References
- Allajbeu I, Hickman SE, Payne N, Moyle P, Taylor K, Sharma N et al.: Automated breast ultrasound: technical aspects, impact on breast screening, and future perspectives. Curr Breast Cancer Rep 2021; 13: 141–150.
- Van Zelst JCM, Mann RM: Automated three-dimensional breast US for screening: technique, artifacts, and lesion characterization. Radiogaphics 2018; 38: 663–683.
- Karst I, Henley C, Gottschalk N, Floyd S, Mendelson EB: Three-dimensional automated breast US: facts and artifacts. Radiographics 2019; 39: 913–931.
- Chae EY, Cha JH, Kim HH, Shin HJ: Comparison of lesion detection in the transverse and coronal views on automated breast sonography. J Ultrasound Med 2015; 34: 125–135.
- Brem RF, Tabár L, Duffy SW, Inciardi MF, Guingrich JA, Hashimoto BE et al.: Assessing improvement in detection of breast cancer with three-dimensional automated breast US in women with dense breast tissue: the SomoInsight Study. Radiology 2015; 274: 663–673.
- Vourtsis A: Three-dimensional automated breast ultrasound: technical aspects and first results. Diagn Interv Imaging 2019; 100: 579–592.
- Rella R, Belli P, Giuliani M, Bufi E, Carlino G, Rinaldi P et al.: Automated breast ultrasonography (ABUS) in the screening and diagnostic setting: Indications and practical use. Acad Radiol 2018; 25: 1457–1470.
- Zheng FY, Yan LX, Huang BJ, Xia HS, Wang X, Lu Q et al.: Comparison of retraction phenomenon and BI-RADS-US descriptors in differentiating benign and malignant breast masses using an automated breast volume scanner. Eur J Radiol 2015; 84: 2123–2129.
- Boca I, Ciurea AI, Ciortea CA, Dudea SM: Personalized medicine pros and cons for automated breast ultrasound (ABUS): a narrative review. J Pers Med 2021; 11: 703.
- Vourtsis A, Kachulis A: The performance of 3D ABUS versus HHUS in the visualisation and BI-RADS characterisation of breast lesions in a large cohort of 1,886 women. Eur Radiol 2018; 28: 592–601.
- Wilczek B, Wilczek HE, Rasouliyan L, Leifland K: Adding 3D automated breast ultrasound to mammography screening in women with heterogeneously and extremely dense breasts: Report from a hospital-based, high-volume, single-center breast cancer screening program. Eur J Radiol 2016; 85: 1554–1563.
- Hartmann LC, Sellers TA, Frost MH, Lingle WL, Degnim AC, Ghosh K et al.: Benign breast disease and the risk of breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2005; 353: 229–237.
- Arleo EK, Saleh M, Ionescu D, Drotman M, Min RJ, Hentel K: Recall rate of screening ultrasound with automated breast volumetric scanning (ABVS) in women with dense breasts: a first quarter experience. Clin Imaging 2014; 38: 439–444.
- Weaver DL, Rosenberg RD, Barlow WE, Ichikawa L, Carney PA, Kerlikowske K et al.: Pathologic findings from the breast cancer surveillance consortium population-based outcomes in women undergoing biopsy after screening mammography. Cancer 2006; 106: 732–742.
- Hogge JP, Robinson RE, Magnant CM, Zuurbier RA: The mammographic spectrum of fat necrosis of the breast. Radiographics 1995; 15: 1347–1356.
- Bitencourt A, Ferreira E, Bastos D, Sperandio V, Graziano L, Guatelli C et al.: Intramammary lymph nodes: normal and abnormal multimodality imaging features. Br J Radiol 2019; 92: 20190517.
- Wen X, Cheng W: Nonmalignant breast papillary lesions at core-needle biopsy: a meta-analysis of underestimation and influencing factors. Ann Surg Oncol 2013; 20: 94–101.
- Fasih T, Jain M, Shrimankar J, Staunton M, Hubbard J, Griffith CDM: All radial scars/complex sclerosing lesions seen on breast screening mammograms should be excised. Eur J Surg Oncol 2005; 31: 1125– 1128.
- Su A, Margolies L: Large subpectoral lipoma on screening mammography. J Radiol Case Rep 2017; 11: 22–27.
- Wanders JOP, Holland K, Veldhuis WB, Mann RM, Pijnappel RM, Peeters PHM et al.: Volumetric breast density affects performance of digital screening mammography. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2017; 162: 95–103.
- Chen L, Chen Y, Diao XH, Fang L, Pang Y, Cheng AQ et al.: Comparative study of automated breast 3D ultrasound and handheld B-mode ultrasound for differentiation of benign and malignant breast masses. Ultrasound Med Biol 2013; 39: 1735–1742.
- Au-Yong ITH, Evans AJ, Taneja S, Rakha EA, Green AR, Paish C et al.: Sonographic correlations with the new molecular classification of invasive breast cancer. Eur Radiol 2009; 19: 2342–2348.
- Blaichman J, Marcus JC, Alsaadi T, El-Khoury M, Meterissian S, Mesurolle B: Sonographic appearance of invasive ductal carcinoma of the breast according to histologic grade. Am J Roentgenol 2012; 199: 402–408.
- Irshad A, Leddy R, Pisano E, Baker N, Lewis M, Ackerman S et al.: Assessing the role of ultrasound in predicting the biological behavior of breast cancer. Am J Roentgenol 2013; 200: 284–290.
- Louwman MWJ, Vriezen M, van Beek MWPM, Tutein Nolthenius-Puylaert MCBJE, van der Sangen MJC, Roumen RM et al.: Uncommon breast tumors in perspective: incidence, treatment and survival in the Netherlands. Int J Cancer 2007; 121: 127–135.
- Jones KN, Magut M, Henrichsen TL, Boughey JC, Reynolds C, Glazebrook KN: Pure lobular carcinoma of the breast presenting as a hyperechoic mass: incidence and imaging characteristics. Am J Roentgenol 2013; 201: 765–769.
- Wang LC, Sullivan M, Du H, Feldman MI, Mendelson EB: US appearance of ductal carcinoma in situ. Radiographics 2013; 33: 213–228.