The Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) is a standardized system of reporting breast pathology as seen on mammogram, ultrasound, and magnetic resonance imaging. It encourages consistency between reports and facilitates clear communication between the radiologist and other physicians by providing a lexicon of descriptors, a reporting structure that relates assessment categories to management recommendations, and a framework for data collection and auditing. This article highlights the changes made to the BI-RADS atlas 5th edition by comparison with its predecessor, provide a useful resource for a radiologist attempting to review the recent changes to the new edition, and serve as a quick reference to those who have previously become familiar with the material.

A mass that shows homogeneous or heterogeneous hyperechogenicity at US (with associated architectural distortion) and has a hypervascular, hemorrhagic, and heterogeneous appearance and typical malignant enhancement characteristics at MR imaging should alert the radiologist to a possible diagnosis of angiosarcoma.

Despite their large size at presentation, triple receptor-negative cancers may be occult on mammography or sonography and frequently have benign or indeterminate features. MRI identified all triple receptor-negative cancers and showed features that had a high positive predictive value for malignancy.

The mammographic features of TRN breast cancer suggest more rapid carcinogenesis leading directly to invasive cancer, that may require adjunct imaging tools for early diagnosis.

Breast cancer diagnosed during pregnancy is mammographically evident despite dense parenchymal background. US, when performed, demonstrates all masses and provides information regarding response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

Patients with clinical MFMC breast cancer at the time of diagnosis treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by locoregional therapy have similar 5-year rates of locoregional control, disease-free survival, and overall survival as those with unicentric disease. Clinically detected MFMC disease did not predict for inferior outcome.

Amorphous silicon/cesium iodide (a-Si:H/CsI:Tl) flat-panel (FP)-based full-field digital mammography systems have recently become commercially available for clinical use. Some investigations on physical properties and imaging characteristics of these types of detectors have been conducted and reported. In this perception study, a phantom containing simulated microcalcifications (microCs) of various sizes was imaged with four detector systems: a FP system, a small field-of-view charge coupled device (CCD) system, a high resolution computed radiography (CR) system, and a conventional mammography screen/film (SF) system. The images were reviewed by mammographers as well as nonradiologist participants. Scores reflecting confidence ratings were given and recorded for each detection task. The results were used to determine the average confidence-rating scores for the four imaging systems. Receiver operating characteristics (ROC) analysis was also performed to evaluate and compare the overall detection accuracy for the four detector systems. For calcifications of 125-140 microm in size, the FP system was found to have the best performance with the highest confidence-rating scores and the greatest detection accuracy (Az = 0.9) in the ROC analysis. The SF system was ranked second while the CCD system outperformed the CR system. The p values obtained by applying a Student t-test to the results of the ROC analysis indicate that the differences between any two systems are statistically significant (p<0.005). Differences in microC detectability for the large (150-160 microm) and small (112-125 microm) size microC groups showed a wider range of p values (not all p values are smaller than 0.005, ranging from 0.6 to <0.001) compared to the p values obtained for the medium (125-140 microm) size microC group. Using the p values to assess the statistical significance, the use of the average confidence-rating scores was not as significant as the use of the ROC analysis p value for p value.

Objective The objective of this study was to compare the potential Influence of imaging variables on surgical margins after preoperative radioactive seed localization (RSL) and wire localization (WL) techniques. Materials and Methods A total of 565 women with 660 breast lesions underwent RSL or WL between May 16, 2012, and May 30, 2013. Patient age, lesion type (mass, calcifications, mass with associated calcifications, other), lesion size, number of seeds or wires used, surgical margin status (close positive or negative margins), and reexcision and mastectomy rates were recorded. Results Of 660 lesions, 127 (19%) underwent RSL and 533 (81%) underwent WL pre-operatively. Mean lesion size was 1.8 cm in the RSL group and 1.8 cm in the WL group (p = 0.35). No difference in lesion type was identified in the RSL and WL groups (p = 0.63). RSL with a single seed was used in 105 of 127 (83%) RSLs compared with WL with a single wire in 349 of 533 (65%) WLs (p = 0.0003). The number of cases with a close positive margin was similar for RSLs (26/127, 20%) and WLs (104/533, 20%) (p = 0.81). There was no difference between the RSL group and the WL group in close positive margin status (20% each, p = 0.81), reexcision rates (20% vs 16%, respectively; p = 0.36), or mastectomy rates (6% each, p = 0.96). Lesions containing calcifications were more likely to require more than one wire (odds ratio [OR], 4.44; 95% CI, 2.8–7.0) or more than one seed (OR, 7.03; 95% CI, 1.6–30.0) when compared with masses alone (p < 0.0001). Increasing lesion size and the presence of calcifications were significant predictors of positive margins, whereas the use of more than one wire or seed was not (OR, 0.9; 95% CI, 0.5–1.5) (p = 0.75). Conclusion Close positive margin, reexcision, and mastectomy rates remained similar in the WL group and RSL group. The presence of calcifications and increasing lesion size increased the odds of a close positive margin in both the WL and RSL groups, whereas the use of one versus more than one seed or wire did not.