The European journal of surgery = Acta chirurgica · 1999
Detection of cancer in augmented breasts by positron emission tomography.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание 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.
Noh D Y, Yun I J, Kang H S, Kim Y C, Kim J S, Chung J K, Lee D S, Lee M C, Moon W K, Youn Y K, Oh S K, Choe K J
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To assess the diagnostic efficiency of positron emission tomography with 18-fluorine fluorodeoxyglucose in detecting breast cancer in augmented breasts.
DESIGN: Retrospective study.
SETTING: University hospital, Korea.
SUBJECT: 9 cases or 8 patients with breasts augmented with paraffin or silicone.
INTERVENTION: FDG-PET, mammography, and ultrasonography
RESULTS: The mammogram detected the breast cancer in only 1 of 3 patients, and ultrasonography gave a false positive result in 1 patient with an augmented breast. In contrast, PET predicted all the cancers and 5/6 benign lesions. 2/3 breast cancers had axillary FDG uptake interpreted as showing metastatic involvement, and in 1 case with cancer with no axillary lymph node involvement there was no FDG uptake in the axilla, which correlated with the pathological finding.
CONCLUSIONS: Although the high cost of PET makes its use as a screening test for all patients with augmented breasts unrealistic, it would be the best diagnostic choice if other methods failed.
DESIGN: Retrospective study.
SETTING: University hospital, Korea.
SUBJECT: 9 cases or 8 patients with breasts augmented with paraffin or silicone.
INTERVENTION: FDG-PET, mammography, and ultrasonography
RESULTS: The mammogram detected the breast cancer in only 1 of 3 patients, and ultrasonography gave a false positive result in 1 patient with an augmented breast. In contrast, PET predicted all the cancers and 5/6 benign lesions. 2/3 breast cancers had axillary FDG uptake interpreted as showing metastatic involvement, and in 1 case with cancer with no axillary lymph node involvement there was no FDG uptake in the axilla, which correlated with the pathological finding.
CONCLUSIONS: Although the high cost of PET makes its use as a screening test for all patients with augmented breasts unrealistic, it would be the best diagnostic choice if other methods failed.