17Calcifications: Amorphous/Indistinct Microcalcifications A 48-year-old woman presents with new densities on her right mammogram. • Normal exam Calcifications (Figs. 17.1 and 17.2) • Type: amorphous/indistinct • Distribution: grouped/clustered • Deodorant material on skin • BI-RADS assessment category 2, benign finding • This case is an example of the appearance of skin powder. Various creams, powders, tattoos, and aluminum deodorants can produce densities that may appear to represent intraparenchymal calcifications. When the densities are extremely small and visible on only one view, this etiology should be considered. Bartton JW III, Kornguth PJ. Mammographic deodorant and powder artifact: is there confusion with malignant microcalcifications? Breast Dis 1990;3:121–126 Pamilo M, Soiva M, Suramo I. New artifacts simulating malignant microcalcifications in mammography. Breast Dis 1989;1:321–327 A 64-year-old woman presents with new calcifications on her screening mammogram. • Normal exam Calcifications (Fig. 17.3) • Type: amorphous/indistinct • Distribution: grouped/clustered Low Frequency Frequency • 7 MHz (Fig. 17.4) Frequency • 10 MHz • Fibroadenomatoid hyperplasia • BI-RADS assessment category 4, suspicious abnormality; biopsy should be considered. • These amorphous calcifications are moderately suspicious. Conditions that may produce these calcifications include fibrocystic changes, fibroadenomas, fat necrosis, and intraductal carcinoma. • Fibrosis highly attenuates sound and commonly produces focal shadowing. To differentiate diffuse fibrosis from a focal malignant mass, one should utilize a lower frequency. A lower frequency may penetrate the tissue and demonstrate either the presence of a mass or the presence of benign tissue. Kamal M, Evans AJ, Denley H, Pinder SE, Ellis IO. Fibroadenomatoid hyperplasia: a cause of suspicious microcalcification on mammographic screening. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1998;171:1331–1334 A 49-year-old woman presents with left breast calcifications that are new since her previous screening mammogram 4 years ago. • Normal exam Calcifications (Figs. 17.6 and 17.7) • Type: amorphous/indistinct • Distribution: segmental Atypical ductal hyperplasia; both the percutaneous core biopsy and the partial mastectomy specimens demonstrated atypical duct epithelial hyperplasia without evidence of in situ or invasive carcinoma. • BI-RADS assessment category 4, suspicious; biopsy should be considered. • Atypical ductal hyperplasia (ADH) is commonly associated with biopsied calcifications. If the sampled tissue only demonstrates ADH, reexcision of the tissue is recommended. About 50% of percutaneous biopsies showing only ADH are associated with malignancy after subsequent surgical excision. Larger tissue core sampling devices appear to reduce the chance of inadequate sampling to 10 to 20%.
Case 17.1: Skin Powder/Deodorant
Case History
Physical Examination
Mammogram
Pathology
Management
Pearls and Pitfalls
Suggested Reading
Case 17.2: Fibrocystic Change
Case History
Physical Examination
Mammogram
Ultrasound
Pathology
Management
Pearls and Pitfalls
Suggested Reading
Case 17.3: Fibrocystic Change
Case History
Physical Examination
Mammogram
Pathology
Management
Pearls and Pitfalls
Suggested Reading