Rad
Mammogram
search
Mammogram
, Mammography
See Also
Mammogram Interpretation
(
BI-RADS
)
Breast Mass
Indications
Breast Cancer Screening
Background
Mammogram visualizes glandular tissue
Lucent Areas
Fat appears as dark, hazy gray areas
White areas
Parenchymal cells and ducts
Breast
tissue abnormalities
Protocol
Mammographic Views
Preparation
Breast
compressed to 6 cm
Skin taut
More compression
Uses less radiation
Results in better image
Standard Views
Cranial caudal (C-C)
Head to toe view
Shows medial tissue with centered nipple
Medial-Lateral Oblique (MLO)
Side view including axilla
Images more of
Breast
than C-C view
Additional Views
Cone down compression
Indicated for
Nodule
s
Magnification
Indicated for micro-calcifications
Eklund View (Implant Displacement View)
Indicated for
Breast Implant
s
Pushes
Breast Implant
out of image
Compresses
Breast
to 3.5 cm
Very umcomfortable for patient
Protocol
Technological enhancement
Digital Mammography
Overall diagnostic accuracy similar to XRay film
Test Sensitivity
better in specific cohorts
Women younger than 50 and premenopausal women
Radiographically dense
Breast
s
Pisano (2005) N Engl J Med 353:1773-83 [PubMed]
Computer-aided detection
Test Sensitivity
decreases with use
Higher
False Positive Rate
No change in overall
Breast Cancer
detection rates
Fenton (2007) N Engl J Med 356:1399-409 [PubMed]
Timing
Perform during
Follicular Phase
(Days 1-14)
Less
Breast
engorgement
Age 40-49 years
ACOG and AMA recommend every 1-2 years
USPSTF Strength of Recommendation
: C
New data recommends every 18 month Mammograms
Reference
Bjurstam (1997) Cancer 80: 2091-9 [PubMed]
Age 50 years and older
Annual Mammogram
USPSTF Strength of Recommendation
: A
Continue screening indefinitely as long as benefit
Efficacy
Early detection of
Breast Cancer
Detects
Breast Cancer
1.7 years before
Breast Exam
Detects lesions as small as 12 mm
Benefits outweigh risks for women ages 50 to 74 years
Reference
Sox (1998)
Test Sensitivity
: 60 to 95%
False Negative Rate
: 15%
Less effective in:
Dense
Breast
s
Women younger than age 50 years
Hormone Replacement
References
Mushlin (1998) Am J Prev Med 14:143-53 [PubMed]
Test Specificity
: 94-97%
False Positive Rate
: 3-6%
Higher rate of
False Positive
s under age 60 years
24% of U.S women have at least 1
False Positive
/10 yr
49% cummulative
False Positive
risk with 10 Mammogram
Reference
Elmore (1998) N Engl J Med 338:1089-96
Consensus Double Reading
Two radiologists independently review Mammograms
Identified 80
Breast Cancer
s per 10,000 reading
Only 71
Breast Cancer
s found by a single reader
Saved $7300 over cost of a single reader
Reference
Brown (1996) BMJ 312:809-12 [PubMed]
Risks
Radiation exposure with Mammogram is NOT significant
Two view Mammogram delivers less than 0.5 Centigray
200 Mammograms would be needed to raise cancer risk
References
(2002) Am Fam Physician 65(12):2537-44 [PubMed]
Type your search phrase here