.

There used to be somone on the boards that knew alot about the imaging terminology but haven't seen her here in awhile.  Can you do a search using a variety of terms including those and anything to do with ultrasound or ultrasound waves?  Sorry.  Maybe someone else will respond.  That is all I could think of otherwise call your MD and ask.
Rose

 Pink Impacts Forever
5-23-06 DCIS High Grade
Strong family history BC/OVCA
denied(lost appeals)out of network surgery
10-30-06 BM SICA left,DIEP right
Nodes Neg No chemo or rads 
Revisions along with LAVH/BSO/TVT 1-23-08
Biopsies x 3 10/20/08,neg
Bone scan 2/23/11 spot on R frontal and occiptal bone
PET/CT scan 3/4/11 negative

Everything I can find indicates HYPOechoic is more suspicious for possible  cancer, HYPERecoic is usually benign fatty (cyst) tissue, but there are rare exceptions. I would call the radiologist and ask them, then you'll know for sure what they concluded.
hope this helps.


 1.  What does hyper-echoic mean?

    * 6 months ago
Hyperechoic is usually a term used to described the appearance of an area on an ultrasound. Hyperechoic means it returns more sound echoes to the probe. Hypoechoic would be less, and isocechoic or homogenous would be same. Hyperechoic areas usually relate to fatty areas.
For example a hyperechoic liver is synonymis with a fatty liver. Or a hyperechoic nodule/mass would be a lipoma (fatty mass) and almost always benign.
Ultrasound can determine malignancy. Malignancy is associated with "hypervascularity" and usually *hypoechoic masses.
Hope that was helpful let me know if you need more info
Source(s):
me, RDMS certified

  2.  RESULTS: Main *benignancy criteria were: well defined shape, regular contour, precise limits, lesions isoechoic to fatty tissue, homogeneous echotexture, and horizontal orientation. The criteria more typically related to *malignancy were: ill-defined shape, irregular contour, partially precise limits, and *hypoechogenicity.* Contour irregularity has presented the greatest sensitivity (92.7%) as well as the highest negative predictive value (98.2%), while vertical orientation of the lesion has presented the greatest specificity (99.3%), and ill-defined shape, the highest positive predictive value (91.0%).
CONCLUSION: The standardization of the method for characterization and description of breast ultrasound images has resulted in reports uniformization and optimization, allowing more appropriate therapeutic decisions.

Wow you ROCK Gordon!  Took the words right outta my mouth (not really!)  lol

Love Ruth

Paw Paw MI 
6/06 IDC,7/06 IBC (Inflammatory BC) RT
2 lumpectomies still no clear margins
chemo 8/06-12/06 
Bilat mast 1/07
rads 2/07, arimidex 6 mos, 1/08 femara, 10/08 aromasin
6/10 tamoxifen, now Rheum Arthritis
Pet scan NED x3 yrs

WOW, YOU DO ROCK GORDON...you ALL do!  Thank you so much for the information.  I appreciate it!!!!

Gordon, Your the Man,
               I know it wasn't my question, but I appreciated the education on the subject.  Good to know info.
 
Chris

Chris/47/Ret Air Force, dx Sep 07 Stage IV mets liver/lungs; ER/Pr+, Her2-, Arimidex, Jul 08: 6 AC, 9 Taxol complete, Nov 08: Lumpectomy Nov 08: NED, Mar 09: Rads complete, Apr 11/May 11: Liver spot biop  ER+, PR-, HER2+, Jun 11: Start Herceptin/Docetaxel/Carboplatin  Sep 11: Left lobe of liver removed.  Carepages: Calamitychris

And I thought I new all the terms that related to breast cancer...  Those, I've never heard of!!

Thanks for the education, Gordon!

Theresa

Diagnosed 3/24/06 Tubular Carcinoma, grade 1, stage 1
Lumpectomy, then MRI that found lump #2, also tubular, stage 1. Both ER/PR pos, HER2 neg.
Bilateral Mastectomy 5/5/06
Exchange and ooph,8/9/06
Oncotype 15 Arimidex
Carepage-TheresaRasmussen