RoFo : Fortschritte auf dem Gebiete der Rontgenstrahlen und der Nuklearmedizin · 2001
[Malignant and benign diseases of the breast in 41 male patients: mammography, sonography and pathohistological correlations].
Сравнительное исследованиеОценочное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
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.
Partik B, Mallek R, Rudas M, Pokieser P, Wunderbaldinger P, Helbich T H
Аннотация
AIM: The goal of our study was to evaluate findings in mammography and sonography in male patients with pathohistologically proven diseases of the breast.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: Mammographies and sonographies, which were obtained in 41 male patients in a 6-year period, were retrospectively evaluated in accordance with the BI-RADS(R) classification.
RESULTS: Histologically 13 carcinomas, 21 gynecomastias, 3 pseudogynecomastias, 2 epithelial inclusion cysts and 2 other benign lesions were diagnosed. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value and accuracy of mammography in differentiation of benign versus malignant disease were 92 %, 89 %, 80 %, 96 % and 90 %, respectively. Additional sonography did not change these results. However, sonography increased diagnostic confidence in 18.2 % (2/11) of suspicious lesions.
CONCLUSION: In our study the invasive ductal carcinoma of male patients was a predominantly lobulated, ill-defined lesion in mammography and sonography. The differentiation of carcinoma to pseudogynecomastia and diffuse or dendritic gynecomastia was securely feasible. However, we could not reliably distinguish between carcinoma and some benign mass lesions. In cases of mammographically diagnosed masses or unclear mammography, additional sonography should be performed to increase the diagnostic confidence.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: Mammographies and sonographies, which were obtained in 41 male patients in a 6-year period, were retrospectively evaluated in accordance with the BI-RADS(R) classification.
RESULTS: Histologically 13 carcinomas, 21 gynecomastias, 3 pseudogynecomastias, 2 epithelial inclusion cysts and 2 other benign lesions were diagnosed. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value and accuracy of mammography in differentiation of benign versus malignant disease were 92 %, 89 %, 80 %, 96 % and 90 %, respectively. Additional sonography did not change these results. However, sonography increased diagnostic confidence in 18.2 % (2/11) of suspicious lesions.
CONCLUSION: In our study the invasive ductal carcinoma of male patients was a predominantly lobulated, ill-defined lesion in mammography and sonography. The differentiation of carcinoma to pseudogynecomastia and diffuse or dendritic gynecomastia was securely feasible. However, we could not reliably distinguish between carcinoma and some benign mass lesions. In cases of mammographically diagnosed masses or unclear mammography, additional sonography should be performed to increase the diagnostic confidence.