PeerJ · 2025
Electrical characteristics of the extracellular fluid in the body segments of Apis mellifera bees.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Hernandez Juan, Mesa Fredy, Dussan Anderson, Riveros Andre
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: The use of conventional imaging techniques, namely mammography (MMG) and ultrasound (US), for breast cancer (BC) detection in women at high risk for the disease does not bring optimal results in many cases.
AIM: The present study evaluated the effectiveness of magnetic resonance (MR) mammography (MRM) in cases where US and MMG failed to detect suspected breast lesions.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: The study group consisted of 379 women who had had no breast pathologies detected by US and MMG. This group was then divided into 4 groups according to the relative risk of breast cancer development. All the women underwent MRM, and any breast pathology detected by MRM was then verified by open surgical biopsy (OSB).
RESULTS: Based on the MRM findings, 37 women with breast pathologies were identified. All detected pathologies were then classified into one of the BIRADS (Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System) categories. Of these, 33 patients underwent open surgical biopsy. There were a total of 17 benign and 16 malignant breast pathologies that were not visualized by US and MMG. The types of malignancies found, in order of their frequency, were as follows: invasive ductal carcinoma (11 cases), ductal carcinoma in situ (2 cases), invasive lobular carcinoma (2 cases), and lobular carcinoma in situ (1 case). An analysis of MRM effectiveness in detecting BC showed 93.7% sensitivity and 64.71% specificity.
CONCLUSIONS: All women with a 20% or greater lifetime risk of developing BC should undergo annual MRM as a diagnostic adjunct to US and MMG.
AIM: The present study evaluated the effectiveness of magnetic resonance (MR) mammography (MRM) in cases where US and MMG failed to detect suspected breast lesions.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: The study group consisted of 379 women who had had no breast pathologies detected by US and MMG. This group was then divided into 4 groups according to the relative risk of breast cancer development. All the women underwent MRM, and any breast pathology detected by MRM was then verified by open surgical biopsy (OSB).
RESULTS: Based on the MRM findings, 37 women with breast pathologies were identified. All detected pathologies were then classified into one of the BIRADS (Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System) categories. Of these, 33 patients underwent open surgical biopsy. There were a total of 17 benign and 16 malignant breast pathologies that were not visualized by US and MMG. The types of malignancies found, in order of their frequency, were as follows: invasive ductal carcinoma (11 cases), ductal carcinoma in situ (2 cases), invasive lobular carcinoma (2 cases), and lobular carcinoma in situ (1 case). An analysis of MRM effectiveness in detecting BC showed 93.7% sensitivity and 64.71% specificity.
CONCLUSIONS: All women with a 20% or greater lifetime risk of developing BC should undergo annual MRM as a diagnostic adjunct to US and MMG.