SUMMARY: BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to define the diagnostic accuracy of mammography and ultrasound in the evaluation of male breast disease, and to suggest a diagnostic protocol for male breast disease. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed clinical, radiographic, and pathologic records of 75 patients. Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) category 4-5 mammograms and ultrasonograms were suggested as suspicious for malignancy. RESULTS: Of the 75 patients, 23 (31%) were considered to have suspicious lesions by mammography and/or ultrasonography. 13 of the patients were shown to have breast cancer. The remaining 52 (69%) were referred for biopsy by clinicians; all of the biopsy specimens were benign (gynecomastia). The accuracy data of mammography and ultrasonography are: sensitivity, 69 and 100%; specificity, 87 and 97%; positive predictive value, 53 and 87%; negative predictive value, 93 and 100%; and accuracy, 84 and 97%, respectively. CONCLUSION: We suggest a new diagnostic algorithm for the evaluation of male breast disease in which ultrasonography may be used to evaluate palpable abnormalities as the first diagnostic tool of choice. To use and to trust imaging would decrease the number of false-positive biopsies that would be generated by physical examination alone.
SUMMARY: BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to define the diagnostic accuracy of mammography and ultrasound in the evaluation of male breast disease, and to suggest a diagnostic protocol for male breast disease. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed clinical, radiographic, and pathologic records of 75 patients. Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) category 4-5 mammograms and ultrasonograms were suggested as suspicious for malignancy. RESULTS: Of the 75 patients, 23 (31%) were considered to have suspicious lesions by mammography and/or ultrasonography. 13 of the patients were shown to have breast cancer. The remaining 52 (69%) were referred for biopsy by clinicians; all of the biopsy specimens were benign (gynecomastia). The accuracy data of mammography and ultrasonography are: sensitivity, 69 and 100%; specificity, 87 and 97%; positive predictive value, 53 and 87%; negative predictive value, 93 and 100%; and accuracy, 84 and 97%, respectively. CONCLUSION: We suggest a new diagnostic algorithm for the evaluation of male breast disease in which ultrasonography may be used to evaluate palpable abnormalities as the first diagnostic tool of choice. To use and to trust imaging would decrease the number of false-positive biopsies that would be generated by physical examination alone.
Authors: G F Evans; T Anthony; R H Turnage; T D Schumpert; K R Levy; R H Amirkhan; T J Campbell; J Lopez; A H Appelbaum Journal: Am J Surg Date: 2001-02 Impact factor: 2.565
Authors: Jean Mathew; George H Perkins; Tanya Stephens; Lavinia P Middleton; Wei-Tse Yang Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2008-12 Impact factor: 3.959