Literature DB >> 14961201

Dedicated screening mammography for diagnosis of small breast cancer.

Boris Kirshtein1, Pavel Crystal, Michael Koretz, Selwyn Strano.   

Abstract

Breast cancer is the most common malignancy in women, and early diagnosis is a cornerstone of successful treatment. Mammography is the sole acceptable method for breast cancer screening, but its efficacy is still disputable. The aim of this study was to determine whether the influence of dedicated mammographic team skills could improve the diagnostic accuracy of screening mammography and detection of small breast cancers. From June 1992 to September 1996 a total of 17,393 screening mammograms and 335 mammographically guided needle-localization breast biopsies were performed. From August 1994, a dedicated mammographer commenced work in our hospital. Screening mammography and biopsy results were compared for the nondedicated period (NDP) and the dedicated period (DP). The biopsy rate decreased from 2.9% to 1.3% (p < 0.0001), and the positive biopsy rate increased from 26.3% to 48.2% (p < 0.0001) during the respective periods. The cancer detection rate not changed significantly (p = 0.27) through the whole study period, but the subgroup of small carcinomas (T0, T1a, T1b) increased significantly (p < 0.04), from 25 cases in the NDP to 40 cases in the DP. We concluded that dedicated mammography team skills can significantly improve the detection of small breast cancers and permit more effective diagnosis of breast cancer by reducing the number of breast biopsies ultimately found to be benign.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 14961201     DOI: 10.1007/s00268-003-7044-2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  World J Surg        ISSN: 0364-2313            Impact factor:   3.352


  18 in total

1.  Standardized abnormal interpretation and cancer detection ratios to assess reading volume and reader performance in a breast screening program.

Authors:  L Kan; I A Olivotto; L J Warren Burhenne; E A Sickles; A J Coldman
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2000-05       Impact factor: 11.105

2.  Reasons for failure of a mammography unit at clinical image review in the American College of Radiology Mammography Accreditation Program.

Authors:  L W Bassett; D M Farria; S Bansal; M A Farquhar; P A Wilcox; S A Feig
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2000-06       Impact factor: 11.105

Review 3.  Preoperative imaging-guided needle placement and localization of clinically occult breast lesions.

Authors:  D B Kopans; C A Swann
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  1989-01       Impact factor: 3.959

4.  Does diagnostic accuracy in mammography depend on radiologists' experience?

Authors:  J G Elmore; C K Wells; D H Howard
Journal:  J Womens Health       Date:  1998-05       Impact factor: 2.681

5.  Performance of screening mammography in organized programs in Canada in 1996. The Database Management Subcommittee to the National Committee for the Canadian Breast Cancer Screening Initiative.

Authors:  D Paquette; J Snider; F Bouchard; I Olivotto; H Bryant; K Decker; G Doyle
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2000-10-31       Impact factor: 8.262

6.  Multivariate analysis of roentgenologic characteristics and risk factors for nonpalpable carcinoma of the breast.

Authors:  K Harkins; P I Tartter; G Hermann; R Squitieri; S T Brower; R J Keller
Journal:  J Am Coll Surg       Date:  1994-02       Impact factor: 6.113

7.  Factors influencing prognosis in node-negative breast carcinoma: analysis of 767 T1N0M0/T2N0M0 patients with long-term follow-up.

Authors:  P P Rosen; S Groshen; D W Kinne; L Norton
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  1993-11       Impact factor: 44.544

8.  Medical audit after 26,711 breast imaging studies: improved rate of detection of small breast carcinomas (classified as Tis or T1a,b)

Authors:  F Schmidt; K A Hartwagner; E B Spork; R Groell
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  1998-12-15       Impact factor: 6.860

9.  Re-excision operations in nonpalpable breast cancer.

Authors:  K Mokbel; M Ahmed; A Nash; N Sacks
Journal:  J Surg Oncol       Date:  1995-04       Impact factor: 3.454

10.  Reduction in mortality from breast cancer after mass screening with mammography. Randomised trial from the Breast Cancer Screening Working Group of the Swedish National Board of Health and Welfare.

Authors:  L Tabár; C J Fagerberg; A Gad; L Baldetorp; L H Holmberg; O Gröntoft; U Ljungquist; B Lundström; J C Månson; G Eklund
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1985-04-13       Impact factor: 79.321

View more
  1 in total

1.  Near-diploid hyperploidy in early breast cancer (T1a,b) is associated with higher risk of lymph node involvement.

Authors:  Joško Bezić; Ivana Samija-Projić; Petar Projić; Jelena Ljubković; Sandra Tomaš-Zekić; Maja Marinović-Guić; Snježana Tomić
Journal:  Pathol Oncol Res       Date:  2012-08-28       Impact factor: 3.201

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.