T J Hieken1, J Harrison, J Herreros, J M Velasco. 1. Department of Surgery, Rush North Shore Medical Center, 9600 Gross Point Rd., Skokie, IL 60076, USA. thieken@rush.edu
Abstract
BACKGROUND: With the increasing use of neoadjuvant and minimally invasive therapy, the accuracy of preoperative determination of breast tumor size becomes important. Therefore, we undertook this study to compare mammography and ultrasonography (US). METHODS: A total of 180 invasive breast cancer patients were prospectively examined by mammography and US; 146 eligible patients had tumors visualized by both modalities. RESULTS: In 69% of cases, US was better than or equivalent to mammography in determining tumor size. Both underestimated tumor size; mean (median) underestimation was 3.8 +/- 0.7 mm (1.7 mm) by US and 3.5 +/- 0.9 mm (2 mm) by mammogram. Maximal tumor dimension was accurate within 5 mm in 65% of cases by mammography and 75% of cases by US. For mammographically determined size (versus pathologic size) correlation, r, was 0.4 and for US it was 0.63 and improved for only T1 and T2 tumors. CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest that US is more accurate than mammography in assessing breast cancer size.
BACKGROUND: With the increasing use of neoadjuvant and minimally invasive therapy, the accuracy of preoperative determination of breast tumor size becomes important. Therefore, we undertook this study to compare mammography and ultrasonography (US). METHODS: A total of 180 invasive breast cancerpatients were prospectively examined by mammography and US; 146 eligible patients had tumors visualized by both modalities. RESULTS: In 69% of cases, US was better than or equivalent to mammography in determining tumor size. Both underestimated tumor size; mean (median) underestimation was 3.8 +/- 0.7 mm (1.7 mm) by US and 3.5 +/- 0.9 mm (2 mm) by mammogram. Maximal tumor dimension was accurate within 5 mm in 65% of cases by mammography and 75% of cases by US. For mammographically determined size (versus pathologic size) correlation, r, was 0.4 and for US it was 0.63 and improved for only T1 and T2 tumors. CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest that US is more accurate than mammography in assessing breast cancer size.
Authors: Anees B Chagpar; Lavinia P Middleton; Aysegul A Sahin; Peter Dempsey; Aman U Buzdar; Attiqa N Mirza; Fredrick C Ames; Gildy V Babiera; Barry W Feig; Kelly K Hunt; Henry M Kuerer; Funda Meric-Bernstam; Merrick I Ross; S Eva Singletary Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2006-02 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: Jason D Keune; Donna B Jeffe; Mario Schootman; Abigail Hoffman; William E Gillanders; Rebecca L Aft Journal: Am J Surg Date: 2010-04 Impact factor: 2.565
Authors: Martina Meier-Meitinger; Lothar Häberle; Peter A Fasching; Mayada R Bani; Katharina Heusinger; David Wachter; Matthias W Beckmann; Michael Uder; Rüdiger Schulz-Wendtland; Boris Adamietz Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2010-12-30 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: M Barry; R A Cahill; G Roche-Nagle; R Landers; D Walsh; D J Bouchier-Hayes; R G K Watson Journal: Ir J Med Sci Date: 2007-05-03 Impact factor: 1.568