Descriptors from the new sonographic BI-RADS lexicon can be useful in differentiating benign from malignant solid masses.

Currently, the clinical role of positron emission tomography (PET) and PET/computed tomography (CT) in patients with breast cancer is to provide additional information in select scenarios in which results of conventional imaging are indeterminate or of limited utility. There is currently no clinical role for fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) PET in detection of breast cancer or evaluation of axillary lymph nodes, but these are areas of active research. FDG PET is complementary to conventional staging procedures and should not be a replacement for either bone scintigraphy or diagnostic CT. FDG PET and PET/CT have been shown to be particularly useful in the restaging of breast cancer, in evaluation of response to therapy, and as a problem-solving method when results of conventional imaging are equivocal. In these situations, FDG PET often demonstrates locoregional or unsuspected distant disease that affects management. PET has demonstrated a particular capability for evaluation of chemotherapy response in both patients with locally advanced breast carcinoma and those with metastatic disease.

Suspicious microcalcifications are seen infrequently on sonography (23%) but, when detected, can be successfully biopsied with sonographic guidance and more frequently are malignant and represent invasive cancer than those seen on mammography alone.

MRI can show residual malignancy after neoadjuvant chemotherapy better than physical examination, particularly in patients who have not had a complete clinical response to therapy.

When the histologic diagnosis is benign, our data suggest that papillary lesions may be safely managed with imaging follow-up rather than with surgical excision. However, atypical papillary lesions or those associated with atypia require surgical excision because histologic underestimation occurs at a frequency similar to that in other atypical lesions undergoing core needle biopsy.

Metallic clips placed during core-needle breast biopsy are intended to mark the biopsy site when the visible lesion is excised, in case additional biopsy is required. The data suggest that the position of metallic clips placed during stereotactic core-needle biopsy may differ substantially from the location of the biopsy site. Postbiopsy mammography should be performed in two orthogonal planes to document clip position relative to the biopsy site.

To identify the Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) enhancement characteristics of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). A retrospective review of consecutive patients who underwent breast MRI for newly diagnosed breast carcinoma prior to surgery was conducted. This yielded 381 lesions in 361 patients with pathologic confirmation of either DCIS alone, invasive carcinoma alone, or mixed invasive and in-situ disease. Presence or absence of a MRI lesion at the site of the documented carcinoma was recorded, and for all identified MRI lesions the Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System morphology patterns were recorded. MRI features of the different malignancy types were compared utilizing Fisher's exact tests; 64/381 (16.8%) lesions had DCIS, 101/381 (26.5%) had invasive carcinoma, and 216/381 (56.7%) had mixed invasive/in situ carcinoma. A MRI lesion corresponding to the known cancer was identified in 55/64 (85.9%) cases of DCIS, 98/101 (97.0%) cases of invasive carcinoma, and 212/216 (98.1%) cases of mixed invasive and in-situ carcinoma. For pure DCIS lesions, 38/64 (59.4%) exhibited nonmass-like enhancement (NMLE), 9/64 (14.1%) were masses, and 8/64 (12.5%) were a focus. For pure invasive carcinomas 79/101(78.2%) were masses, 16/101 (15.8%) were NMLE, and 3/101 (3.0%) were a focus. For mixed lesions 163/216 (75.5%) were masses, 44/216 (20.4%) demonstrated NMLE, and 5/216 (2.3%) were a focus. The most common NMLE patterns of pure DCIS were segmental distribution and clumped internal enhancement. Although there is overlap in the MRI morphology and enhancement pattern of in situ and invasive breast carcinoma, DCIS more frequently manifests as NMLE than does invasive carcinoma.

Fewer than one half of the cases of architectural distortion were detected by the two most widely available CAD systems used for interpretations of screening mammograms. Considerable improvement in the sensitivity of CAD systems is needed for detecting this type of lesion. Practicing breast imagers who use CAD systems should remain vigilant for architectural distortion.