Literature DB >> 27689181

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

S Ackermann1, C-A Schoenenberger2, R Zanetti-Dällenbach3.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Ultrasound (US) is a well-established diagnostic procedure for breast examination. We investigated the malignancy rate in solid breast lesions according to their BI-RADS classification with a particular focus on false-negative BI-RADS 3 lesions. We examined whether patient history and clinical findings could provide additional information that would help determine further diagnostic steps in breast lesions.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study by exploring US BI-RADS in 1469 breast lesions of 1201 patients who underwent minimally invasive breast biopsy (MIBB) from January 2002 to December 2011.
RESULTS: The overall sensitivity and specificity of BI-RADS classification was 97.4% and 66.4%, respectively, with a positive (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) of 65% and 98%, respectively. In 506 BI-RADS 3 lesions, histology revealed 15 malignancies (2.4% malignancy rate), which corresponds to a false-negative rate (FNR) of 2.6%. Clinical evaluation and patient requests critically influenced the further diagnostic procedure, thereby prevailing over the recommendation given by the BI-RADS 3 classification.
CONCLUSION: Clinical criteria including age, family and personal history, clinical examination, mammography and patient choice ensure adequate diagnostic procedures such as short-term follow-up or MIBB in patients with lesions classified as US-BI-RADS 3.

Entities:  

Keywords:  BI-RADS; breast cancer; breast ultrasound; cancer rate; false-negative

Year:  2016        PMID: 27689181      PMCID: PMC5032888          DOI: 10.1055/s-0042-110657

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ultrasound Int Open        ISSN: 2199-7152


  28 in total

1.  BRCA1-associated breast carcinomas frequently present with benign sonographic features.

Authors:  Kerstin Rhiem; Uta Flucke; Rita K Schmutzler
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2006-05       Impact factor: 3.959

2.  Probably benign breast masses at US: is follow-up an acceptable alternative to biopsy?

Authors:  Oswald Graf; Thomas H Helbich; Gottfried Hopf; Claudia Graf; Edward A Sickles
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2007-07       Impact factor: 11.105

3.  [Impact of breast ultrasound screening in gynecological practice].

Authors:  H Madjar; S Becker; K Doubek; T Horchler; M Mendoza; C Moisidis-Tesch; B Näther; K Niebling; U Pröls; A-R Schardt; S Ulrich; U Zahn
Journal:  Ultraschall Med       Date:  2010-04-20       Impact factor: 6.548

4.  Criteria for the safe avoidance of needle sampling in young women with solid breast masses.

Authors:  A J Maxwell; J M Pearson
Journal:  Clin Radiol       Date:  2010-01-04       Impact factor: 2.350

5.  Accuracy and value of breast ultrasound for primary imaging evaluation of symptomatic women 30-39 years of age.

Authors:  Constance D Lehman; Christoph I Lee; Vilert A Loving; Michael S Portillo; Sue Peacock; Wendy B DeMartini
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2012-11       Impact factor: 3.959

6.  The diagnosis of breast cancer in women younger than 40.

Authors:  L M Foxcroft; E B Evans; A J Porter
Journal:  Breast       Date:  2004-08       Impact factor: 4.380

7.  Accuracy of classification of breast ultrasound findings based on criteria used for BI-RADS.

Authors:  J Heinig; R Witteler; R Schmitz; L Kiesel; J Steinhard
Journal:  Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2008-09       Impact factor: 7.299

8.  Tumor size and detection in breast cancer: Self-examination and clinical breast examination are at their limit.

Authors:  Uwe Güth; Dorothy Jane Huang; Marco Huber; Andreas Schötzau; Daniela Wruk; Wolfgang Holzgreve; Edward Wight; Rosanna Zanetti-Dällenbach
Journal:  Cancer Detect Prev       Date:  2008-09-13

9.  Imaging features of sporadic breast cancer in women under 40 years old: 97 cases.

Authors:  Bénédicte Bullier; Gaétan MacGrogan; Hervé Bonnefoi; Gabrielle Hurtevent-Labrot; Edouard Lhomme; Véronique Brouste; Martine Boisserie-Lacroix
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2013-08-06       Impact factor: 5.315

10.  Risk of malignancy in palpable solid breast masses considered probably benign or low suspicion: implications for management.

Authors:  Catherine S Giess; Lisa Zorn Smeglin; Jack E Meyer; Julie A Ritner; Robyn L Birdwell
Journal:  J Ultrasound Med       Date:  2012-12       Impact factor: 2.153

View more
  3 in total

1.  Logistic LASSO regression for the diagnosis of breast cancer using clinical demographic data and the BI-RADS lexicon for ultrasonography.

Authors:  Sun Mi Kim; Yongdai Kim; Kuhwan Jeong; Heeyeong Jeong; Jiyoung Kim
Journal:  Ultrasonography       Date:  2017-04-14

2.  Length Scale Matters: Real-Time Elastography versus Nanomechanical Profiling by Atomic Force Microscopy for the Diagnosis of Breast Lesions.

Authors:  Rosanna Zanetti-Dällenbach; Marija Plodinec; Philipp Oertle; Katharina Redling; Ellen C Obermann; Roderick Y H Lim; Cora-Ann Schoenenberger
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2018-10-16       Impact factor: 3.411

3.  Agreement in breast lesion assessment and final BI-RADS classification between radial and meander-like breast ultrasound.

Authors:  Pascale Brasier-Lutz; Claudia Jäggi-Wickes; Sabine Schaedelin; Rosemarie Burian; Cora-Ann Schoenenberger; Rosanna Zanetti-Dällenbach
Journal:  BMC Med Imaging       Date:  2021-06-22       Impact factor: 1.930

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.