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
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 Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Cupples, T.
Right arrow Articles by Cardenosa, G
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Cupples, T.
Right arrow Articles by Cardenosa, G

Radiology, Vol 199, 105-108, Copyright © 1996 by Radiological Society of North America


ARTICLES

Mammographic halo sign revisited

TE Cupples, GW Eklund and G Cardenosa
Susan G. Komen Breast Center, Saint Francis Medical Center, Peoria, IL 61614, USA.

PURPOSE: To determine whether increased silver halide deposition accounts for some curvilinear areas of hyperlucency (halo signs) that surround breast masses on screen-film mammograms. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Breast images obtained in 43 women (aged 30-67 years; mean, 48.6 years) that showed a halo sign were selected from the authors' teaching files. Optical magnification (x8.0-12.5) of the masses with halos was used to establish the pattern of silver halide deposition in the film emulsion. RESULTS: True radiolucent halos, differentiated from Mach bands by means of the increased silver halide deposition in the film emulsion, were identified in 44 masses in 36 women. Partial true radiolucent halos were identified in 32 (73%) of 44 masses. Thirty- eight (86%) of the 44 masses were cysts; three (7%), fibroadenomas; two (4%), infiltrating ductal carcinomas; and one (2%), axillary lymph node metastasis. True radiolucent halos were more common in growing benign and malignant lesions. CONCLUSION: A halo is not always a perceptual illusion.





HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
RADIOLOGY RADIOGRAPHICS RSNA JOURNALS ONLINE
Copyright © 1996 by the Radiological Society of North America.