Download PDF
CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Indian J Radiol Imaging
DOI: 10.1055/s-0044-1779589
Review Article

Approach to Nonmass Lesions on Breast Ultrasound

Supraja Laguduva Mohan
1   Department of Radiodiagnosis and Interventional Radiology, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India
,
Ekta Dhamija 
1   Department of Radiodiagnosis and Interventional Radiology, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India
,
Richa Gauba
2   Department of Radiodiagnosis, National Cancer Institute - All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Jhajjar, Haryana, India
› Author Affiliations Funding None.
› Further Information
Also available at
   Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Nonmass lesions in breast ultrasound (US) are areas of altered echogenicity without definite margins or mass effect. However, these lesions may show calcifications, associated architectural distortion, or shadowing just like masses. They vary in their echogenicity, distribution, ductal or nonductal appearance and the associated features that can be seen in variety of benign and malignant pathologies. With no uniform definition or classification system, there is no standardized approach in further risk categorization and management strategies of these lesions. Malignant nonmass lesions are not uncommon and few sonographic features can help in differentiating benign and malignant pathologies. US-guided tissue sampling or lesion localization can be preferred in the nonmass lesions identified on second look US after magnetic resonance imaging or mammography. This article aims to describe various imaging patterns and attempts to provide an algorithmic approach to nonmass findings on breast US.

Keywords

nonmass lesions - BIRADS - architectural distortion - breast ultrasound

Author Contributions

S.L.M. contributed to resources and writing—original draft. E.D. helped in conceptualization, resources, writing—review and editing, and supervision. R.G. was involved in writing—review and editing.




Publication History

Article published online:
23 February 2024

© 2024. Indian Radiological Association. 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 Mendelson EB, Böhm-Vélez M, Berg WA, Whitman GJ, Feldman MI, Madjar H. Acr bi-rads® ultrasound. ACR BI-RADS® atlas, breast imaging reporting and data system. 2013;149.
  • 2 Choe J, Chikarmane SA, Giess CS. Nonmass findings at breast US: definition, classifications, and differential diagnosis. Radiographics 2020; 40 (02) 326-335
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Kim SJ, Park YM, Jung HK. Nonmasslike lesions on breast sonography: comparison between benign and malignant lesions. J Ultrasound Med 2014; 33 (03) 421-430
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Ko ES, Choi HY, Kim RB, Noh WC. Application of sonoelastography: comparison of performance between mass and non-mass lesion. Eur J Radiol 2012; 81 (04) 731-736
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Lee J, Lee JH, Baik S. et al. Non-mass lesions on screening breast ultrasound. Med Ultrason 2016; 18 (04) 446-451
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Yamaguchi R, Watanabe H, Mihara Y, Yamaguchi M, Tanaka M. Histopathology of non-mass-like breast lesions on ultrasound. J Med Ultrason 2023; 50 (03) 375-380
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Endo T, Kubota M, Konishi Y. et al. Draft Diagnostic Guidelines for Non-Mass Image-Forming Lesions by the Japan Association of Breast and Thyroid Sonology (JABTS) and the Japan Society of Ultrasonics in Medicine. In: Ueno E, Shiina T, Kubota M, Sawai K. eds. Research and Development in Breast Ultrasound. Tokyo: Springer; 2005: 89-100
    Google Scholar
  • 8 Uematsu T. Non-mass-like lesions on breast ultrasonography: a systematic review. Breast Cancer 2012; 19 (04) 295-301
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Ko KH, Hsu HH, Yu JC. et al. Non-mass-like breast lesions at ultrasonography: feature analysis and BI-RADS assessment. Eur J Radiol 2015; 84 (01) 77-85
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Wang ZL, Li N, Li M, Wan WB. Non-mass-like lesions on breast ultrasound: classification and correlation with histology. Radiol Med (Torino) 2015; 120 (10) 905-910
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Park JW, Ko KH, Kim EK, Kuzmiak CM, Jung HK. Non-mass breast lesions on ultrasound: final outcomes and predictors of malignancy. Acta Radiol 2017; 58 (09) 1054-1060
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Giess CS, Chesebro AL, Chikarmane SA. Ultrasound features of mammographic developing asymmetries and correlation with histopathologic findings. Am J Roentgenol 2018; 210 (01) W29-W38
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Ito T, Ueno E, Endo T. et al. The Japan Society of Ultrasonics in Medicine guidelines on non-mass abnormalities of the breast. J Med Ultrason 2023; 50 (03) 331-339
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Gao Y, Slanetz PJ, Eisenberg RL. Echogenic breast masses at US: to biopsy or not to biopsy?. Radiographics 2013; 33 (02) 419-434
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Ferris-James DM, Iuanow E, Mehta TS, Shaheen RM, Slanetz PJ. Imaging approaches to diagnosis and management of common ductal abnormalities. Radiographics 2012; 32 (04) 1009-1030
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Uematsu T. Non-mass lesions on breast ultrasound: why does not the ACR BI-RADS breast ultrasound lexicon add the terminology?. J Med Ultrason 2023; 50 (03) 341-346
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Sefidbakht S, Haseli S, Khalili N, Bazojoo V, Keshavarz P, Zeinali-Rafsanjani B. Can shear wave elastography be utilized as an additional tool for the assessment of non-mass breast lesions?. Ultrasound 2022; 30 (01) 44-51
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Zhang F, Jin L, Li G. et al. The role of contrast-enhanced ultrasound in the diagnosis of malignant non-mass breast lesions and exploration of diagnostic criteria. Br J Radiol 2021; 94 (1120): 20200880
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Zhang W, Xiao X, Xu X. et al. Non-mass breast lesions on ultrasound: feature exploration and multimode ultrasonic diagnosis. Ultrasound Med Biol 2018; 44 (08) 1703-1711
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Leong PW, Chotai NC, Kulkarni S. Imaging features of inflammatory breast disorders: a pictorial essay. Korean J Radiol 2018; 19 (01) 5-14
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Tan H, Li R, Peng W, Liu H, Gu Y, Shen X. Radiological and clinical features of adult non-puerperal mastitis. Br J Radiol 2013; 86 (1024): 20120657
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Alikhassi A, Azizi F, Ensani F. Imaging features of granulomatous mastitis in 36 patients with new sonographic signs. J Ultrasound 2020; 23 (01) 61-68
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Kim J, Kim EK, Kim MJ, Moon HJ, Yoon JH. Diabetic mastopathy: imaging features and the role of image-guided biopsy in its diagnosis. Ultrasonography 2016; 35 (02) 140-147
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Kim YR, Kim HS, Kim HW. Are irregular hypoechoic breast masses on ultrasound always malignancies?: a pictorial essay. Korean J Radiol 2015; 16 (06) 1266-1275
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Mesurolle B, Perez JCH, Azzumea F. et al. Atypical ductal hyperplasia diagnosed at sonographically guided core needle biopsy: frequency, final surgical outcome, and factors associated with underestimation. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2014; 202 (06) 1389-1394
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Chen YL, Chen JJ, Chang C. et al. Sclerosing adenosis: ultrasonographic and mammographic findings and correlation with histopathology. Mol Clin Oncol 2017; 6 (02) 157-162
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Trombadori CML, D'Angelo A, Ferrara F, Santoro A, Belli P, Manfredi R. Radial scar: a management dilemma. Radiol Med (Torino) 2021; 126 (06) 774-785
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Takei J, Tsunoda-Shimizu H, Kikuchi M. et al. Clinical implications of architectural distortion visualized by breast ultrasonography. Breast Cancer 2009; 16 (02) 132-135
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Bilgen IG, Ustun EE, Memis A. Fat necrosis of the breast: clinical, mammographic and sonographic features. Eur J Radiol 2001; 39 (02) 92-99
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Jin ZQ, Lin MY, Hao WQ. et al. Diagnostic evaluation of ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast: ultrasonographic, mammographic and histopathologic correlations. Ultrasound Med Biol 2015; 41 (01) 47-55
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Watanabe T, Yamaguchi T, Tsunoda H. et al. Ultrasound image classification of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) of the breast: analysis of 705 DCIS lesions. Ultrasound Med Biol 2017; 43 (05) 918-925
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Gunawardena DS, Burrows S, Taylor DB. Non-mass versus mass-like ultrasound patterns in ductal carcinoma in situ: is there an association with high-risk histology?. Clin Radiol 2020; 75 (02) 140-147
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Choi BB, Kim SH, Park CS, Cha ES, Lee AW. Radiologic findings of lobular carcinoma in situ: mammography and ultrasonography. J Clin Ultrasound 2011; 39 (02) 59-63
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Lamb PM, Perry NM, Vinnicombe SJ, Wells CA. Correlation between ultrasound characteristics, mammographic findings and histological grade in patients with invasive ductal carcinoma of the breast. Clin Radiol 2000; 55 (01) 40-44
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 35 Selinko VL, Middleton LP, Dempsey PJ. Role of sonography in diagnosing and staging invasive lobular carcinoma. J Clin Ultrasound 2004; 32 (07) 323-332
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 36 Shetty MK, Watson AB. Sonographic evaluation of focal asymmetric density of the breast. Ultrasound Q 2002; 18 (02) 115-121
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 37 Bahl M, Baker JA, Kinsey EN, Ghate SV. Architectural distortion on mammography: correlation with pathologic outcomes and predictors of malignancy. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2015; 205 (06) 1339-1345
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 38 Hong MJ, Cha JH, Kim HH. et al. Second-look ultrasonography for MRI-detected suspicious breast lesions in patients with breast cancer. Ultrasonography 2015; 34 (02) 125-132
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 39 Coskun Bilge A, Demir PI, Aydin H, Bostanci IE. Dynamic contrast-enhanced breast magnetic resonance imaging findings that affect the magnetic resonance-directed ultrasound correlation of non-mass enhancement lesions: a single-center retrospective study. Br J Radiol 2022; 95 (1132): 20210832
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 40 Sotome K, Yamamoto Y, Hirano A. et al. The role of contrast enhanced MRI in the diagnosis of non-mass image-forming lesions on breast ultrasonography. Breast Cancer 2007; 14 (04) 371-380
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 41 Lin M, Wu S. Ultrasound classification of non-mass breast lesions following BI-RADS presents high positive predictive value. PLoS One 2022; 17 (11) e0278299
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar