Download PDF
CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Ann Natl Acad Med Sci 2022; 58(02): 069-077
DOI: 10.1055/s-0042-1744392
Review Article

Best Practice Guidelines for Breast Imaging, Breast Imaging Society, India: Part—2

Suma Chakrabarthi
1   Department of Radiology and Imaging, Peerless Hospitex Hospital and Research Center Limited, Kolkata, West Bengal, India
,
Shikha Panwar
2   Department of Radiology, Mahajan Imaging, Delhi, India
,
Tulika Singh
3   Department of Radiodiagnosis and Imaging, Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, Chandigarh, India
,
Shilpa Lad
4   Department of Radiology, NM Medical, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India
,
Jwala Srikala
5   Department of Radiology and Imaging, Krishna Institute of Medical Sciences, Secunderabad, India
,
Niranjan Khandelwal
6   Former Head, Department of Radiodiagnosis and Imaging, Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, Chandigarh, India
,
Sanjeev Misra
7   Department of Surgical Oncology, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Jodhpur, Rajasthan, India
,
Sanjay Thulkar
8   Department of Radiology, Dr BRA IRCH, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India
› Author Affiliations
› Further Information
Also available at
   Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Breast imaging is a prerequisite for providing high quality breast health care. Choosing the appropriate investigation is central to diagnosing breast disease in patients who present to health professionals for treatment. These patients present to doctors of different subspecialties as well as to general practitioners in our country. It is important, therefore, to provide uniform guidance to doctors in different healthcare setups of our country, urban and rural, government and private, for optimal management of breast diseases. These guidelines framed by the task group set up by the Breast Imaging Society, India, have been formulated focusing primarily on the Indian patients and health care infrastructures. They aim to provide a framework for the referring doctors and practicing radiologists to enable them to choose the appropriate investigation for patients with breast symptoms and signs. The aim has been to keep this framework simple and practical so that it can guide not only subspecialists in breast care but also help doctors who do not routinely deal with breast diseases, so that breast cancer is not missed. Overall, the aim of this document is to provide a holistic approach to standardize breast care imaging services in India. Part 2 of these guidelines focuses on the best practice principles for breast interventions and provides algorithms for the investigation of specific common breast symptoms and signs. Ultrasound is the preferred imaging modality for image-guided breast interventions due to real-time needle visualization, easy availability, patient comfort and absence of radiation. Stereotactic mammography guided procedures are performed if the lesion is visualized on mammography but not visualized on ultrasound. 14-gauge automated core biopsy device is preferred for breast biopsies although vacuum assisted biopsy devices are useful for biopsy of certain abnormalities as well as for imaging guided excision of some pathologies. MRI guided biopsy is reserved for suspicious lesions seen only on MRI. Algorithms for investigation of patients presenting with mastalgia, breast lumps, suspicious nipple discharge, infections and inflammation of the breast have been provided. For early breast cancers routine use of investigations to detect occult distant metastasis is not advised. Metastatic work up for advanced breast cancer is required for selection of appropriate treatment options.

Keywords

Breast Imaging Society, India - Best practice guidelines for breast imaging - mammography - breast ultrasound - breast magnetic resonance imaging - core biopsy - vacuum-assisted breast biopsy - stereotactic biopsy - investigations for common breast symptoms - imaging-guided breast biopsy

Disclaimer

The Best Practice Guidelines of Breast Imaging Society, India (BISI) are the broad guidelines for investigation, intervention, and management of clients opting for breast screening and patients with breast symptoms in India and intended for the use of qualified medical caregivers only. These are based on various national and international guidelines and personal experiences and opinions of BISI members, as there are no large credible Indian data to formulate these guidelines. These guidelines are purely recommendatory in nature. Actual decisions for the management of patients should be individualized according to own judgment of the caregiver and tailored on case-to-case basis. As scientific knowledge is continuously improving, a regular update of the same by the caregiver is essential. Failure to do so may result in untoward patient management or outcome and BISI members or BISI as the organization cannot be held responsible for that in any manner.


Author Contributions

S.C. contributed to mammography and all other sections, S.P. contributed to breast MRI, T.S. contributed to breast ultrasound, S.L. contributed to breast interventions, J.S. contributed to breast MRI, N.K. contributed to mammography, S.M. contributed to common breast symptoms: algorithm for imaging evaluation and all other sections, and S.T. contributed to common breast symptoms: algorithm for imaging evaluation and all other sections.




Publication History

Article published online:
07 June 2022

© 2022. National Academy of Medical Sciences (India). This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)

Thieme Medical and Scientific Publishers Pvt. Ltd.
A-12, 2nd Floor, Sector 2, Noida-201301 UP, India

 

  • References

  • 1 Liberman L, Fahs MC, Dershaw DD. et al. Impact of stereotaxic core breast biopsy on cost of diagnosis. Radiology 1995; 195 (03) 633-637
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Liberman L, LaTrenta LR, Dershaw DD. et al. Impact of core biopsy on the surgical management of impalpable breast cancer. Am J Roentgenol 1997; 168 (02) 495-499
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Liberman L, LaTrenta LR, Dershaw DD. Impact of core biopsy on the surgical management of impalpable breast cancer: another look at margins. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1997; 169 (05) 1464-1465
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Liberman L. Centennial dissertation. Percutaneous imaging-guided core breast biopsy: state of the art at the millennium. Am J Roentgenol 2000; 174 (05) 1191-1199
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Hari S, Kumari S, Srivastava A, Thulkar S, Mathur S, Veedu PT. Image guided versus palpation guided core needle biopsy of palpable breast masses: a prospective study. Indian J Med Res 2016; 143 (05) 597-604
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Parker SH, Jobe WE, Dennis MA. et al. US-guided automated large-core breast biopsy. Radiology 1993; 187 (02) 507-511
    Google Scholar
  • 7 Jackman RJ, Burbank F, Parker SH. et al. Stereotactic breast biopsy of nonpalpable lesions: determinants of ductal carcinoma in situ underestimation rates. Radiology 2001; 218 (02) 497-502
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Liberman L, Evans III WP, Dershaw DD. et al. Radiography of microcalcifications in stereotaxic mammary core biopsy specimens. Radiology 1994; 190 (01) 223-225
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Liberman L, Dershaw DD, Rosen PP, Abramson AF, Deutch BM, Hann LE. Stereotaxic 14-gauge breast biopsy: how many core biopsy specimens are needed?. Radiology 1994; 192 (03) 793-795
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Burbank F, Parker SH, Fogarty TJ. Stereotactic breast biopsy: improved tissue harvesting with the Mammotome. Am Surg 1996; 62 (09) 738-744
    Google Scholar
  • 11 Burbank F. Stereotactic breast biopsy: comparison of 14- and 11-gauge Mammotome probe performance and complication rates. Am Surg 1997; 63 (11) 988-995
    Google Scholar
  • 12 Berg WA, Krebs TL, Campassi C, Magder LS, Sun CCJ. Evaluation of 14- and 11-gauge directional, vacuum-assisted biopsy probes and 14-gauge biopsy guns in a breast parenchymal model. Radiology 1997; 205 (01) 203-208
    Google Scholar
  • 13 Rogers LW. Breast biopsy: a pathologist's perspective on biopsy aquisition techniques and devices with mammographic-pathologic correlation. Semin Breast Dis 2005; 8: 127-137
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Yu YH, Wei W, Liu JL. Diagnostic value of fine-needle aspiration biopsy for breast mass: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Cancer 2012; 12: 41
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Vimpeli SM, Saarenmaa I, Huhtala H, Soimakallio S. Large-core needle biopsy versus fine-needle aspiration biopsy in solid breast lesions: comparison of costs and diagnostic value. Acta Radiol 2008; 49 (08) 863-869
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Nath ME, Robinson TM, Tobon H, Chough DM, Sumkin JH. Automated large-core needle biopsy of surgically removed breast lesions: comparison of samples obtained with 14-, 16-, and 18-gauge needles. Radiology 1995; 197 (03) 739-742
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Fishman JE, Milikowski C, Ramsinghani R, Velasquez MV, Aviram G. US-guided core-needle biopsy of the breast: how many specimens are necessary?. Radiology 2003; 226 (03) 779-782
    Google Scholar
  • 18 McIlhenny C, Doughty JC, George WD, Mallon EA. Optimum number of core biopsies for accurate assessment of histological grade in breast cancer. Br J Surg 2002; 89 (01) 84-85
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Lee SH, Kim EK, Kim MJ, Moon HJ, Yoon JH. Vacuum-assisted breast biopsy under ultrasonographic guidance: analysis of a 10-year experience. Ultrasonography 2014; 33 (04) 259-266
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Seely JM. Management of breast magnetic resonance imaging-detected lesions. Can Assoc Radiol J 2012; 63 (03) 192-206
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Liberman L, Bracero N, Morris E, Thornton C, Dershaw DD. MRI-guided 9-gauge vacuum-assisted breast biopsy: initial clinical experience. Am J Roentgenol 2005; 185 (01) 183-193
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Price ER, Morris EA. Magnetic resonance imaging-guided breast biopsies: tips and tricks. Can Assoc Radiol J 2011; 62 (01) 15-21
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Heywang-Köbrunner SH, Sinnatamby R, Lebeau A, Lebrecht A, Britton PD, Schreer I. Consensus Group. Interdisciplinary consensus on the uses and technique of MR-guided vacuum-assisted breast biopsy (VAB): results of a European consensus meeting. Eur J Radiol 2009; 72 (02) 289-294
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Trop I, Dugas A, David J. et al. Breast abscesses: evidence-based algorithms for diagnosis, management, and follow-up. Radiographics 2011; 31 (06) 1683-1699
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Smith DN, Kaelin CM, Korbin CD, Ko W, Meyer JE, Carter GR. Impalpable breast cysts: utility of cytologic examination of fluid obtained with radiologically guided aspiration. Radiology 1997; 204 (01) 149-151
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Youk JH, Kim EK, Kwak JY, Son EJ, Park BW, Kim SI. Benign papilloma without atypia diagnosed at US-guided 14-gauge core-needle biopsy: clinical and US features predictive of upgrade to malignancy. Radiology 2011; 258 (01) 81-88
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Eiada R, Chong J, Kulkarni S, Goldberg F, Muradali D. Papillary lesions of the breast: MRI, ultrasound, and mammographic appearances. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2012; 198 (02) 264-271
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Dinkel HP, Gassel AM, Müller T, Lourens S, Rominger M, Tschammler A. Galactography and exfoliative cytology in women with abnormal nipple discharge. Obstet Gynecol 2001; 97 (04) 625-629
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Orel SG, Dougherty CS, Reynolds C, Czerniecki BJ, Siegelman ES, Schnall MD. MR imaging in patients with nipple discharge: initial experience. Radiology 2000; 216 (01) 248-254
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Nakahara H, Namba K, Watanabe R. et al. A comparison of MR imaging, galactography and ultrasonography in patients with nipple discharge. Breast Cancer 2003; 10 (04) 320-329
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Youk JH, Kim EK, Kim MJ, Lee JY, Oh KK. Missed breast cancers at US-guided core needle biopsy: how to reduce them. Radiographics 2007; 27 (01) 79-94
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 D'Orsi CJ, Sickles EA, Mendelson EB. et al. ACR BI-RADS® Atlas, Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System. Reston, VA: American College of Radiology; 2013
    Google Scholar
  • 33 Indian Council of Medical Research. 2016 Government of India. ICMR Subcommittee on Breast Cancer. Consensus document for management of breast cancer,. 2016. Accessed September 2021 at: http://cancerindia.org.in/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/Breast_Cancer.pdf
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Hari S, Srivastav A, Thulkar S. Scope of breast imaging in developing countries. Nepal J Radiol 2013; 3 (02) 11-30
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 35 The American College of Radiology. ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Palpable Breast Masses, Revised 2016. Accessed September 2021 at: https://acsearch.acr.org/docs/69495/narrative/
    Google Scholar
  • 36 Debi U, Thulkar S, Sharma S. et al. Role of directional vacuum assisted breast biopsy in previously equivocal biopsies for breast masses suspicious for malignancy. Malays J Pathol 2015; 37 (01) 25-33
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 37 Srivastava A, Mansel RE, Arvind N, Prasad K, Dhar A, Chabra A. Evidence-based management of Mastalgia: a meta-analysis of randomised trials. Breast 2007; 16 (05) 503-512
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 38 Ulitzsch D, Nyman MK, Carlson RA. Breast abscess in lactating women: US-guided treatment. Radiology 2004; 232 (03) 904-909
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 39 Froman J, Landercasper J, Ellis R, De Maiffe B, Theede L. Red breast as a presenting complaint at a breast center: an institutional review. Surgery 2011; 149 (06) 813-819
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 40 Rea D, Francis A, Hanby AM. et al; UK Inflammatory Breast Cancer Working group. Inflammatory breast cancer: time to standardise diagnosis assessment and management, and for the joining of forces to facilitate effective research. Br J Cancer 2015; 112 (09) 1613-1615
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 41 Dolan RT, Butler JS, Kell MR, Gorey TF, Stokes MA. Nipple discharge and the efficacy of duct cytology in evaluating breast cancer risk. Surgeon 2010; 8 (05) 252-258
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 42 The American College of Radiology. ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Evaluation of Nipple Discharge,. 2016 . Accessed September 2021 at: https://acsearch.acr.org/docs/3099312/Narrative/
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 43 Ramalingam K, Srivastava A, Vuthaluru S, Dhar A, Chaudhry R. Duct ectasia and periducatal mastitis in Indian women. Indian J Surg 2015; 77 (Suppl. 03) 957-962
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 44 Dawes LG, Bowen C, Venta LA, Morrow M. Ductography for nipple discharge: no replacement for ductal excision. Surgery 1998; 124 (04) 685-691
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 45 Lee JM, Orel SG, Czerniecki BJ, Solin LJ, Schnall MD. MRI before reexcision surgery in patients with breast cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2004; 182 (02) 473-480
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 46 Munshi A, Gupta S, Anderson B. et al; other Locoregional Panel Members. Guidelines for locoregional therapy in primary breast cancer in developing countries: the results of an expert panel at the 8(th) Annual Women's Cancer Initiative - Tata Memorial Hospital (WCI-TMH) Conference. Indian J Med Paediatr Oncol 2012; 33 (02) 112-122
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 47 National Comprehensive Cancer Network®, United States of America. NCCN clinical practice guidelines in oncology, Breast Cancer, Version 5. 2020 . Accessed September 2021 at: https://www2.tri-kobe.org/nccn/guideline/breast/english/breast.pdf
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 48 The American College of Surgeons. Breast Cancer Staging System: American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) Cancer Staging Manual, 8th edition. Accessed September 2021 at: http://www.breastsurgeonsweb.com/wp-content/uploads/downloads/2020/10/AJCC-Breast-Cancer-Staging-System.pdf
    Google Scholar
  • 49 National Cancer Grid. India. Breast Cancer Management Guidelines. September, 2019. Accessed September 2021 at: https://tmc.gov.in/ncg/docs/PDF/DraftGuidelines/Breast/NCG_guidelines_2019_Breast.pdf
    Google Scholar
  • 50 Kalli S, Semine A, Cohen S, Naber SP, Makim SS, Bahl M. American Joint Committee on Cancer's Staging System for Breast Cancer, Eighth Edition: what the radiologist needs to know. Radiographics 2018; 38 (07) 1921-1933
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 51 Mann RM, Balleyguier C, Baltzer PA. et al; European Society of Breast Imaging (EUSOBI), with language review by Europa Donna–The European Breast Cancer Coalition. Breast MRI: EUSOBI recommendations for women's information. Eur Radiol 2015; 25 (12) 3669-3678
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 52 Moschetti I, Cinquini M, Lambertini M, Levaggi A, Liberati A. Follow-up strategies for women treated for early breast cancer. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2016; 201 (05) CD001768
    Google Scholar