Literature DB >> 12763948

Interexamination variation of whole breast ultrasound.

A M Bosch1, A G H Kessels, G L Beets, K L C G Vranken, A C Borstlap, M F Von Meyenfeldt, J M A van Engelshoven.   

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to determine the interexamination agreement of ultrasound of the breasts. This includes the complete process of performing whole breast ultrasound and interpreting the dynamic scanning and the static images by one person. In a prospective study, 58 patients with a clinical indication for mammography underwent an ultrasound examination of both breasts by three independent sonographers. The sonographers had full knowledge of the physical and mammographic findings. Histology and 12 month follow-up were used as the reference standard. Interobserver variability for both mammography and breast ultrasound was measured using linearly weighted kappa statistics. Receiver operator characteristic curves were constructed to compare the diagnostic performance of the observers. The interexamination agreement for the score of the probability of malignancy after mammography was substantial (kappas ranged from 0.63 to 0.65). The interexamination agreement for the final score of the probability of malignancy after mammography and ultrasound examination was slightly better (kappas ranged from 0.72 to 0.75). The area under the receiver operating characteristic curves after mammography and ultrasound examination ranged from 0.97 to 0.98. Ultrasound examination of the whole breast shows a substantial interexamination agreement. Ultrasound examination of the breast adds consistency to mammography and physical examination.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12763948     DOI: 10.1259/bjr/17252624

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Br J Radiol        ISSN: 0007-1285            Impact factor:   3.039


  8 in total

1.  Training the ACRIN 6666 Investigators and effects of feedback on breast ultrasound interpretive performance and agreement in BI-RADS ultrasound feature analysis.

Authors:  Wendie A Berg; Jeffrey D Blume; Jean B Cormack; Ellen B Mendelson
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2012-07       Impact factor: 3.959

2.  Ultrasound as the Primary Screening Test for Breast Cancer: Analysis From ACRIN 6666.

Authors:  Wendie A Berg; Andriy I Bandos; Ellen B Mendelson; Daniel Lehrer; Roberta A Jong; Etta D Pisano
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2015-12-28       Impact factor: 13.506

3.  Added value of deep learning-based computer-aided diagnosis and shear wave elastography to b-mode ultrasound for evaluation of breast masses detected by screening ultrasound.

Authors:  Min Young Kim; Soo-Yeon Kim; Yeon Soo Kim; Eun Sil Kim; Jung Min Chang
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2021-08-06       Impact factor: 1.817

4.  Combined screening with ultrasound and mammography vs mammography alone in women at elevated risk of breast cancer.

Authors:  Wendie A Berg; Jeffrey D Blume; Jean B Cormack; Ellen B Mendelson; Daniel Lehrer; Marcela Böhm-Vélez; Etta D Pisano; Roberta A Jong; W Phil Evans; Marilyn J Morton; Mary C Mahoney; Linda Hovanessian Larsen; Richard G Barr; Dione M Farria; Helga S Marques; Karan Boparai
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2008-05-14       Impact factor: 56.272

5.  Clinical Data as an Adjunct to Ultrasound Reduces the False-Negative Malignancy Rate in BI-RADS 3 Breast Lesions.

Authors:  S Ackermann; C-A Schoenenberger; R Zanetti-Dällenbach
Journal:  Ultrasound Int Open       Date:  2016-07-19

Review 6.  Breast density implications and supplemental screening.

Authors:  Athina Vourtsis; Wendie A Berg
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2018-09-25       Impact factor: 5.315

7.  Interobserver concordance in the BI-RADS classification of breast ultrasound exams.

Authors:  Maria Julia G Calas; Renan M V R Almeida; Bianca Gutfilen; Wagner C A Pereira
Journal:  Clinics (Sao Paulo)       Date:  2012       Impact factor: 2.365

8.  Application of the downgrade criteria to supplemental screening ultrasound for women with negative mammography but dense breasts.

Authors:  Soo-Yeon Kim; Min Jung Kim; Hee Jung Moon; Jung Hyun Yoon; Eun-Kyung Kim
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2016-11       Impact factor: 1.889

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.