Does the radiologist need to rescan the breast lesion to validate the final BI-RADS US assessment made on the static images in the diagnostic setting?

References

• Ohuchi N, Suzuki A, Sobue T, et al. Sensitivity and specificity of mammography and adjunctive ultrasonography to screen for breast cancer in the Japan Strategic Anti-cancer Randomized Trial (J-START): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet (Lond, Engl). 2016;387(10016):341–348. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(15)00774-6
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berg WA, Bandos AI, Mendelson EB, Lehrer D, Jong RA, Pisano ED. Ultrasound as the primary screening test for breast cancer: analysis from ACRIN 6666. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2016;108(4):djv367. doi:10.1093/jnci/djv36726712110
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Shen S, Zhou Y, Xu Y, et al. A multi-centre randomised trial comparing ultrasound vs mammography for screening breast cancer in high-risk Chinese women. Br J Cancer. 2015;112(6):998–1004. doi:10.1038/bjc.2015.3325668012
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fan L, Strasser-Weippl K, Li J-J, et al. Breast cancer in China. Lancet Oncol. 2014;15(7):e279–e289. doi:10.1016/S1470-2045(13)70567-924872111
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dai H, Yan Y, Wang P, et al. Distribution of mammographic density and its influential factors among Chinese women. Int J Epidemiol. 2014;43(4):1240–1251. doi:10.1093/ije/dyu04224639441
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nelson HD, Pappas M, Cantor A, Griffin J, Daeges M, Humphrey L. Harms of breast cancer screening: systematic review to update the 2009 U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation. Ann Intern Med. 2016;164(4):256–267. doi:10.7326/M15-097026756737
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hooley RJ, Scoutt LM, Philpotts LE. Breast ultrasonography: state of the art. Radiology. 2013;268(3):642–659. doi:10.1148/radiol.1312160623970509
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stavros AT, Thickman D, Rapp CL, Dennis MA, Parker SH, Sisney GA. Solid breast nodules: use of sonography to distinguish between benign and malignant lesions. Radiology. 1995;196(1):123–134. doi:10.1148/radiology.196.1.77845557784555
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sickles E, D’Orsi C, Bassett L, Appleton C, Berg W, Burnside E. ACR BI-RADS ® Atlas Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System. Reston (VA): American College of Radiology; 2013.
   Google Scholar
• American College of Radiology. ACR practice parameter for the performance of a breast ultrasound examination. Available at: https://www.acr.org/-/media/ACR/Files/Practice-Parameters/US-Breast.pdf?la=en. Res.38-2016. Accessed Oct 20, 2018.
   Google Scholar
• Kaplan SS. Clinical utility of bilateral whole-breast US in the evaluation of women with dense breast tissue. Radiology. 2001;221(3):641–649. doi:10.1148/radiol.221301036411719658
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hooley RJ, Greenberg KL, Stackhouse RM, Geisel JL, Butler RS, Philpotts LE. Screening US in patients with mammographically dense breasts: initial experience with Connecticut Public Act 09-41. Radiology. 2012;265(1):59–69. doi:10.1148/radiol.1212062122723501
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tohno E, Takahashi H, Tamada T, Fujimoto Y, Yasuda H, Ohuchi N. Educational program and testing using images for the standardization of breast cancer screening by ultrasonography. Breast Cancer. 2012;19(2):138–146. doi:10.1007/s12282-010-0221-x20924733
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berg WA, Blume JD, Cormack JB, Mendelson EB. Training the ACRIN 6666 Investigators and effects of feedback on breast ultrasound interpretive performance and agreement in BI-RADS ultrasound feature analysis. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2012;199(1):224–235. doi:10.2214/AJR.11.732422733916
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hu Y, Yang Y, Gu R, et al. Does patient age affect the PPV3 of ACR BI-RADS ultrasound categories 4 and 5 in the diagnostic setting? Eur Radiol. 2018;28(6):2492–2498. doi:10.1007/s00330-017-5203-329302783
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Landis JR, Koch GG. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics. 1977;33(1):159–174.843571
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berg WA, Mendelson EB. Technologist-performed handheld screening breast US imaging: how is it performed and what are the outcomes to date? Radiology. 2014;272(1):12–27. doi:10.1148/radiol.1413262824956046
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sung JS. High-quality breast ultrasonography. Radiol Clin North Am. 2014;52(3):519–526. doi:10.1016/j.rcl.2014.02.01224792653
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berg WA, Blume JD, Cormack JB, Mendelson EB. Operator dependence of physician-performed whole-breast US: lesion detection and characterization. Radiology. 2006;241(2):355–365. doi:10.1148/radiol.241205171017057064
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Youk JH, Jung I, Yoon JH, et al. Comparison of inter-observer variability and diagnostic performance of the fifth edition of BI-RADS for breast ultrasound of static versus video images. Ultrasound Med Biol. 2016;42(9):2083–2088. doi:10.1016/j.ultrasmedbio.2016.05.00627324292
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Foldi M, Hanjalic-Beck A, Klar M, et al. Video sequence compared to conventional freeze image documentation: a way to improve the sonographic assessment of breast lesions? Ultraschall Med. 2011;32(5):497–503. doi:10.1055/s-0029-124579721294070
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zou X, Wang J, Lan X, et al. Assessment of diagnostic accuracy and efficiency of categories 4 and 5 of the second edition of the BI-RADS ultrasound lexicon in diagnosing breast lesions. Ultrasound Med Biol. 2016;42(9):2065–2071. doi:10.1016/j.ultrasmedbio.2016.04.02027262521
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Holsbeke C, Yazbek J, Holland TK, et al. Real-time ultrasound vs. evaluation of static images in the preoperative assessment of adnexal masses. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2008;32(6):828–831. doi:10.1002/uog.621418925606
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Raza S, Chikarmane SA, Neilsen SS, Zorn LM, Birdwell RL. BI-RADS 3, 4, and 5 lesions: value of US in management–follow-up and outcome. Radiology. 2008;248(3):773–781. doi:10.1148/radiol.248307178618647850
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berg WA, Cosgrove DO, Dore CJ, et al. Shear-wave elastography improves the specificity of breast US: the BE1 multinational study of 939 masses. Radiology. 2012;262(2):435–449. doi:10.1148/radiol.1111064022282182
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar