Literature DB >> 27734795

Breast US as primary imaging modality for diagnosing gynecomastia.

M Telegrafo, T Introna, L Coi, I Cornacchia, L Rella, A A Stabile Ianora, G Angelelli, M Moschetta.   

Abstract

AIM: To assess the role of breast US in diagnosing and classifying gynecomastia as the primary imaging modality and to compare US findings and classification system with the mammographic ones. PATIENTS AND METHODS: 48 patients suspected of having gynecomastia underwent mammography and US. Two radiologists in consensus retrospectively evaluated mammograms and sonograms. Both US and mammographic images were evaluated categorizing gynecomastia into non-mass, nodular and flame shaped patterns. The two category assignations were compared in order to find any difference. The reference standard for both the classification systems was represented by the cytological examination in 18 out of 44 cases (41%) and the six-month US follow-up in the remaining cases.
RESULTS: The US examination revealed pseudo-gynecomastia in 4/48 (8%) and true gynecomastia in the remaining 44 (92%). Gynecomastia was bilateral in 25/44 cases (57%) and unilateral in the remaining 19 (43%). The cases of true gynecomastia included non mass shape in 26/44 cases (59%), nodular shape in 12 (27%) and flame shape in 6 (14%). The mammographic examination revealed the same results as compared with US findings. 18/44 (41%) patients affected by nodular or dendritic gynecomastia underwent cytological examination confirming the presence of glandular tissue and the benign nature of the clinical condition.
CONCLUSIONS: US could be proposed as the primary imaging tool for diagnosing and classifying gynecomastia, avoiding unnecessary Xray examinations or invasive procedures in case of diffuse gynecomastia. In case of nodular or dendritic patterns, biopsy remains mandatory for a definitive diagnosis.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27734795      PMCID: PMC5119698          DOI: 10.11138/gchir/2016.37.3.118

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  G Chir        ISSN: 0391-9005


  22 in total

1.  Role of multidetector computed tomography in evaluating incidentally detected breast lesions.

Authors:  Marco Moschetta; Arnaldo Scardapane; Valentina Lorusso; Leonarda Rella; Michele Telegrafo; Gabriella Serio; Giuseppe Angelelli; Amato Antonio Stabile Ianora
Journal:  Tumori       Date:  2015-04-16       Impact factor: 2.098

2.  Unenhanced breast MRI (STIR, T2-weighted TSE, DWIBS): An accurate and alternative strategy for detecting and differentiating breast lesions.

Authors:  Michele Telegrafo; Leonarda Rella; Amato Antonio Stabile Ianora; Giuseppe Angelelli; Marco Moschetta
Journal:  Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2015-06-25       Impact factor: 2.546

Review 3.  Gynecomastia: physiopathology, evaluation and treatment.

Authors:  Alfredo Carlos Simões Dornellas de Barros; Marcelo de Castro Moura Sampaio
Journal:  Sao Paulo Med J       Date:  2012       Impact factor: 1.044

4.  Clinical examination allied to ultrasonography in the assessment of new onset gynaecomastia: an observational study.

Authors:  Ruvinder Kaur Athwal; Rosamund Donovan; Mehboob Mirza
Journal:  J Clin Diagn Res       Date:  2014-06-20

5.  Mammography and ultrasound in the evaluation of male breast disease.

Authors:  Rafaela Muñoz Carrasco; Marina Alvarez Benito; Elisa Muñoz Gomariz; José Luis Raya Povedano; María Martínez Paredes
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2010-06-23       Impact factor: 5.315

6.  Sonography of gynecomastia.

Authors:  K D Wigley; J L Thomas; M E Bernardino; J L Rosenbaum
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  1981-05       Impact factor: 3.959

7.  Mammographic appearances of male breast disease.

Authors:  A H Appelbaum; G F Evans; K R Levy; R H Amirkhan; T D Schumpert
Journal:  Radiographics       Date:  1999 May-Jun       Impact factor: 5.333

8.  Sonographic features of gynecomastia.

Authors:  Vandana Dialani; Janet Baum; Tejas S Mehta
Journal:  J Ultrasound Med       Date:  2010-04       Impact factor: 2.153

9.  The diagnostic accuracy of mammography in the evaluation of male breast disease.

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

Review 10.  Gynecomastia: pathophysiology, evaluation, and management.

Authors:  Ruth E Johnson; M Hassan Murad
Journal:  Mayo Clin Proc       Date:  2009-11       Impact factor: 7.616

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.