Search

Axillary lymphadenopathy on breast imaging after recent coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination has been reported in the literature as immunization has become more widespread. While muscle edema at the injection site has been observed on MRI secondary to an immune response, ipsilateral breast imaging observations of edema have not been reported to be seen with the COVID-19 vaccinations to date. Mammographic findings such as trabecular and skin thickening, along with increased echogenicity on ultrasound, can be seen with edema secondary to capillary leak or poor lymphatic drainage, and should be considered as a possible etiology for the observed breast edema following a recent COVID-19 vaccine. Inflammatory changes observed in the breast and axillary tail post vaccination described in this case series are transient, but clinically relevant for patients who experience swelling following injection. Similar to evaluations for suspected mastitis, a short interval imaging follow up to confirm resolution may be appropriate for patients with ipsilateral vaccination histories, and could potentially reduce the number of false positive examinations in this clinical scenario. However, inflammatory breast cancer can mimic inflammation and infection, therefore close follow up to resolution is critical as to not miss cancer., (Copyright © 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Hydrodissection is a procedural tactic utilized in various interventions. It is a technique which helps separate structures in order to safely perform a certain procedure. This article will provide a review of hydrodissection, how to perform this technique, and why it can be useful in breast interventions., (Copyright © 2020 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: To review the use of diagnostic breast imaging and outcomes for symptomatic male patients., Methods: We retrospectively evaluated 122 males who underwent diagnostic imaging for breast symptoms at our academic center., Results: The majority (94%) of cases had negative or benign imaging, with gynecomastia being the most common diagnosis (78%). There were two malignancies, both of which had positive imaging. Fifteen patients underwent percutaneous biopsy, and over half (53%) were palpation-guided biopsies initiated by the referring clinician despite negative imaging. Diagnostic imaging demonstrated 100% sensitivity and 96% specificity for identifying cancer., Conclusions: Malignancy is rarely a cause of male breast symptoms. Diagnostic breast imaging is useful to establish benignity and avert unnecessary biopsies., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)