References
- American College of Radiology (2003). Breast imaging reporting and data system (BI-RADS), 4th ed. Reston, VA: American College of Radiology.
- Cassano E, Urban LABD, Pizzamiglio M, et al (2007). Ultrasound-guided vacuumassisted core breast biopsy: experience with 406 cases. Breast Cancer Res Treat, 102, 103-10. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-006-9305-x
- Chae BJ, Lee A, Song BJ, Jung SS (2009). Predictive factors for breast cancer in patients diagnosed atypical ductal hyperplasia at core needle biopsy. World J Surg Oncol, 7, 77-82. https://doi.org/10.1186/1477-7819-7-77
- Crystal P, Koretz M, Shcharynsky S, Makarov V, Strano S (2005). Accuracy of sonographically guided 14-gauge core-needle biopsy: results of 715 consecutive breast biopsies with at least two-year follow-up of benign lesions. J Clin Ultrasound , 33, 47-52. https://doi.org/10.1002/jcu.20089
- Hsu HH, Yu JC, Hsu GC, et al (2012). Atypical ductal hyperplasia of the breast diagnosed by ultrasonographically guided core needle biopsy. Ultraschall Med, 33, 447-54.
- Jang M, Cho N, Moon WK, et al (2008). Underestimation of atypical ductal hyperplasia at sonographically guided core biopsy of the breast. AJR Am J Roentgenol, 191, 1347-51. https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.07.3643
- Ko E, Han W, Lee JW, et al (2008). Scoring system for predicting malignancy in patients diagnosed with atypical ductal hyperplasia at ultrasound-guided core needle biopsy. Breast Cancer Res Treat, 112, 189-95. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-007-9824-0
- Lee KE, Kim HH, Shin HJ, Cha JH (2013). Stereotactic biopsy of the breast using a decubitus table: comparison of histologic underestimation rates between 11-and 8-gauge vacuum-assisted breast biopsy. Springerplus, 22, 551.
- Ozkan-Gurdal S, Cabioglu N, Ozcinar B, et al (2014). Factors predicting microinvasion in ductal carcinoma in situ. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev, 15, 55-60. https://doi.org/10.7314/APJCP.2014.15.1.55
- Page DL, Jensen RA (1994). Evaluation and management of high risk and premalignant lesions of the breast. World J Surg, 18, 32-4. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00348189
- Page DL, Rogers LW (1992). Combined histologic and cytologic criteria for the diagnosis of mammary atypical ductal hyperplasia. Hum Pathol, 23, 1095-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/0046-8177(92)90026-Y
- Philpotts LE, Lee CH, Horvath LJ, et al (2000). Underestimation of breast cancer with 11-gauge vacuum suction biopsy. lAm J Roentgenol, 175, 1047-50. https://doi.org/10.2214/ajr.175.4.1751047
- Sauer G, Deissler H, Strunz K, et al (2005). Ultrasound guided large-core needle biopsies of breast lesions: analysis of 962 cases to determine the number of samples for reliable tumour classification. Br J Cancer, 92, 231-5. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bjc.6602303
- Suh YJ, Kim MJ, Kim EK, et al (2012). Comparison of the underestimation rate in cases with ductal carcinoma in situ at ultrasound-guided core biopsy: 14-gauge automated core-needle biopsy vs 8-or 11-gauge vacuum-assisted biopsy. Br J Radiol, 85, 349-56. https://doi.org/10.1259/bjr/30974918
- Teng-Swan Ho J, Tan PH, Hee SW, Su-Lin Wong J (2008). Underestimation of malignancy of atypical ductal hyperplasia diagnosed on 11-gauge stereotactically guided mammotome breast biopsy: an Asian breast screen experience. Breast, 17, 401-6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.breast.2008.02.007
- Wiratkapun C, Treesit T, Wibulpolprasert B, Lertsithichai P (2012). Diagnostic accuracy ultrasonography-guided core needle biopsy for breast lesions. Singapore Med J, 53, 40-5.
- Youk JH, Kim EK, Kim MJ (2009). Atypical ductal hyperplasia diagnosed at sonographically guided 14-gauge core needle biopsy of breast mass. Am J Roentgenol, 192, 1135-41. https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.08.1144
Cited by
- Ultrasonography-guided 14-gauge core biopsy of the breast: results of 7 years of experience vol.37, pp.1, 2018, https://doi.org/10.14366/usg.17028