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 Huynh, P. T.
Right arrow Articles by Maxin, M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Huynh, P. T.
Right arrow Articles by Maxin, M.

Radiology, Vol 204, 137-141, Copyright © 1997 by Radiological Society of North America

ARTICLES

Dilated duct pattern at mammography

PT Huynh, JA Parellada, ES de Paredes, J Harvey, D Smith, L Holley and M Maxin
Department of Radiology, University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, 77030, USA.

PURPOSE: To determine the importance of a dilated duct pattern at mammography. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Mammograms obtained in 46 women with histopathologically proved, asymmetrically dilated ducts were retrospectively studied. The laterality and location of the asymmetrically dilated duct, the presence of branching, and associated findings such as microcalcifications, nipple discharge, and interval change were evaluated. RESULTS: Eleven patients (24%) had malignant results (ductal carcinoma in situ or invasive ductal carcinoma). Among these, six (54%) had suspicious microcalcifications. Nonsubareolar location and interval change are significant (P = .04) variables associated with malignancy. CONCLUSION: Mammographic asymmetrically dilated ducts in a nonsubareolar area that are associated with interval change, suspicious microcalcifications, or both warrant biopsy.


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 RadioGraphicsHome page
D. Da Costa, A. Taddese, M. L. Cure, D. Gerson, R. Poppiti Jr, and L. E. Esserman
Common and Unusual Diseases of the Nipple-Areolar Complex
RadioGraphics, October 1, 2007; 27(suppl_1): S65 - S77.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J Ultrasound MedHome page
B. E. Dogan, K. Ceyhan, S. Tukel, S. Saylisoy, and G. J. Whitman
Ductal Dilatation as the Manifesting Sign of Invasive Ductal Carcinoma
J. Ultrasound Med., October 1, 2005; 24(10): 1413 - 1417.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 RadioGraphicsHome page
A. S. Majid, E. S. de Paredes, R. D. Doherty, N. R. Sharma, and X. Salvador
Missed Breast Carcinoma: Pitfalls and Pearls
RadioGraphics, July 1, 2003; 23(4): 881 - 895.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J Ultrasound MedHome page
D. E. March, B. F. Coughlin, J. R. Polino, R. A. Goulart, and G. Makari-Judson
Single Dilated Lactiferous Duct Due to Papilloma: Ultrasonographically Guided Percutaneous Biopsy With a Vacuum-Assisted Device
J. Ultrasound Med., January 1, 2002; 21(1): 107 - 111.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
M. K. Shetty and A. B. Watson
Mondor's Disease of the Breast: Sonographic and Mammographic Findings
Am. J. Roentgenol., October 1, 2001; 177(4): 893 - 896.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 RadioGraphicsHome page
S. H. Slawson and B. A. Johnson
Ductography: How To and What If?
RadioGraphics, January 1, 2001; 21(1): 133 - 150.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
RADIOLOGY RADIOGRAPHICS RSNA JOURNALS ONLINE
Copyright © 1997 by the Radiological Society of North America.