Clinical radiology · 2016
Whole-breast US following mammography and breast MRI in newly diagnosed breast cancer patients: can it be more than just a guidance tool for biopsy?
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.
Park Y J, Kim M J, Moon H J, Kim E-K, Yoon J H
Аннотация
AIM: To evaluate the role of ultrasound (US) following magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and mammography in patients with newly diagnosed breast cancers by assessing the additional cancer detection rate of US.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: Two hundred and twenty-five women who had undergone 225 MRI examinations followed by US were included. An US-detected additional cancer was defined as a lesion detected using breast US that had not been detected by MRI, and which was shown to be malignant at histopathology. The rate of additional cancer detection, incidence of additional malignancies, positive predictive value (PPV), and false-positive (FP) rate were analysed. Factors associated with an increase in the additional cancer detection rate were analysed.
RESULTS: The additional cancer detection rate was 0% (0/225) for the ipsilateral breast and 0.9% (2/225) for the contralateral breast, and the PPVs were 0% (0/5) and 100% (2/2), respectively. The overall TP:FP ratio was 0.4 (2:5). The additional cancer detection rate was higher for cases with moderate and severe background parenchymal enhancement than cases with minimal and mild background parenchymal enhancement (p=0.003). The additional cancer detection rate for cases with moderate and severe background parenchymal enhancement was 5.7% (2/35) for the contralateral breast (p=0.003).
CONCLUSION: Preoperative breast US following MRI and mammography can help clinicians screen for contralateral cancers with an additional detection rate of 0.9%. Moreover, whole-breast US might be a useful contralateral screening modality in cases with moderate or marked parenchymal enhancement on breast MRI.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: Two hundred and twenty-five women who had undergone 225 MRI examinations followed by US were included. An US-detected additional cancer was defined as a lesion detected using breast US that had not been detected by MRI, and which was shown to be malignant at histopathology. The rate of additional cancer detection, incidence of additional malignancies, positive predictive value (PPV), and false-positive (FP) rate were analysed. Factors associated with an increase in the additional cancer detection rate were analysed.
RESULTS: The additional cancer detection rate was 0% (0/225) for the ipsilateral breast and 0.9% (2/225) for the contralateral breast, and the PPVs were 0% (0/5) and 100% (2/2), respectively. The overall TP:FP ratio was 0.4 (2:5). The additional cancer detection rate was higher for cases with moderate and severe background parenchymal enhancement than cases with minimal and mild background parenchymal enhancement (p=0.003). The additional cancer detection rate for cases with moderate and severe background parenchymal enhancement was 5.7% (2/35) for the contralateral breast (p=0.003).
CONCLUSION: Preoperative breast US following MRI and mammography can help clinicians screen for contralateral cancers with an additional detection rate of 0.9%. Moreover, whole-breast US might be a useful contralateral screening modality in cases with moderate or marked parenchymal enhancement on breast MRI.