. Feature extraction and classification of dynamic contrast-enhanced T2*-weighted breast image data. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 2001; 20:1293–1301. 1914. Tosteson AN, Weinstein MC, Wittenberg J, Begg CB. ROC curve regression analysis: the use of ordinal regression models for diagnostic test assessment. Environ Health Perspect 1994; 102 Suppl 8:73–78. 1915. Touraine P, Youssef N, Alyanakian MA, et al. Breast inflammatory gigantomastia in a context of immune-mediated diseases. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2005; 90:5287–5294. 1916. Tozaki M. Interpretation of breast MRI: correlation of kinetic and morphological parameters with pathological findings. Magn Reson Med Sci 2004; 3:189–197. 1917. Tozaki M, Fukuda K. High-spatial-resolution MRI of non-masslike breast lesions: interpretation model based on BI-RADS MRI descriptors. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2006; 187:330–337. 1918. Tozaki M, Fukuda K. Supine MR mammography using VIBE with parallel acquisition technique for the planning of breast-conserving surgery: clinical feasibility. Breast 2006; 15:137–140. 1919. Tozaki M, Fukuda K, Suzuki M. Dynamic high-spatial-resolution MR imaging of invasive ductal carcinoma: influence of histological scirrhous component on MR descriptors. Magn Reson Med Sci 2006; 5:137–146. 1920. Tozaki M, Fukuda Y, Fukuda K. [Multi-section magnetic susceptibility perfusion echo-planar imaging of the breast]. Nippon Igaku Hoshasen Gakkai Zasshi 2003; 63:214–220. 1921. Tozaki M, Igarashi T, Fukuda K. Breast MRI using the VIBE sequence: clustered ring enhancement in the differential diagnosis of lesions showing non-masslike enhancement. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2006; 187:313–321. 1922. Tozaki M, Igarashi T, Fukuda K. Positive and negative predictive values of BI-RADS-MRI descriptors for focal breast masses. Magn Reson Med Sci 2006; 5:7–15. 1923. Tozaki M, Igarashi T, Matsushima S, Fukuda K. High-spatial-resolution MR imaging of focal breast masses: interpretation model based on kinetic and morphological parameters. Radiat Med 2005; 23:43–50. 1924. Tozaki M, Uno S, Kobayashi T, et al. Histologic breast cancer extent after neoadjuvant chemotherapy: comparison with multidetector-row CT and dynamic MRI. Radiat Med 2004; 22:246–253. 1925. Trecate G, Ceglia E, Stabile F, et al. [Locally advanced breast tumors. Role of magnetic resonance in the assessment of response to preoperative therapy and of neoplastic residue before the operation]. Radiol Med (Torino) 1998; 95:449–455. 1926. Trecate G, Ceglia E, Stabile F, et al. Locally advanced breast cancer treated with primary chemotherapy: comparison between magnetic resonance imaging and pathologic evaluation of residual disease. Tumori 1999; 85:220–228. 1927. Trecate G, Tess JD, Vergnaghi D, et al. Breast microcalcifications studied with 3D contrast-enhanced high-field magnetic resonance imaging: more accuracy in the diagnosis of breast cancer. Tumori 2002; 88:224–233. 1928. Trecate G, Tess JD, Vergnaghi D, et al. Lobular breast cancer: how useful is breast magnetic resonance imaging? Tumori 2001; 87:232–238. 1929. Trecate G, Vergnaghi D, Bergonzi S, et al. BMRI in early detection of breast cancer in patients with increased genetic risk: our preliminary results. J Exp Clin Cancer Res 2002; 21:125–130. 1930. Trecate G, Vergnaghi D, Bergonzi S, et al. Breast MRI screening in patients with increased familial and/or genetic risk for breast cancer: a preliminary experience. Tumori 2003; 89:125–131. 1931. Trecate G, Vergnaghi D, Manoukian S, et al. MRI in the early detection of breast cancer in women with high genetic risk. Tumori 2006; 92:517–523. 1932. Tritchler D. Interpreting the standardized difference. Biometrics 1995; 51:351–353. 1933. Trop I, David J, Lalonde L. Breast cancer staging: the role of the radiologist. Can Assoc Radiol J 2005; 56:324–331. 1934. Troufleau P, Chevrier-Fraboulet B, Noel A, Stines J. [Breast imaging]. J Radiol 2005; 86:848–858. 1935. Tse GM, Chaiwun B, Wong KT, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging of breast lesions-a pathologic correlation. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2007; 103:1–10. 1936. Tsenov D. [Current diagnostic methods in breast pathology]. Akush Ginekol (Sofiia) 2000; 39 Suppl 1:11–12. 1937. Tsuboi N, Ogawa Y, Inomata T, et al. Dynamic MR appearance of adenoid cystic carcinoma of the breast in a 67-yearold female. Radiat Med 1998; 16:225–228. 1938. Tsuboi N, Ogawa Y, Inomata T, et al. Changes in the findings of dynamic MRI by preoperative CAF chemotherapy for patients with breast cancer of stage II and III: pathologic correlation. Oncol Rep 1999; 6:727–732.  

376

1939. Tsuchiya J, Nagata T, Kawagoe H, et al. Preoperative Diagnosis of Breast Diseases by Dynamic MR Mammography: Cut-off Point Establishment for Signal Intensity Ratio. Breast Cancer 1998; 5:155–164. 1940. Tsyb AF, Tlepshukov GK. [Current methods of imaging in the diagnosis of breast cancer]. Vopr Onkol 1989; 35:387–395. 1941. Tukel S, Dogan BE, Ozcan H. Alveolar rhabdomyosarcoma metastatic to the breast. Curr Probl Diagn Radiol 2003; 32:102–104. 1942. Tukel S, Erden I, Ciftci E, Kocak S. Hydatid cyst of the breast: MR imaging findings. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1997; 168:1386–1387. 1943. Tuncali D, Ozgur F. Spontaneous autoinflation of saline-filled mammary implants: postoperative volume determination by magnetic resonance imaging. Aesthetic Plast Surg 1999; 23:437–442. 1944. Tuncbilek N, Karakas HM, Okten O. Diabetic fibrous mastopathy: dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging findings. Breast J 2004; 10:359–362. 1945. Tuncbilek N, Karakas HM, Okten OO. Dynamic magnetic resonance imaging in determining histopathological prognostic factors of invasive breast cancers. Eur J Radiol 2005; 53:199–205. 1946. Tuncbilek N, Unlu E, Karakas HM, Cakir B, Ozyilmaz F. Evaluation of tumor angiogenesis with contrast-enhanced dynamic magnetic resonance mammography. Breast J 2003; 9:403–408. 1947. Turetschek K, Floyd E, Helbich T, et al. MRI assessment of microvascular characteristics in experimental breast tumors using a new blood pool contrast agent (MS-325) with correlations to histopathology. J Magn Reson Imaging 2001; 14:237–242. 1948. Turetschek K, Floyd E, Shames DM, et al. Assessment of a rapid clearance blood pool MR contrast medium (P792) for assays of microvascular characteristics in experimental breast tumors with correlations to histopathology. Magn Reson Med 2001; 45:880–886. 1949. Turetschek K, Huber S, Floyd E, et al. MR imaging characterization of microvessels in experimental breast tumors by using a particulate contrast agent with histopathologic correlation. Radiology 2001; 218:562–569. 1950. Turetschek K, Huber S, Helbich T, et al. Dynamic MRI enhanced with albumin-(Gd-DTPA)30 or ultrasmall superparamagnetic iron oxide particles (NC100150 injection) for the measurement of microvessel permeability in experimental breast tumors. Acad Radiol 2002; 9 Suppl 1:S112–114. 1951. Turetschek K, Preda A, Floyd E, et al. MRI monitoring of tumor response following angiogenesis inhibition in an experimental human breast cancer model. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2003; 30:448–455. 1952. Turetschek K, Preda A, Novikov V, et al. Tumor microvascular changes in antiangiogenic treatment: assessment by magnetic resonance contrast media of different molecular weights. J Magn Reson Imaging 2004; 20:138–144. 1953. Turetschek K, Roberts TP, Floyd E, et al. Tumor microvascular characterization using ultrasmall superparamagnetic iron oxide particles (USPIO) in an experimental breast cancer model. J Magn Reson Imaging 2001; 13:882–888. 1954. Turkat TJ, Klein BD, Polan RL, Richman RH. Dynamic MR mammography: a technique for potentially reducing the biopsy rate for benign breast disease. J Magn Reson Imaging 1994; 4:563–568. 1955. Turnbull LW, Kean DM. Tumour identification using magnetic resonance imaging. Cancer Surv 1987; 6:343–359. 1956. Turner DA. MR spectroscopy and imaging of breast cancer. A brief history. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 1994; 2:505–510. 1957. Turner DA, Alcorn FS, Adler YT. Nuclear magnetic resonance in the diagnosis of breast cancer. Radiol Clin North Am 1988; 26:673–687. 1958. Turner DA, Alcorn FS, Shorey WD, et al. Carcinoma of the breast: detection with MR imaging versus xeromammography. Radiology 1988; 168:49–58. 1959. Turoglu HT, Janjan NA, Thorsen MK, et al. Imaging of regional spread of breast cancer by internal mammary lymphoscintigraphy, CT, and MRI. Clin Nucl Med 1992; 17:482–484. 1960. Twellmann T, Lichte O, Nattkemper TW. An adaptive tissue characterization network for model-free visualization of dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance image data. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 2005; 24:1256–1266. 1961. Twellmann T, Saalbach A, Gerstung O, Leach MO, Nattkemper TW. Image fusion for dynamic contrast enhanced magnetic resonance imaging. Biomed Eng Online 2004; 3:35. 1962. Twellmann T, Saalbach A, Muller C, Nattkemper TW, Wismuller A. Detection of suspicious lesions in dynamic contrast enhanced MRI data. Conf Proc IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc 2004; 1:454–457.  

377

 

a  References

1963. Tzacheva AA, Najarian K, Brockway JP. Breast cancer detection in gadolinium-enhanced MR images by static region descriptors and neural networks. J Magn Reson Imaging 2003; 17:337–342. 1964. Uchikoshi M, Ueda T, Nishiki S, et al. [Usefulness of 3D-VIBE method in breast dynamic MRI: imaging parameters and contrasting effects]. Nippon Hoshasen Gijutsu Gakkai Zasshi 2003; 59:759–764. 1965. Uchino M, Kitajima S, Miyazaki C, Otsuka T, Seiki Y, Shibata I. [Peritumoral hemorrhage immediately after radiosurgery for metastatic brain tumor]. No Shinkei Geka 2003; 31:911–916. 1966. Udelnow A, Leinung S, Dannenberg C, et al. [A giant malignant tumour of the skull-Case report and differential diagnosis]. Zentralbl Chir 2002; 127:243–245. 1967. Uematsu T, Sano M, Homma K, Shiina M, Kobayashi S. Three-dimensional helical CT of the breast: accuracy for measuring extent of breast cancer candidates for breast conserving surgery. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2001; 65:249–257. 1968. Uematsu T, Yuen S, Kasami M, Uchida Y. Dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging in screening detected microcalcification lesions of the breast: is there any value? Breast Cancer Res Treat 2007; 103:269–281. 1969. Ukovich W, Gozzi G, Stacul F, Cova MA, Vasciaveo A, Fabbro G. [The definition and realization of a computerized archive for radiological data of scientific interest]. Radiol Med (Torino) 1990; 79:233–238. 1970. Umemura A, Takagi T, Nagai H. [A case of intracranial hemorrhage in a young infant due to vitamin K deficiency: comparison of MRI and CT findings]. No To Hattatsu 1989; 21:385–389. 1971. Umschaden HW, Haselbach H. [MR mammography: current status and indications]. Acta Med Austriaca 1997; 24:39–45. 1972. Unterweger M, Huch Boni RA, Caduff R, Hebisch G, Krestin GP. [Inflammatory breast carcinoma versus puerperal mastitis. Difficulties in differentiation based on clinical, histological and MRI findings]. Rofo 1997; 166:558–560. 1973. Unterweger M, Meuli-Simmen C, Caduff R, Kubik-Huch RA. [Breast imaging after augmentation with homologous adipose tissue implant]. Schweiz Rundsch Med Prax 2000; 89:894–896. 1974. Upponi SS, Warren RM. The diagnostic impact of contrast-enhanced MRI in management of breast disease. Breast 2006; 15:736–743. 1975. Uzan S, Gaudet R. [Breast cancer: epidemiology, pathological anatomy, detection, diagnosis, course, principles of the treatment]. Rev Prat 1998; 48:787–796. 1976. Vadala R, Polito R, Fiorucci C, Costantini M, Romani M, Belli P. A case of primary breast lymphoma. Rays 2005; 30:233–237. 1977. Vaidya A, Sun Y, Ke T, Jeong EK, Lu ZR. Contrast enhanced MRI-guided photodynamic therapy for site-specific cancer treatment. Magn Reson Med 2006; 56:761–767. 1978. Vaidya JS, Hall-Craggs M, Baum M, et al. Percutaneous minimally invasive stereotactic primary radiotherapy for breast cancer. Lancet Oncol 2002; 3:252–253. 1979. Valery CA, Seilhean D, Boyer O, et al. Long-term survival after gene therapy for a recurrent glioblastoma. Neurology 2002; 58:1109–1112. 1980. Valery Ch A, Noel G, Duyme M, et al. [First-line radiosurgery of brain metastases. Interest and results of reduced dose]. Neurochirurgie 2004; 50:11–20. 1981. van Asperen CJ, de Bock GH, van der Horst F, de Koning HJ, Rutgers EJ. [Screening for breast cancer on basis of individual risk assessment for women ineligible for the national population screening program]. Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd 2001; 145:120–125. 1982. van Beek AJ, Bleker RJ. [Expectant management concerning the breast in 5 patients with occult breast carcinoma]. Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd 1995; 139:2514. 1983. van den Bosch MA, Daniel BL, Mariano MN, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging characteristics of fibrocystic change of the breast. Invest Radiol 2005; 40:436–441. 1984. van den Bosch MA, Daniel BL, Pal S, et al. MRI-guided needle localization of suspicious breast lesions: results of a freehand technique. Eur Radiol 2006; 16:1811–1817. 1985. van den Bosch MA, Guit GL, van Waes PF. [Concealed local recurrence after breast-conserving treatment]. Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd 2002; 146:1959–1960; author reply 1960. 1986. Van den Bosch MA, Ikeda DM, Daniel BL. Does size matter? Likelihood of cancer in MRI-detected lesions less than 5 mm. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2007; 188:W571.  

378

1987. van den Brink JS, Watanabe Y, Kuhl CK, et al. Implications of SENSE MR in routine clinical practice. Eur J Radiol 2003; 46:3–27. 1988. van Dijke CF, Mann JS, Rosenau W, et al. Comparison of MR contrast-enhancing properties of albumin-(biotin)10(gadopentetate)25, a macromolecular MR blood pool contrast agent, and its microscopic distribution. Acad Radiol 2002; 9 Suppl 1:S257–260. 1989. van Engeland S, Snoeren PR, Huisman H, Boetes C, Karssemeijer N. Volumetric breast density estimation from fullfield digital mammograms. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 2006; 25:273–282. 1990. Van Goethem M, Biltjes IG, De Schepper AM. Indications for MR mammography. A Belgian study. Jbr-Btr 2000; 83:126–129. 1991. Van Goethem M, Schelfout K, Dijckmans L, et al. MR mammography in the pre-operative staging of breast cancer in patients with dense breast tissue: comparison with mammography and ultrasound. Eur Radiol 2004; 14:809–816. 1992. Van Goethem M, Schelfout K, Jacobs W, et al. MR mammography of a primary squamous cell carcinoma of the breast: a case report. Breast 2003; 12:212–214. 1993. Van Goethem M, Schelfout K, Kersschot E, et al. MR mammography is useful in the preoperative locoregional staging of breast carcinomas with extensive intraductal component. Eur J Radiol 2007; 62:273–282. 1994. Van Goethem M, Schelfout K, Kersschot E, et al. Enhancing area surrounding breast carcinoma on MR mammography: comparison with pathological examination. Eur Radiol 2004; 14:1363–1370. 1995. Van Goethem M, Schelfout K, Kersschot E, et al. Comparison of MRI features of different grades of DCIS and invasive carcinoma of the breast. Jbr-Btr 2005; 88:225–232. 1996. Van Goethem M, Tjalma W, Schelfout K, Verslegers I, Biltjes I, Parizel P. Magnetic resonance imaging in breast cancer. Eur J Surg Oncol 2006; 32:901–910. 1997. Van Goethem M, Van Breusegem L, Ceulemans R, De Schepper A, de Moor J. [Infraclinical breast carcinoma]. J Belge Radiol 1995; 78:6–10. 1998. Van Houten EE, Doyley MM, Kennedy FE, Weaver JB, Paulsen KD. Initial in vivo experience with steady-state subzone-based MR elastography of the human breast. J Magn Reson Imaging 2003; 17:72–85. 1999. Van Houten EE, Miga MI, Weaver JB, Kennedy FE, Paulsen KD. Three-dimensional subzone-based reconstruction algorithm for MR elastography. Magn Reson Med 2001; 45:827–837. 2000. Van Houten EE, Paulsen KD, Miga MI, Kennedy FE, Weaver JB. An overlapping subzone technique for MR-based elastic property reconstruction. Magn Reson Med 1999; 42:779–786. 2001. Van Ongeval C. MR imaging of the breast – present indications. Jbr-Btr 2000; 83:80–84. 2002. Van Ongeval C, Schraepen T, Van Steen A, Baert AL, Moerman P. Idiopathic granulomatous mastitis. Eur Radiol 1997; 7:1010–1012. 2003. van Rijk MC, Nieweg OE, Valdes Olmos RA, Rutgers EJ, Hoefnagel CA, Kroon BB. Non-axillary breast cancer recurrences after sentinel node biopsy. J Surg Oncol 2005; 92:292–298. 2004. Vanel D, Tardivon A. [Magnetic resonance imaging of the breast]. J Radiol 1995; 76:1067. 2005. Varga L, Botos A, Minik K. Difficulties in early diagnosis and treatment of uncommon breast tumours. Acta Chir Hung 1997; 36:375–377. 2006. Vasanawala SS, Pauly JM, Nishimura DG. Fluctuating equilibrium MRI. Magn Reson Med 1999; 42:876–883. 2007. Vaughan JT, Adriany G, Snyder CJ, et al. Efficient high-frequency body coil for high-field MRI. Magn Reson Med 2004; 52:851–859. 2008. Vedantham S, Karellas A, Suryanarayanan S, et al. Full breast digital mammography with an amorphous silicon-based flat panel detector: physical characteristics of a clinical prototype. Med Phys 2000; 27:558–567. 2009. Vedantham S, Karellas A, Suryanarayanan S, et al. Mammographic imaging with a small format CCD-based digital cassette: physical characteristics of a clinical system. Med Phys 2000; 27:1832–1840. 2010. Velasco M, Santamaria G, Ganau S, et al. MRI of metaplastic carcinoma of the breast. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2005; 184:1274–1278. 2011. Veltman J, Boetes C, Wobbes T, Blickman JG, Barentsz JO. Magnetic resonance-guided biopsies and localizations of the breast: initial experiences using an open breast coil and compatible intervention device. Invest Radiol 2005; 40:379–384. 2012. Venat-Bouvet L, Desfougeres M, Aubard Y, et al. [MRI evaluation of primary chemotherapy response in breast cancer]. Bull Cancer 2004; 91:721–728.  

379

 

a  References

2013. Ventz M, Puhlmann B, Knappe G, Gerl H, Lehmann R, Rohde W. [Pregnancy in hyperprolactinemic patients]. Zentralbl Gynakol 1996; 118:610–615. 2014. Vergnaghi D, Monti A, Setti E, Musumeci R. A use of a neural network to evaluate contrast enhancement curves in breast magnetic resonance images. J Digit Imaging 2001; 14:58–59. 2015. Veronesi U, Boyle P, Goldhirsch A, Orecchia R, Viale G. Breast cancer. Lancet 2005; 365:1727–1741. 2016. Verslegers I, Tjalma W, Van Goethem M, et al. Massive infarction of a recurrent phyllodes tumor of the breast: MRIfindings. Jbr-Btr 2004; 87:21–22. 2017. Videnovic A, Semenov I, Chua-Adajar R, et al. Capecitabine-induced multifocal leukoencephalopathy: a report of five cases. Neurology 2005; 65:1792–1794; discussion 1685. 2018. Viehweg P, Bernerth T, Heinig A, et al. MR-guided intervention in women at high hereditary risk of breast cancer due to both family and personal history of breast cancer. Breast J 2006; 12:549–558. 2019. Viehweg P, Bernerth T, Kiechle M, et al. MR-guided intervention in women with a family history of breast cancer. Eur J Radiol 2006; 57:81–89. 2020. Viehweg P, Heinig A, Amaya B, Alberich T, Laniado M, Heywang-Kobrunner SH. MR-guided interventional breast procedures considering vacuum biopsy in particular. Eur J Radiol 2002; 42:32–39. 2021. Viehweg P, Heinig A, Lampe D, Buchmann J, Heywang-Kobrunner SH. Retrospective analysis for evaluation of the value of contrast-enhanced MRI in patients treated with breast conservative therapy. Magma 1998; 7:141–152. 2022. Viehweg P, Lampe D, Buchmann J, Heywang-Kobrunner SH. In situ and minimally invasive breast cancer: morphologic and kinetic features on contrast-enhanced MR imaging. Magma 2000; 11:129–137. 2023. Viehweg P, Paprosch I, Strassinopoulou M, Heywang-Kobrunner SH. Contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging of the breast: interpretation guidelines. Top Magn Reson Imaging 1998; 9:17–43. 2024. Viehweg P, Rotter K, Laniado M, et al. MR imaging of the contralateral breast in patients after breast-conserving therapy. Eur Radiol 2004; 14:402–408. 2025. Vignes S, Arrault M, Bonhomme S, Spielmann M. [Upper limb lymphedema revealing breast cancer.]. Rev Med Interne 2007. 2026. Villeirs G, Van Damme S, Heydanus R, Serreyn R, Kunnen M, Mortier M. Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia and fat necrosis of the breast. Eur Radiol 2000; 10:527–530. 2027. Vincensini D, Dedieu V, Eliat PA, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging measurements of vascular permeability and extracellular volume fraction of breast tumors by dynamic Gd-DTPA-enhanced relaxometry. Magn Reson Imaging 2007; 25:293–302. 2028. Vital A, Bringuier PP, Huang H, et al. Astrocytomas and choroid plexus tumors in two families with identical p53 germline mutations. J Neuropathol Exp Neurol 1998; 57:1061–1069. 2029. Vogt C. New technologies proving useful for breast cancer diagnosis. J Natl Cancer Inst 1993; 85:88–90. 2030. Volders W, Van Steen A. Tubular carcinoma of the breast. Jbr-Btr 2001; 84:81. 2031. Vomweg TW, Buscema M, Kauczor HU, et al. Improved artificial neural networks in prediction of malignancy of lesions in contrast-enhanced MR-mammography. Med Phys 2003; 30:2350–2359. 2032. Vomweg TW, Teifke A, Kauczor HU, et al. [Self-organizing neural networks for automatic detection and classification of contrast (media) enhancement of lesions in dynamic MR-mammography]. Rofo 2005; 177:703–713. 2033. Vomweg TW, Teifke A, Kunz RP, et al. Combination of low and high resolution sequences in two orientations for dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI of the breast: more than a compromise. Eur Radiol 2004; 14:1732–1742. 2034. Vomweg TW, Teifke A, Schreiber WG, Schmidt M, Thelen M. [Combination of low and high resolution T1-weighted sequences for improved evaluation of morphologic criteria in dynamic contrast enhanced MRI of the breast]. Rofo 2002; 174:1445–1449. 2035. Vosshenrich R, Fischer U, Grabbe E. [MRI-controlled intervention in suspected lesions of the breast]. Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd 1996; 56:173–176. 2036. Vourtsi A, Kehagias D, Antoniou A, Moulopoulos LA, Deligeorgi-Politi H, Vlahos L. Male breast myofibroblastoma and MR findings. J Comput Assist Tomogr 1999; 23:414–416. 2037. Vourtsi A, Zervoudis S, Pafiti A, Athanasiadis S. Male breast hemangioma – a rare entity: a case report and review of the literature. Breast J 2006; 12:260–262. 2038. Vukusic S, Confavreux C. [Multiple sclerosis and pregnancy]. Rev Neurol (Paris) 2006; 162:299–309. 2039. Vuorela AL. MRI of breast hemangioma. J Comput Assist Tomogr 1998; 22:1009–1010.  

380

2040. 2041. 2042. 2043. 2044. 2045. 2046.

2047. 2048. 2049. 2050. 2051. 2052. 2053. 2054.

2055. 2056. 2057. 2058. 2059. 2060. 2061. 2062. 2063. 2064. 2065. 2066. 2067. 2068.

Wadden N. Breast imaging: raising the bar. Can Assoc Radiol J 2005; 56:270. Wagner SK. Breast implant imaging homes in on tiny leaks. Diagn Imaging (San Franc) 1996; 18:51–52, 57. Wagner SK. Ultrasound evolves as implant imaging tool. Diagn Imaging (San Franc) 1997; 19:52–54. Wagnon J, Cagnard B, Bridoux-Henno L, Tourtelier Y, Grall JY, Dabadie A. [Breastfeeding and vegan diet]. J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod (Paris) 2005; 34:610–612. Wahl RL. Nuclear medicine techniques in breast imaging. Semin Ultrasound CT MR 1996; 17:494–505. Wald DS, Weinreb JC, Newstead G, Flyer M, Bose S. MR-guided fine needle aspiration of breast lesions: initial experience. J Comput Assist Tomogr 1996; 20:1–8. Walker R, Kessar P, Blanchard R, et al. Turbo STIR magnetic resonance imaging as a whole-body screening tool for metastases in patients with breast carcinoma: preliminary clinical experience. J Magn Reson Imaging 2000; 11:343–350. Wallace AM, Daniel BL, Jeffrey SS, et al. Rates of reexcision for breast cancer after magnetic resonance imagingguided bracket wire localization. J Am Coll Surg 2005; 200:527–537. Wallays C, De Launay S, Le Breton C, Boudghene F, Faintuch JM, Bigot JM. [Intradural metastases of visceral cancers. MRI aspects. Apropos of 2 cases]. J Radiol 1991; 72:575–578. Walter C, Scheidhauer K, Scharl A, et al. Clinical and diagnostic value of preoperative MR mammography and FDGPET in suspicious breast lesions. Eur Radiol 2003; 13:1651–1656. Wang H, Huo Z, Zhang J. Computerized Classification Method for Differentiating Between Benign and Malignant Lesions on Breast MR Images. Conf Proc IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc 2005; 7:6950–6952. Wang J, Shih TT, Chang KJ, Li YW. Silicone migration from silicone-injected breasts: magnetic resonance images. Ann Plast Surg 2002; 48:617–621. Wang J, Shih TT, Li YW, Chang KJ, Huang HY. Magnetic resonance imaging characteristics of paraffinomas and siliconomas after mammoplasty. J Formos Med Assoc 2002; 101:117–123. Wang L. Mammography and beyond: building better breast cancer screening tests. J Natl Cancer Inst 2003; 95:344–346. Wang Y, Ye F, Jeong EK, Sun Y, Parker DL, Lu ZR. Noninvasive visualization of pharmacokinetics, biodistribution and tumor targeting of poly[N-(2-hydroxypropyl)methacrylamide] in mice using contrast enhanced MRI. Pharm Res 2007; 24:1208–1216. Warner E. Intensive radiologic surveillance: a focus on the psychological issues. Ann Oncol 2004; 15 Suppl 1:I43-I47. Warner E, Causer PA. MRI surveillance for hereditary breast-cancer risk. Lancet 2005; 365:1747–1749. Warner E, Plewes DB, Hill KA, et al. Surveillance of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers with magnetic resonance imaging, ultrasound, mammography, and clinical breast examination. Jama 2004; 292:1317–1325. Warner E, Plewes DB, Shumak RS, et al. Comparison of breast magnetic resonance imaging, mammography, and ultrasound for surveillance of women at high risk for hereditary breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2001; 19:3524–3531. Warren L. MRI diagnosis of a ruptured breast implant. Can Assoc Radiol J 1994; 45:486–487. Warren R. Is breast MRI mature enough to be recommended for general use? Lancet 2001; 358:1745–1746. Warren R. Screening women at high risk of breast cancer on the basis of evidence. Eur J Radiol 2001; 39:50–59. Warren R, Hayes C, Pointon L, et al. A test of performance of breast MRI interpretation in a multicentre screening study. Magn Reson Imaging 2006; 24:917–929. Warren R, Kessar P. A method of coil localization for breast lesions seen only on MRI. Br J Radiol 2001; 74:548–551. Warren RM, Bobrow LG, Earl HM, et al. Can breast MRI help in the management of women with breast cancer treated by neoadjuvant chemotherapy? Br J Cancer 2004; 90:1349–1360. Warren RM, Crawley A. Is breast MRI ever useful in a mammographic screening programme? Clin Radiol 2002; 57:1090–1097. Warren RM, Hayes C. Localization of breast lesions shown only on MRI – a review for the UK Study of MRI Screening for Breast Cancer. Advisory Group of MARIBS. Br J Radiol 2000; 73:123–132. Warren RM, Pointon L, Caines R, Hayes C, Thompson D, Leach MO. What is the recall rate of breast MRI when used for screening asymptomatic women at high risk? Magn Reson Imaging 2002; 20:557–565. Warren RM, Pointon L, Thompson D, et al. Reading protocol for dynamic contrast-enhanced MR images of the breast: sensitivity and specificity analysis. Radiology 2005; 236:779–788.

 

381

 

a  References

2069. Warren RM, Thompson D, Pointon LJ, et al. Evaluation of a prospective scoring system designed for a multicenter breast MR imaging screening study. Radiology 2006; 239:677–685. 2070. Washington CW, Miga MI. Modality independent elastography (MIE): a new approach to elasticity imaging. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 2004; 23:1117–1128. 2071. Wasser K, Klein SK, Fink C, et al. Evaluation of neoadjuvant chemotherapeutic response of breast cancer using dynamic MRI with high temporal resolution. Eur Radiol 2003; 13:80–87. 2072. Wasser K, Klein SK, Junkermann H, et al. [Neoadjuvant chemotherapy of breast carcinomas : What post-therapeutic (preoperative) information is provided by quantitative dynamic MRI?]. Radiologe 2007; 47:421–429. 2073. Wasser K, Sinn HP, Fink C, et al. Accuracy of tumor size measurement in breast cancer using MRI is influenced by histological regression induced by neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Eur Radiol 2003; 13:1213–1223. 2074. Watson L. Breast cancer: diagnosis, treatment and prognosis. Radiol Technol 2001; 73:45–61; quiz 62–44, 67. 2075. Weatherall PT, Evans GF, Metzger GJ, Saborrian MH, Leitch AM. MRI vs. histologic measurement of breast cancer following chemotherapy: comparison with x-ray mammography and palpation. J Magn Reson Imaging 2001; 13:868–875. 2076. Weaver JB, Doyley M, Cheung Y, et al. Imaging the shear modulus of the heel fat pads. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon) 2005; 20:312–319. 2077. Weaver JB, Van Houten EE, Miga MI, Kennedy FE, Paulsen KD. Magnetic resonance elastography using 3D gradient echo measurements of steady-state motion. Med Phys 2001; 28:1620–1628. 2078. Wedam SB, Low JA, Yang SX, et al. Antiangiogenic and antitumor effects of bevacizumab in patients with inflammatory and locally advanced breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2006; 24:769–777. 2079. Wedegartner U, Bick U, Wortler K, Rummeny E, Bongartz G. Differentiation between benign and malignant findings on MR-mammography: usefulness of morphological criteria. Eur Radiol 2001; 11:1645–1650. 2080. Wei J, Chan HP, Helvie MA, et al. Correlation between mammographic density and volumetric fibroglandular tissue estimated on breast MR images. Med Phys 2004; 31:933–942. 2081. Weidensteiner C, Rausch M, McSheehy PM, Allegrini PR. Quantitative dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI in tumorbearing rats and mice with inversion recovery TrueFISP and two contrast agents at 4.7 T. J Magn Reson Imaging 2006; 24:646–656. 2082. Weigel RJ. Variability in the adoption of breast MRI among surgeons. J Surg Oncol 2006; 93:343–344. 2083. Weind KL, Maier CF, Rutt BK, Moussa M. Invasive carcinomas and fibroadenomas of the breast: comparison of microvessel distributions – implications for imaging modalities. Radiology 1998; 208:477–483. 2084. Weinreb JC, Newstead G. Controversies in breast MRI. Magn Reson Q 1994; 10:67–83. 2085. Weinreb JC, Newstead G. MR imaging of the breast. Radiology 1995; 196:593–610. 2086. Weinstein D, Strano S, Cohen P, Fields S, Gomori JM, Degani H. Breast fibroadenoma: mapping of pathophysiologic features with three-time-point, contrast-enhanced MR imaging – pilot study. Radiology 1999; 210:233–240. 2087. Weinstein JM, Morris GL, ZuRhein GM, Gentry LR. Posterior ischemic optic neuropathy due to Aspergillus fumigatus. J Clin Neuroophthalmol 1989; 9:7–13. 2088. Weinstein SP, Orel SG, Heller R, et al. MR imaging of the breast in patients with invasive lobular carcinoma. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2001; 176:399–406. 2089. Welch ST, Babcock DS, Ballard ET. Sonography of pediatric male breast masses: gynecomastia and beyond. Pediatr Radiol 2004; 34:952–957. 2090. Werner R, Krueger S, Winkel A, et al. MR-guided breast biopsy using an active marker: a phantom study. J Magn Reson Imaging 2006; 24:235–241. 2091. Wersebe A, Xydeas T, Clauss T, et al. [Quantitative assessment of therapy related effects after breast conserving therapy with dynamic MRI of the breast]. Rofo 2001; 173:1109–1117. 2092. Werthmuller WC, Schiebler ML, Whaley RA, Mauro MA, McCartney WH. Gadolinium-DTPA enhancement of lung radiation fibrosis. J Comput Assist Tomogr 1989; 13:946–948. 2093. Wessberg P, Danielson BI, Willen J. Comparison of Cobb angles in idiopathic scoliosis on standing radiographs and supine axially loaded MRI. Spine 2006; 31:3039–3044. 2094. Westerhof JP, Fischer U, Moritz JD, Oestmann JW. MR imaging of mammographically detected clustered microcalcifications: is there any value? Radiology 1998; 207:675–681.  

382

2095. Whitehouse GH, Moore NR. MR imaging of the breast after surgery for breast cancer. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 1994; 2:591–603. 2096. Whitman GJ, Sheppard DG, Phelps MJ, Gonzales BN. Breast cancer staging. Semin Roentgenol 2006; 41:91–104. 2097. Wiart M, Fournier LS, Novikov VY, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging detects early changes in microvascular permeability in xenograft tumors after treatment with the matrix metalloprotease inhibitor Prinomastat. Technol Cancer Res Treat 2004; 3:377–382. 2098. Wiberg MK, Bone B, Bronge L, Aspelin P. Comparison of the contrast enhancement pattern in two different T1-weighted 3-D sequences in MR imaging of the breast. Acta Radiol 1998; 39:680–685. 2099. Wiener JI, Schilling KJ, Adami C, Obuchowski NA. Assessment of suspected breast cancer by MRI: a prospective clinical trial using a combined kinetic and morphologic analysis. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2005; 184:878–886. 2100. Wilhelm K, Grebe P, Teifke A, Halbsguth A, Mitze M, Thelen M. [Lobular carcinoma of the breast in magnetic resonance tomography. A case report]. Aktuelle Radiol 1992; 2:373–375. 2101. Williams MB, Pisano ED, Schnall MD, Fajardo LL. Future directions in imaging of breast diseases. Radiology 1998; 206:297–300. 2102. Williams MB, Simoni PU, Smilowitz L, Stanton M, Phillips W, Stewart A. Analysis of the detective quantum efficiency of a developmental detector for digital mammography. Med Phys 1999; 26:2273–2285. 2103. Winnekendonk G, Krug B, Warm M, Gohring UJ, Mallmann P, Lackner K. [Diagnostic value of preoperative contrast-enhanced MR imaging of the breast]. Rofo 2004; 176:688–693. 2104. Wiseman CL, Kharazi A. Objective clinical regression of metastatic breast cancer in disparate sites after use of wholecell vaccine genetically modified to release sargramostim. Breast J 2006; 12:475–480. 2105. Wobbes T. [MRI for breast disease diagnosis; an asset, but the proper place has to be determined first]. Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd 2005; 149:1490–1492. 2106. Wobbes T. [MRI-guided biopsy of the breast: new possibilities but also new problems]. Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd 2006; 150:1756–1757. 2107. Wobbes T, Boetes C. [MRI breast-cancer screening: particularly important in women at increased risk]. Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd 2006; 150:1449–1453. 2108. Wolff R, Karlsson B, Dettmann E, Bottcher HD, Seifert V. Pertreatment radiation induced oedema causing acute hydrocephalus after radiosurgery for multiple cerebellar metastases. Acta Neurochir (Wien) 2003; 145:691–696; discussion 696. 2109. Wong KT, Lee PS, Chan YL, Chow LT. Paraffinoma in anterior abdominal wall mimicking liposarcoma. Br J Radiol 2003; 76:264–267. 2110. Wong KT, Tse GM, Yang WT. Ultrasound and MR imaging of diabetic mastopathy. Clin Radiol 2002; 57:730–735. 2111. Wong KW, Ho WC, Wong TT. MRI of muscular hamartoma of the breast. Australas Radiol 2002; 46:441–443. 2112. Woo OH, Yong HS, Shin BK, Park CM, Kang EY. Synchronous bilateral primary breast lymphoma: MRI and pathologic findings. Breast J 2007; 13:429–430. 2113. Wood BJ, Bates S. Radiofrequency thermal ablation of a splenic metastasis. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2001; 12:261–263. 2114. Wood C. Computer Aided Detection (CAD) for breast MRI. Technol Cancer Res Treat 2005; 4:49–53. 2115. Woodhams R, Matsunaga K, Iwabuchi K, et al. Diffusion-weighted imaging of malignant breast tumors: the usefulness of apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) value and ADC map for the detection of malignant breast tumors and evaluation of cancer extension. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2005; 29:644–649. 2116. Woodhams R, Matsunaga K, Kan S, et al. ADC mapping of benign and malignant breast tumors. Magn Reson Med Sci 2005; 4:35–42. 2117. Woods BJ, Clymer BD, Kurc T, et al. Malignant-lesion segmentation using 4D co-occurrence texture analysis applied to dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance breast image data. J Magn Reson Imaging 2007; 25:495–501. 2118. Workie DW, Dardzinski BJ, Graham TB, Laor T, Bommer WA, O’Brien KJ. Quantification of dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging of the knee in children with juvenile rheumatoid arthritis based on pharmacokinetic modeling. Magn Reson Imaging 2004; 22:1201–1210. 2119. Wouter van Es H, Engelen AM, Witkamp TD, Ramos LM, Feldberg MA. Radiation-induced brachial plexopathy: MR imaging. Skeletal Radiol 1997; 26:284–288. 2120. Wright AR, Milner RH, Bainbridge LC, Wilsdon JB. MR and CT in the assessment of Poland syndrome. J Comput Assist Tomogr 1992; 16:442–447.  

383

 

a  References

2121. Wright H, Listinsky J, Quinn C, Rim A, Crowe J, Kim J. Increased ipsilateral whole breast vascularity as measured by contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging in patients with breast cancer. Am J Surg 2005; 190:576–579. 2122. Wright H, Listinsky J, Rim A, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging as a diagnostic tool for breast cancer in premenopausal women. Am J Surg 2005; 190:572–575. 2123. Wright T, McGechan A. Breast cancer: new technologies for risk assessment and diagnosis. Mol Diagn 2003; 7:49–55. 2124. Wurdinger S, Herzog AB, Fischer DR, et al. Differentiation of phyllodes breast tumors from fibroadenomas on MRI. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2005; 185:1317–1321. 2125. Wurdinger S, Kamprath S, Eschrich D, Schneider A, Kaiser WA. False-negative findings of malignant breast lesions on preoperative magnetic resonance mammography. Breast 2001; 10:131–139. 2126. Wurdinger S, Schutz K, Fuchs D, Kaiser WA. Two cases of metastases to the breast on MR mammography. Eur Radiol 2001; 11:802–806. 2127. Xia M, Kodibagkar V, Liu H, Mason RP. Tumour oxygen dynamics measured simultaneously by near-infrared spectroscopy and 19F magnetic resonance imaging in rats. Phys Med Biol 2006; 51:45–60. 2128. Xiaohua C, Brady M, Lo JL, Moore N. Simultaneous segmentation and registration of contrast-enhanced breast MRI. Inf Process Med Imaging 2005; 19:126–137. 2129. Xu LY, Kong XQ, Tian ZX, Qiu DS. Magnetic resonance imaging on complications of breast augmentation with injected hydrophilic polyacrylamide gel. Chin Med J (Engl) 2006; 119:1311–1314. 2130. Yabuuchi H, Kuroiwa T, Kusumoto C, Fukuya T, Ohno S, Hachitanda Y. Incidentally detected lesions on contrastenhanced MR imaging in candidates for breast-conserving therapy: correlation between MR findings and histological diagnosis. J Magn Reson Imaging 2006; 23:486–492. 2131. Yabuuchi H, Soeda H, Matsuo Y, et al. Phyllodes tumor of the breast: correlation between MR findings and histologic grade. Radiology 2006; 241:702–709. 2132. Yaffe MJ. What should the burden of proof be for acceptance of a new breast-cancer screening technique? Lancet 2004; 364:1111–1112. 2133. Yaghan RJ. The magnetic resonance image findings of idiopathic granulomatous mastitis. Saudi Med J 2004; 25:1715–1719. 2134. Yamada K, Murakami M, Kuroda Y. [Treatment results of brain metastasis from breast cancer: course of the disease and radiation therapy]. Nippon Igaku Hoshasen Gakkai Zasshi 1997; 57:34–40. 2135. Yamagami T, Yuen S, Sawai K, Nishimura T. MR imaging-guided axillary node biopsy for breast cancer: initial findings. Eur Radiol 2004; 14:151–156. 2136. Yang SC, Hsu HH, Hsu GC, et al. 3D localization of clustered microcalcifications using cranio-caudal and medio-lateral oblique views. Comput Med Imaging Graph 2005; 29:521–532. 2137. Yang WT, Hennessy BT, Dryden MJ, Valero V, Hunt KK, Krishnamurthy S. Mammary angiosarcomas: imaging findings in 24 patients. Radiology 2007; 242:725–734. 2138. Yang WT, Lam WW, Cheung H, Suen M, King WW, Metreweli C. Sonographic, magnetic resonance imaging, and mammographic assessments of preoperative size of breast cancer. J Ultrasound Med 1997; 16:791–797. 2139. Yang WT, Muttarak M, Ho LW. Nonmammary malignancies of the breast: ultrasound, CT, and MRI. Semin Ultrasound CT MR 2000; 21:375–394. 2140. Yankeelov TE, Lepage M, Chakravarthy A, et al. Integration of quantitative DCE-MRI and ADC mapping to monitor treatment response in human breast cancer: initial results. Magn Reson Imaging 2007; 25:1–13. 2141. Yankeelov TE, Rooney WD, Huang W, et al. Evidence for shutter-speed variation in CR bolus-tracking studies of human pathology. NMR Biomed 2005; 18:173–185. 2142. Yano Y, Ueno E, Kamma H, et al. Non-invasive lobular carcinoma within a fibroadenoma, a preoperatively diagnosed case. Breast Cancer 2001; 8:70–73. 2143. Yasumura K, Ogawa K, Ishikawa H, Takeshita T, Nakagawa Y, Osamura RY. Inflammatory Carcinoma of the Breast: Characteristic Findings of MR Imaging. Breast Cancer 1997; 4:161–169. 2144. Yasumura K, Ogawa K, Nakagawa Y, et al. Dynamic MR Imaging and Tumor Angiogenesis in DMBA-Induced Rat Breast Cancer: Three Dimensional (3D) Reconstructed Image Analysis of Tumor Microvessels by Confocal Laser Scanning Microscopy. Breast Cancer 1997; 4:291–296. 2145. Yasumura K, Ogawa K, Yuasa Y, Hiramatsu H, Hiramatsu K, Kitajima M. [Dynamic MRI and tumor angiogenesis of breast cancer]. Nippon Igaku Hoshasen Gakkai Zasshi 2000; 60:379–388.  

384

2146. Yeh E, Slanetz P, Kopans DB, et al. Prospective comparison of mammography, sonography, and MRI in patients undergoing neoadjuvant chemotherapy for palpable breast cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2005; 184:868–877. 2147. Yeh ED, Slanetz PJ, Edmister WB, Talele A, Monticciolo D, Kopans DB. Invasive lobular carcinoma: spectrum of enhancement and morphology on magnetic resonance imaging. Breast J 2003; 9:13–18. 2148. Yen YF, Han KF, Daniel BL, et al. Dynamic breast MRI with spiral trajectories: 3D versus 2D. J Magn Reson Imaging 2000; 11:351–359. 2149. Yi HJ, Kim CH, Bak KH, Kim JM, Ko Y, Oh SJ. Metastatic tumors in the sellar and parasellar regions: clinical review of four cases. J Korean Med Sci 2000; 15:363–367. 2150. Yilmaz MH, Esen G, Ayarcan Y, et al. The role of US and MR imaging in detecting local chest wall tumor recurrence after mastectomy. Diagn Interv Radiol 2007; 13:13–18. 2151. Yin FF, Gao Q. Oncologic image compression using both wavelet and masking techniques. Med Phys 1997; 24:2038–2042. 2152. Yokoji H, Nakamura S, Ikeda T. [A case of malignant lymphoma with a metastasis to the lateral rectus muscle]. Rinsho Shinkeigaku 1997; 37:526–527. 2153. Yoo SS, Gil Choi B, Han JY, Hee Kim H. Independent component analysis for the examination of dynamic contrastenhanced breast magnetic resonance imaging data: preliminary study. Invest Radiol 2002; 37:647–654. 2154. Yoshikawa E, Matsuoka Y, Yamasue H, et al. Prefrontal cortex and amygdala volume in first minor or major depressive episode after cancer diagnosis. Biol Psychiatry 2006; 59:707–712. 2155. Yoshikawa MI, Ohsumi S, Sugata S, et al. Comparison of breast cancer detection by diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging and mammography. Radiat Med 2007; 25:218–223. 2156. Yoshimoto M, Kasumi F, Iwase T, Takahashi K, Tada T, Uchida Y. Magnetic resonance galactography for a patient with nipple discharge. Breast Cancer Res Treat 1997; 42:87–90. 2157. Yoshimura G, Sakurai T, Oura S, et al. Evaluation of Axillary Lymph Node Status in Breast Cancer with MRI. Breast Cancer 1999; 6:249–258. 2158. Yoshino A. [Efficacy of dynamic susceptibility contrast MRI using echo-planar imaging in differential diagnosis of breast tumors]. Nippon Igaku Hoshasen Gakkai Zasshi 1998; 58:441–446. 2159. Youssefzadeh S, Eibenberger K, Helbich T, et al. Reduction of adverse events in MRI of the breast by personal patient care. Clin Radiol 1997; 52:862–864. 2160. Youssefzadeh S, Hittmair K, Pokieser P, et al. [Magnetic resonance imaging of breast implants. Significance compared to mammography and ultrasonography]. Dtsch Med Wochenschr 1994; 119:1453–1457. 2161. Youssefzadeh S, Wolf G, Imhof H. MR findings of a breast oil cyst containing a fat-fluid level. A case report. Acta Radiol 1994; 35:492–494. 2162. Yu H, Reeder SB, McKenzie CA, et al. Single acquisition water-fat separation: feasibility study for dynamic imaging. Magn Reson Med 2006; 55:413–422. 2163. Yuen S, Uematsu T, Kasami M, et al. Breast carcinomas with strong high-signal intensity on T2-weighted MR images: pathological characteristics and differential diagnosis. J Magn Reson Imaging 2007; 25:502–510. 2164. Yuen S, Uematsu T, Uchida Y, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging findings in an axillary accessory breast fibroadenoma. Breast J 2005; 11:493–494. 2165. Yuen S, Yamada K, Kinosada Y, et al. Equivalent cross-relaxation rate imaging of breast cancer. J Magn Reson Imaging 2004; 20:56–65. 2166. Zahavi A, Sklair ML, Ad-El DD. Capsular contracture of the breast: working towards a better classification using clinical and radiologic assessment. Ann Plast Surg 2006; 57:248–251. 2167. Zapf S, Halbsguth A, Brunier A, Mitze M, Klemencic J, Wilhelm K. [The feasibility of magnetic resonance tomography in the diagnosis of non-palpable breast tumors]. Rofo 1991; 154:106–110. 2168. Zeggelink WF, Deurloo EE, Bartelink H, Rutgers EJ, Gilhuijs KG. Reproducibility of the assessment of tumor extent in the breast using multiple image modalities. Med Phys 2003; 30:2919–2926. 2169. Zegzula HD, Lee WP. Infusion port dislodgement of bilateral breast tissue expanders after MRI. Ann Plast Surg 2001; 46:46–48. 2170. Zelch JV, Artz S, Dinner MI. STIR sequences detect breast implant rupture. Diagn Imaging (San Franc) 1992; 14:79–82.  

385

 

a  References

2171. Zhang JL, Koh TS. On the selection of optimal flip angles for T1 mapping of breast tumors with dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 2006; 53:1209–1214. 2172. Zhang Y, Fukatsu H, Naganawa S, et al. The role of contrast-enhanced MR mammography for determining candidates for breast conservation surgery. Breast Cancer 2002; 9:231–239. 2173. Zhao X, Wu N, Ouyang H. [Imaging manifestations of tumors metastasized in fatty liver]. Zhonghua Zhong Liu Za Zhi 1998; 20:132–134. 2174. Zhao XF, Deeb G, Tan DF. Pathologic quiz case: a cystic breast mass. Cystic hypersecretory hyperplasia with cytologic atypia. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2003; 127:e389–390. 2175. Zhong L. Magnetic resonance imaging in the detection of pancreatic neoplasms. J Dig Dis 2007; 8:128–132. 2176. Zhou CW, Zhang HM, Ouyang H. [Intracranial metastasis of malignant tumors: clinical characteristics and MR imaging features.]. Zhonghua Zhong Liu Za Zhi 2004; 26:554–557. 2177. Zhou XH, Gordon R. Detection of early breast cancer: an overview and future prospects. Crit Rev Biomed Eng 1989; 17:203–255. 2178. Zhu DC, Buonocore MH. Breast tissue differentiation using arterial spin tagging. Magn Reson Med 2003; 50:966–975. 2179. Zhu J, Kurihara Y, Kanemaki Y, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of high-resolution MRI using a microscopy coil for patients with presumed DCIS following mammography screening. J Magn Reson Imaging 2007; 25:96–103. 2180. Zidi SH, Prat F, Le Guen O, Rondeau Y, Pelletier G. Performance characteristics of magnetic resonance cholangiography in the staging of malignant hilar strictures. Gut 2000; 46:103–106. 2181. Ziegler J. New techniques promise improved breast imaging. J Natl Cancer Inst 1996; 88:1518–1521. 2182. Ziewacz JT, Neumann DP, Weiner RE. The difficult breast. Surg Oncol Clin N Am 1999; 8:17–33. 2183. Zimman OA. About images with breast implants and galactocele. Plast Reconstr Surg 2003; 112:1951–1952; author reply 1952–1953. 2184. Zippel DB, Papa MZ. The use of MR imaging guided focused ultrasound in breast cancer patients; a preliminary phase one study and review. Breast Cancer 2005; 12:32–38. 2185. Zong Y, Wang X, Goodrich KC, Mohs AM, Parker DL, Lu ZR. Contrast-enhanced MRI with new biodegradable macromolecular Gd(III) complexes in tumor-bearing mice. Magn Reson Med 2005; 53:835–842. 2186. Zornoza A, Pina L, Sola J, Martinez-Regueira F, Zornoza G. [Imaging techniques for axillary lymph node staging in breast cancer]. Rev Med Univ Navarra 2004; 48:9–13. 2187. Zuiani C, Francescutti GE, Londero V, Zunnui I, Bazzocchi M. Ductal carcinoma in situ: is there a role for MRI? J Exp Clin Cancer Res 2002; 21:89–95. 2188. Zuo CS, Jiang A, Buff BL, Mahon TG, Wong TZ. Automatic motion correction for breast MR imaging. Radiology 1996; 198:903–906.

 

386