Controversies on the management of high-risk lesions at core biopsy from a radiology/pathology perspective.
Readers may feel less than satisfied when they discover that there is no consensus on the appropriate recommendations for follow-up of risk lesions following percutaneous core biopsy. The significance of this article is in the details of the methodologies and results, and much less in the numbers. The overall goal is to emphasize the flaws in current studies.
Georgian-Smith
Dianne
D
Division of Breast Imaging, Department of Radiology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, 75 Francis Street, RA 020, Boston, MA 02115, USA. dgeorgiansmith@partners.org
Lawton
Thomas J
TJ
D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D001707:Biopsy, Needle / Q000379:methods*; D001940:Breast / Q000473:pathology; D001943:Breast Neoplasms / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging / Q000473:pathology* / Q000601:surgery; D002278:Carcinoma in Situ / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging / Q000473:pathology; D018270:Carcinoma, Ductal, Breast / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging / Q000473:pathology / Q000601:surgery; D018275:Carcinoma, Lobular / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging / Q000473:pathology / Q000601:surgery; D005260:Female; D005500:Follow-Up Studies; D006801:Humans; D008327:Mammography / Q000379:methods; D009361:Neoplasm Invasiveness / Q000473:pathology*; D009364:Neoplasm Recurrence, Local / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging / Q000473:pathology*; D018570:Risk Assessment; D016217:Ultrasonography, Mammary / Q000379:methods