Radiology
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Rissanen, T. J.
Right arrow Articles by Kiviniemi, H. O.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Rissanen, T. J.
Right arrow Articles by Kiviniemi, H. O.

Radiology, Vol 188, 463-467, Copyright © 1993 by Radiological Society of North America

ARTICLES

Breast cancer recurrence after mastectomy: diagnosis with mammography and US

TJ Rissanen, HP Makarainen, SI Mattila, EL Lindholm, MI Heikkinen and HO Kiviniemi
Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Oulu University Central Hospital, Finland.

The authors reviewed mammograms and/or ultrasound (US) scans of 76 lesions (67 patients) suspected of being recurrent breast cancer. All patients had previously undergone mastectomy. Sixty-one cases were malignant disease and 15 were benign. Mammography and US were complementary to clinical examination in evaluating palpable lesions at the mastectomy site. Both imaging methods revealed nonpalpable recurrences. The sensitivity of US was 91%, whereas the sensitivities of clinical examination and mammography were 79% and 45%, respectively. US was the best imaging method for evaluating tumors in the chest wall far from the scar and in the axilla, as these could not be visualized on mammograms. Most recurrent cancers were seen as circumscribed masses at mammography and as hypoechoic lesions at US. Hyperechoic recurrences could not be differentiated from benign lesions. The value of early detection of recurrences with imaging methods remains to be seen.


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 J Ultrasound MedHome page
J. H. Youk, E.-K. Kim, M. J. Kim, and K. K. Oh
Imaging Findings of Chest Wall Lesions on Breast Sonography
J. Ultrasound Med., January 1, 2008; 27(1): 125 - 138.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J Ultrasound MedHome page
J. H. Shin, B.-K. Han, Y. H. Choe, S.-J. Nam, W. Park, and Y.-H. Im
Ultrasonographic Detection of Occult Cancer in Patients After Surgical Therapy for Breast Cancer
J. Ultrasound Med., May 1, 2005; 24(5): 643 - 649.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 RadioGraphicsHome page
J. I. Jung, H. H. Kim, S. H. Park, S. W. Song, M. H. Chung, H. S. Kim, K. J. Kim, M. I. Ahn, S. B. Seo, and S. T. Hahn
Thoracic Manifestations of Breast Cancer and Its Therapy
RadioGraphics, September 1, 2004; 24(5): 1269 - 1285.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 RadioGraphicsHome page
S. M. Kim and J. M. Park
Normal and Abnormal US Findings at the Mastectomy Site
RadioGraphics, March 1, 2004; 24(2): 357 - 365.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 RadioGraphicsHome page
J. P. Hogge, R. A. Zuurbier, and E. S. de Paredes
Mammography of Autologous Myocutaneous Flaps
RadioGraphics, October 1, 1999; 19(90001): 63 - 72.
[Abstract] [Full Text]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
RADIOLOGY RADIOGRAPHICS RSNA JOURNALS ONLINE
Copyright © 1993 by the Radiological Society of North America.