Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) for mammography (MMG)
Terms may undergo revision; consult current edition of lexicon published by American College of Radiology (ACR)
Minor changes in phrasing have been made
Definitions
Standardized terms to describe breast density, mammographic findings, assessment, and management recommendations
Includes guidance on report organization and audits
Facilitates communication across facilities, disciplines
Descriptors listed from least to most suggestive of malignancy
Combination of features leads to management decision
"Baseline" = 1st mammogram
IMAGING
Anatomy-Based Imaging Issues
Findings
PATHOLOGY
Pathology-Based Imaging Issues
DIAGNOSTIC CHECKLIST
Assessments and Recommendations
Selected References
Alshafeiy TI et al: Outcome of architectural distortion detected only at breast tomosynthesis versus 2D mammography. Radiology. 288(1):38-46, 2018
Choudhery S et al: Masses in the Era of screening tomosynthesis: Is diagnostic ultrasound sufficient? Br J Radiol. 20180801, 2018
Elezaby M et al: ACR BI-RADS assessment category 4 subdivisions in diagnostic mammography: utilization and outcomes in the National Mammography Database. Radiology. 170770, 2018
Oligane HC et al: Grouped amorphous calcifications at mammography: frequently atypical but rarely associated with aggressive malignancy. Radiology. 288(3):671-679, 2018
Grimm LJ et al: Suspicious breast calcifications undergoing stereotactic biopsy in women ages 70 and over: Breast cancer incidence by BI-RADS descriptors. Eur Radiol. 27(6):2275-81, 2017
Nakashima K et al: Comparison of visibility of circumscribed masses on Digital Breast Tomosynthesis (DBT) and 2D mammography: are circumscribed masses better visualized and assured of being benign on DBT? Eur Radiol. 27(2):570-7, 2017
Sickles EA et al: Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS): Mammography. 5th ed. Reston: American College of Radiology, 2013
Torres-Tabanera M et al: Analysis of the positive predictive value of the subcategories of BI-RADS(®) 4 lesions: preliminary results in 880 lesions. Radiologia. 54(6):520-531, 2012
Youk JH et al: Scoring system based on BI-RADS lexicon to predict probability of malignancy in suspicious microcalcifications. Ann Surg Oncol. 19(5):1491-8, 2012
Bent CK et al: The positive predictive value of BI-RADS microcalcification descriptors and final assessment categories. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 194(5):1378-83, 2010
Burnside ES et al: The ACR BI-RADS experience: learning from history. J Am Coll Radiol. 6(12):851-60, 2009
Venkatesan A et al: Positive predictive value of specific mammographic findings according to reader and patient variables. Radiology. 250(3):648-57, 2009
Kim SJ et al: Application of sonographic BI-RADS to synchronous breast nodules detected in patients with breast cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 191(3):653-8, 2008
Burnside ES et al: Use of microcalcification descriptors in BI-RADS 4th edition to stratify risk of malignancy. Radiology. 242(2):388-95, 2007
Berg WA et al: Does training in the Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) improve biopsy recommendations or feature analysis agreement with experienced breast imagers at mammography? Radiology. 224(3):871-80, 2002
Varas X et al: Revisiting the mammographic follow-up of BI-RADS category 3 lesions. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 179(3):691-5, 2002
Vizcaíno I et al: Short-term follow-up results in 795 nonpalpable probably benign lesions detected at screening mammography. Radiology. 219(2):475-83, 2001
Liberman L et al: The breast imaging reporting and data system: positive predictive value of mammographic features and final assessment categories. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 171(1):35-40, 1998
Sickles EA: Nonpalpable, circumscribed, noncalcified solid breast masses: likelihood of malignancy based on lesion size and age of patient. Radiology. 192(2):439-42, 1994
Related Anatomy
Loading...
Related Differential Diagnoses
Loading...
References
Tables
Tables
KEY FACTS
Terminology
Imaging
Diagnostic Checklist
TERMINOLOGY
Abbreviations
Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) for mammography (MMG)
Terms may undergo revision; consult current edition of lexicon published by American College of Radiology (ACR)
Minor changes in phrasing have been made
Definitions
Standardized terms to describe breast density, mammographic findings, assessment, and management recommendations
Includes guidance on report organization and audits
Facilitates communication across facilities, disciplines
Descriptors listed from least to most suggestive of malignancy
Combination of features leads to management decision
"Baseline" = 1st mammogram
IMAGING
Anatomy-Based Imaging Issues
Findings
PATHOLOGY
Pathology-Based Imaging Issues
DIAGNOSTIC CHECKLIST
Assessments and Recommendations
Selected References
Alshafeiy TI et al: Outcome of architectural distortion detected only at breast tomosynthesis versus 2D mammography. Radiology. 288(1):38-46, 2018
Choudhery S et al: Masses in the Era of screening tomosynthesis: Is diagnostic ultrasound sufficient? Br J Radiol. 20180801, 2018
Elezaby M et al: ACR BI-RADS assessment category 4 subdivisions in diagnostic mammography: utilization and outcomes in the National Mammography Database. Radiology. 170770, 2018
Oligane HC et al: Grouped amorphous calcifications at mammography: frequently atypical but rarely associated with aggressive malignancy. Radiology. 288(3):671-679, 2018
Grimm LJ et al: Suspicious breast calcifications undergoing stereotactic biopsy in women ages 70 and over: Breast cancer incidence by BI-RADS descriptors. Eur Radiol. 27(6):2275-81, 2017
Nakashima K et al: Comparison of visibility of circumscribed masses on Digital Breast Tomosynthesis (DBT) and 2D mammography: are circumscribed masses better visualized and assured of being benign on DBT? Eur Radiol. 27(2):570-7, 2017
Sickles EA et al: Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS): Mammography. 5th ed. Reston: American College of Radiology, 2013
Torres-Tabanera M et al: Analysis of the positive predictive value of the subcategories of BI-RADS(®) 4 lesions: preliminary results in 880 lesions. Radiologia. 54(6):520-531, 2012
Youk JH et al: Scoring system based on BI-RADS lexicon to predict probability of malignancy in suspicious microcalcifications. Ann Surg Oncol. 19(5):1491-8, 2012
Bent CK et al: The positive predictive value of BI-RADS microcalcification descriptors and final assessment categories. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 194(5):1378-83, 2010
Burnside ES et al: The ACR BI-RADS experience: learning from history. J Am Coll Radiol. 6(12):851-60, 2009
Venkatesan A et al: Positive predictive value of specific mammographic findings according to reader and patient variables. Radiology. 250(3):648-57, 2009
Kim SJ et al: Application of sonographic BI-RADS to synchronous breast nodules detected in patients with breast cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 191(3):653-8, 2008
Burnside ES et al: Use of microcalcification descriptors in BI-RADS 4th edition to stratify risk of malignancy. Radiology. 242(2):388-95, 2007
Berg WA et al: Does training in the Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) improve biopsy recommendations or feature analysis agreement with experienced breast imagers at mammography? Radiology. 224(3):871-80, 2002
Varas X et al: Revisiting the mammographic follow-up of BI-RADS category 3 lesions. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 179(3):691-5, 2002
Vizcaíno I et al: Short-term follow-up results in 795 nonpalpable probably benign lesions detected at screening mammography. Radiology. 219(2):475-83, 2001
Liberman L et al: The breast imaging reporting and data system: positive predictive value of mammographic features and final assessment categories. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 171(1):35-40, 1998
Sickles EA: Nonpalpable, circumscribed, noncalcified solid breast masses: likelihood of malignancy based on lesion size and age of patient. Radiology. 192(2):439-42, 1994
STATdx includes over 200,000 searchable images, including x-ray, CT, MR, and ultrasound images. To access all images, please log in or subscribe.