AIUM Practice Guideline for the Performance of a Breast Ultrasound Examination

2009 ◽  
Vol 28 (1) ◽  
pp. 105-109 ◽  
Choonpa Igaku ◽  
2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ayami SHIMIZU ◽  
Yuko HASHIMOTO ◽  
Tsuyoshi TABATA ◽  
Kazuhiro SHIMIZU ◽  
Nobuo TAKADA

2021 ◽  
Vol 64 (10) ◽  
pp. 671-677
Author(s):  
Su Min Ha ◽  
Jung Min Chang

Background: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine-induced lymphadenopathy is a critical side effect that should be a concern to clinicians, patients, radiologists, and oncologists. Vaccine-induced lymphadenopathy causes a diagnostic dilemma, especially for breast radiologists who examine both axillary regions during breast ultrasound examinations. Appropriate imaging guidelines are needed to manage vaccine-induced lymphadenopathy for patients undergoing screening examinations or symptomatic patients, including cancer patients.Current Concepts: For patients with axillary lymphadenopathy in the setting of recent ipsilateral vaccination, clinical follow-up is recommended. In other scenarios, short-term follow-up axillary ultrasound examinations are recommended if the clinical concerns persist for more than 6 weeks after vaccination. To mitigate the diagnostic dilemma of vaccine-induced lymphadenopathy, patients should schedule screening imaging examinations before the first vaccination or at least six weeks following the second vaccination. For clinicians and radiologists, documenting the patients’ vaccination status is critical to decreasing unnecessary follow-up imaging, biopsies, and patient’s anxiety.Discussion and Conclusion: Our proposal can help reduce patient anxiety, provider burden, and costs of unnecessary evaluation of enlarged lymph nodes in the setting of recent COVID-19 vaccination. Further, it can avoid delays in vaccination and breast cancer screening during the COVID-19 pandemic.


Author(s):  
Werner Bader ◽  
Claudia Maria Vogel-Minea ◽  
Jens-Uwe Blohmer ◽  
Volker Duda ◽  
Christian Eichler ◽  
...  

AbstractFor many years, breast ultrasound has been used in addition to mammography as an important method for clarifying breast findings. However, differences in the interpretation of findings continue to be problematic 1 2. These differences decrease the diagnostic accuracy of ultrasound after detection of a finding and complicate interdisciplinary communication and the comparison of scientific studies 3. In 1999, the American College of Radiology (ACR) created a working group (International Expert Working Group) that developed a classification system for ultrasound examinations based on the established BI-RADS classification of mammographic findings under consideration of literature data 4. Due to differences in content, the German Society for Ultrasound in Medicine (DEGUM) published its own BI-RADS-analogue criteria catalog in 2006 3. In addition to the persistence of differences in content, there is also an issue with formal licensing with the current 5th edition of the ACR BI-RADS catalog, even though the content is recognized by the DEGUM as another system for describing and documenting findings. The goal of the Best Practice Guideline of the Breast Ultrasound Working Group of the DEGUM is to provide colleagues specialized in senology with a current catalog of ultrasound criteria and assessment categories as well as best practice recommendations for the various ultrasound modalities.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document