As in the previous case, even with a normal ultrasound, a mass that is suspected on Stereotactic vacuumĪssisted biopsy with mammographic guidance revealed infiltrating ductal carcinoma. The second-look ultrasound does not depict any abnormality. Lesion was classified as suggestive of malignancy. The second readerįelt that further investigations were necessary (BIRADS 0). However, ultrasound does not depict any lesion and the mammogram wasĬonsidered probably benign and classified in BIRADS category 3. Spot magnification confirms a mass with ill-defined margins. In this second example, there is a mass in the upper outer quadrant of the rightīreast (arrows). In BIRADS category 5 (infiltrating ductal carcinoma). However, ultrasound did not depictĪny abnormality in the lower inner quadrant and the lesion was considered asīenign by the reader (BIRADS category 2). Suggestive of malignancy (BIRADS category 5). Margins are spiculated and the lesion should have been classified as highly In this example, mammography depicts a mass in the lower inner quadrant of the Ultrasound does not depict abnormality, the reader can modify the BIRADSĬategory and consider the lesion as benign even if it was suspicious on An abnormality detected on a mammogram requires ultrasound evaluation. Investigations are necessary when the margins are suspicious. Irregular mass and the biopsy revealed an infiltrating ductal carcinoma. The second readerįelt the margins were suspicious and recommended further investigations: ultrasound depicted an The previous mammogram, considered stable and classified in BIRADS category 2. 6), shows a mass with spiculated margins. Ultrasound depicted a suspicious mass and the Grown and recommended further investigations. Was considered to be stable and classified in BIRADS category 2. 5), the mammogram shows a mass with microlobulated margins. Abnormality Considered Benign or Probably because the lesion was not found on ultrasound because the abnormality was seen only on one view because the abnormality was considered stable compared with a previous mammogram because the abnormality was considered benign or probably benign on the Four reasons can explain a “default error”: A default error is defined as a suspicious lesion that is considered benign. In this case, spot compression shows that the abnormality was a false image and the mammography was An abnormality cannot be classified in category 4 without further investigations. With a previous mammogram, the reader considered the abnormality to be suspicious(BIRADS category 4) In this example, the reader described architectural distortion on a medio-lateral view. Lumpectomy and should have been classified in BIRADS category 2. However, the architectural distortion was secondary to a benign This abnormality wasĬlassified in BIRADS category 4. In this example, there was a distortion in the right upper inner quadrant (Fig. An excess error is defined as an excessive classification of a benign abnormality in BIRADS category 4 or 5. a “default error” is when a suspicious abnormality is misinterpreted as benign or probably an “excess error” is when a benign abnormality is deemed suspicious and additional “Interpretation errors” occur when the lesion is detected but misinterpreted by the reader. Occur in dense breasts, are often present as a mass and are frequently found in the “Detection errors” occur when a lesion is not seen by the reader. Was seen in 47 (85%) of 55 interpretations. Intra-observer agreement on management (additional evaluation or biopsy versus follow-up) (BIRADS categories 0, 4, and 5 combined) versus follow-up (categories 1, 2, and 3 combined),įive observers were in agreement concerning the management of only 47 (55%) of 86 lesions.
When they grouped assessments recommending immediate additional evaluation and biopsy Reviewed by each observer 2 months later. Screening mammograms (two with malignant findings, 11 with diagnostic evaluation) were re. Mammograms with diagnostic evaluation, including 23 (27%) depicting cancer. Screening mammograms, including 30 (29%) depicting cancer, and a subset of 86 In Berg’s study, five experienced mammographers used the lexicon to describe and assess 103 Different types of errors with illustrated cases will be presented in this review. But, in daily practice, high variability is observed in the use of BIRADS which Aimed at standardizing the terminology in the mammographic report, in theĪssessment of findings, and in the recommendations for subsequent actions.
The American College of Radiology developed the Breast Imaging Reporting Variability And Errors When Applying The BIRADS Mammography Classification
0 kommentar(er)
