Literature DB >> 1620838

Nonpalpable, probably benign lesions: role of follow-up mammography.

X Varas1, F Leborgne, J H Leborgne.   

Abstract

Of 21,855 consecutive women prospectively studied with mammography, physical examination, and high-resolution ultrasonography when appropriate, 558 received a diagnosis of nonpalpable, probably benign lesions. Follow-up mammography was recommended for these patients. Characteristically benign lesions and palpable masses were excluded from analysis. The positive predictive value for detection of a nonpalpable, probably benign breast lesion was 0.017. Nine patients ultimately proved to have carcinoma; two of them had noninvasive carcinoma, and two had axillary node metastases. The positive predictive value for detection of a nonpalpable, probably malignant lesion was 0.47. The policy of recommending mammographic surveillance for nonpalpable, probably benign lesions, a viable option for radiologists, has the capability of lowering the rate and therefore the costs of biopsy procedures with negative results.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1992        PMID: 1620838     DOI: 10.1148/radiology.184.2.1620838

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Radiology        ISSN: 0033-8419            Impact factor:   11.105


  33 in total

1.  Computer-aided classification of breast masses: performance and interobserver variability of expert radiologists versus residents.

Authors:  Swatee Singh; Jeff Maxwell; Jay A Baker; Jennifer L Nicholas; Joseph Y Lo
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2010-10-22       Impact factor: 11.105

2.  Frequency of malignancy seen in probably benign lesions at contrast-enhanced breast MR imaging: findings from ACRIN 6667.

Authors:  Susan P Weinstein; Lucy G Hanna; Constantine Gatsonis; Mitchell D Schnall; Mark A Rosen; Constance D Lehman
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2010-06       Impact factor: 11.105

3.  Management for BI-RADS category 3 lesions detected in preoperative breast MR imaging of breast cancer patients.

Authors:  Hye Mi Gweon; Nariya Cho; Soo-Yeon Kim; Hye Ryoung Koo; Mirinae Seo; Ajung Chu; Eun Ju Son
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2017-01-12       Impact factor: 5.315

Review 4.  Applications and literature review of the BI-RADS classification.

Authors:  S Obenauer; K P Hermann; E Grabbe
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2005-01-26       Impact factor: 5.315

5.  [Evaluation of the results after using of the BI-RADS categories in 1,777 clinical mammograms].

Authors:  E A Hauth; K Khan; B Wolfgarten; A Betzler; R Kimmig; M Forsting
Journal:  Radiologe       Date:  2008-03       Impact factor: 0.635

6.  Growing BI-RADS category 3 lesions on follow-up breast ultrasound: malignancy rates and worrisome features.

Authors:  Su Min Ha; Eun Young Chae; Joo Hee Cha; Hee Jung Shin; Woo Jung Choi; Hak Hee Kim
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2018-04-25       Impact factor: 3.039

7.  Nonpalpable, probably benign breast lesions in general practice: the role of follow-up mammography.

Authors:  L E Duijm; J O Zaat; G L Guit
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  1998-07       Impact factor: 5.386

8.  Additional diagnostic value of MRI in patients with suspicious breast lesions based on ultrasound.

Authors:  O Sarica; F Uluc
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2014-07-01       Impact factor: 3.039

9.  Staging of the axilla in breast cancer: accurate in vivo assessment using positron emission tomography with 2-(fluorine-18)-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose.

Authors:  I C Smith; K N Ogston; P Whitford; F W Smith; P Sharp; M Norton; I D Miller; A K Ah-See; S D Heys; J A Jibril; O Eremin
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  1998-08       Impact factor: 12.969

10.  Validation of results from knowledge discovery: mass density as a predictor of breast cancer.

Authors:  Ryan W Woods; Louis Oliphant; Kazuhiko Shinki; David Page; Jude Shavlik; Elizabeth Burnside
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2009-09-16       Impact factor: 4.056

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.