Research ArticleOriginal Article
Open Access

Accuracy of imaging of BI-RADS 4 subcategorizations in breast lesion diagnosis

Radiologic-pathologic correlation

Hadeel A. Ghunaim, Rana E. Alatawi, Walaa M. Borhan, Tareef S. Daqqaq, Ayman S. Alhasan, Mervat M. Aboualkheir and Reem M. Elkady
Saudi Medical Journal November 2024, 45 (11) 1228-1237; DOI: https://doi.org/10.15537/smj.2024.45.11.20240001

References

  1. 1.↵
    1. Alqahtani WS,
    2. Almufareh NA,
    3. Domiaty DM,
    4. Albasher G,
    5. Alduwish MA,
    6. Alkhalaf H, et al.
    Epidemiology of cancer in Saudi Arabia thru 2010-2019: a systematic review with constrained meta-analysis. AIMS Public Health 2020; 7: 679-696.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  2. 2.↵
    1. Spak DA,
    2. Plaxco JS,
    3. Santiago L,
    4. Dryden MJ,
    5. Dogan BE
    . BI-RADS® fifth edition: a summary of changes. Diagn Interv Imaging 2017; 98: 179-190.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  3. 3.↵
    1. D’Orsi CJ,
    2. Sickles EA,
    3. Mendelson EB,
    4. Morris EA
    . ACR BI-RADS® Atlas: breast imaging reporting and data system. [Updated 2013; accessed 2024 Jun 18]. Available from: https://www.scirp.org/reference/ReferencesPapers?ReferenceID=2274695
  4. 4.↵
    1. Schueller G,
    2. Schueller-Weidekamm C,
    3. Helbich TH
    . Accuracy of ultrasound-guided, large-core needle breast biopsy. Eur Radiol 2008; 18: 1761-1773.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  5. 5.↵
    1. Dahabreh IJ,
    2. Wieland LS,
    3. Adam GP,
    4. Halladay C,
    5. Lau J,
    6. Trikalinos TA
    . Core needle and open surgical biopsy for diagnosis of breast lesions: an update to the 2009 report. [Updated 2014; accessed 2024 Jun 18]. Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25275206/
  6. 6.↵
    1. Park VY,
    2. Kim EK,
    3. Moon HJ,
    4. Yoon JH,
    5. Kim MJ
    . Evaluating imaging-pathology concordance and discordance after ultrasound-guided breast biopsy. Ultrasonography 2018; 37: 107-120.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  7. 7.
    1. Zhang C,
    2. Lewis DR,
    3. Nasute P,
    4. Hayes M,
    5. Warren LJ,
    6. Gordon PB
    . The negative predictive value of ultrasound-guided 14-gauge core needle biopsy of breast masses: a validation study of 339 cases. Cancer Imaging 2012; 12: 488-496.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  8. 8.↵
    1. Zhou JY,
    2. Tang J,
    3. Wang ZL,
    4. Lv FQ,
    5. Luo YK,
    6. Qin HZ, et al.
    Accuracy of 16/18G core needle biopsy for ultrasound-visible breast lesions. World J Surg Oncol 2014; 12: 7.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  9. 9.↵
    1. Youk JH,
    2. Kim EK,
    3. Kim MJ,
    4. Ko KH,
    5. Kwak JY,
    6. Son EJ, et al.
    Concordant or discordant? Imaging-pathology correlation in a sonography-guided core needle biopsy of a breast lesion. Korean J Radiol 2011; 12: 232-240.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  10. 10.↵
    1. Jörg I,
    2. Wieler J,
    3. Elfgen C,
    4. Bolten K,
    5. Hutzli C,
    6. Talimi J, et al.
    Discrepancies between radiological and histological findings in preoperative core needle (CNB) and vacuum-assisted (VAB) breast biopsies. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 2021; 147: 749-754.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  11. 11.↵
    1. Maltez de Almeida JR,
    2. Gomes AB,
    3. Barros TP,
    4. Fahel PE,
    5. de Seixas Rocha M
    . Subcategorization of suspicious breast lesions (BI-RADS category 4) according to MRI criteria: role of dynamic contrast-enhanced and diffusion-weighted imaging. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2015; 205: 222-231.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  12. 12.↵
    1. Saadaat R,
    2. Abdul-Ghafar J,
    3. Haidary AM,
    4. Rahmani S,
    5. Atta N
    . Age distribution and types of breast lesions among Afghan women diagnosed by fine needle aspiration cytology (FNAC) at a tertiary care centre in Afghanistan: a descriptive cross-sectional study. BMJ Open 2020; 10: e037513.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  13. 13.↵
    1. Mukhtar R,
    2. Hussain M,
    3. Mukhtar MA,
    4. Haider SR
    . Prevalence of different breast lesions in women of southern Punjab, Pakistan, characterized on high-resolution ultrasound and mammography. Egypt J Radiol Nucl Med 2021; 52: 245. doi:10.1186/s43055-021-00633-8.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  14. 14.↵
    1. Noonpradej S,
    2. Wangkulangkul P,
    3. Woodtichartpreecha P,
    4. Laohawiriyakamol S
    . Prediction for breast cancer in BI-RADS category 4 lesion categorized by age and breast composition of women in Songklanagarind hospital. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev 2021; 22: 531-536.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  15. 15.↵
    1. Zou X,
    2. Wang J,
    3. Lan X,
    4. Lin Q,
    5. Han F,
    6. Liu L, et al.
    Assessment of diagnostic accuracy and efficiency of categories 4 and 5 of the second edition of the BI-RADS ultrasound lexicon in diagnosing breast lesions. Ultrasound Med Biol 2016; 42: 2065-2071.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  16. 16.↵
    1. Xiao M,
    2. Zhao C,
    3. Li J,
    4. Zhang J,
    5. Liu H,
    6. Wang M, et al.
    Diagnostic value of breast lesions between deep learning-based computer-aided diagnosis system and experienced radiologists: comparison the performance between symptomatic and asymptomatic patients. Front Oncol 2020; 10: 1070.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  17. 17.↵
    1. Mohapatra SK,
    2. Mishra A,
    3. Sahoo TK,
    4. Nayak RB,
    5. Das PK,
    6. Nayak B
    . The positive predictive values of the breast imaging reporting and data system (BI-RADS) 4 lesions and its mammographic morphological features. Indian J Surg Oncol 2021; 12: 182-189.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  18. 18.↵
    1. Lazarus E,
    2. Mainiero MB,
    3. Schepps B,
    4. Koelliker SL,
    5. Livingston LS
    . BI-RADS lexicon for US and mammography: interobserver variability and positive predictive value. Radiology 2006; 239: 385-391.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  19. 19.↵
    1. El Bcheraoui C,
    2. Basulaiman M,
    3. Wilson S,
    4. Daoud F,
    5. Tuffaha M,
    6. AlMazroa MA, et al.
    Breast cancer screening in Saudi Arabia: free but almost no takers. PLoS One 2015; 10: e0119051.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  20. 20.↵
    1. Al-Wassia RK,
    2. Farsi NJ,
    3. Merdad LA,
    4. Hagi SK. Patterns
    , knowledge, and barriers of mammography use among women in Saudi Arabia. Saudi Med J 2017; 38: 913-921.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  21. 21.↵
    1. AlAbdulKader A,
    2. Gari D,
    3. Al Yousif G,
    4. Alghamdi A,
    5. AlKaltham S,
    6. AlDamigh F
    , et al. Perceived barriers and facilitators to breast cancer screening among women in Saudi Arabia. Breast Cancer (Dove Med Press) 2023; 15: 505-513.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  22. 22.
    1. Abdel-Salam DM,
    2. Mohamed RA,
    3. Alyousef HY,
    4. Almasoud WA,
    5. Alanzi MB,
    6. Mubarak AZ, et al.
    Perceived barriers and awareness of mammography screening among Saudi women attending primary health centers. Risk Manag Healthc Policy 2020; 13: 2553-2561.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  23. 23.
    1. Abdel-Aziz SB,
    2. Amin TT,
    3. Al-Gadeeb MB,
    4. Alhassar AI,
    5. Al-Ramadan A,
    6. Al-Helal M, et al.
    Perceived barriers to breast cancer screening among Saudi women at primary care setting. J Prev Med Hyg 2018; 59: E20-E29.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  24. 24.↵
    1. Aljehani AJ,
    2. Alomar MA,
    3. Albalawi AM,
    4. Alsultan AS,
    5. Alhussini FO,
    6. Alshehri RF, et al.
    Perceptions and behaviors regarding early screening and breast-related complaints among Saudi women. Cureus 2024; 16: e61891.
    OpenUrlPubMed
Back to top

In this issue

Print
Download PDF
Email Article
Citation Tools
Bookmark this article

Jump to section

Keywords