Literature DB >> 402833

Combined mammographic-sonographic evaluation of breast masses.

H S Teixidor, E Kazam.   

Abstract

Palpable breast masses which have a nondiagnostic appearance on the mammogram often require a biopsy to rule out malignancy. Contact B-scan ultrasonography of such masses were performed in an effort to improve the diagnostic accuracy of mammography and reduce the number of unnecessary biopsies. A total of 200 patients with breast masses of 1-8 cm were examined by both methods. The results of this combined evaluation were compared to those of mammography alone. Of 115 pathologically proven lesions, 44 were fluid-filled cysts. Sonography correctly diagnosed all 44 cysts, while mammography was equivocal in 27 (61%) of them. Of the remaining 71 solid masses, 38 were benign and 33 malignant. Mammography alone correctly diagnosed 31 carcinomas (94%), whereas sonography correctly diagnosed 26 (78.8%). While the infiltrating carcinomas have a typical sonographic appearance, circumscribed carcinomas may have the same sonographic features as fibroadenomas; the value of sonography here was to establish whether the mass was solid. In other solid masses such as those produced by dysplasias, abscesses, and mastitis, sonography was helpful in differentiating between diffuse and discrete lesions. The combined mammographic-sonographic evaluation of breast masses was more accurate than either method alone.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1977        PMID: 402833     DOI: 10.2214/ajr.128.3.409

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol        ISSN: 0361-803X            Impact factor:   3.959


  5 in total

1.  Post-menopausal breast abscess.

Authors:  G C Raju; V Naraynsingh; N Jankey
Journal:  Postgrad Med J       Date:  1986-11       Impact factor: 2.401

2.  Diagnosing breast carcinoma in young women.

Authors:  A Yelland; M D Graham; P A Trott; H T Ford; R C Coombes; J C Gazet; N G Polson
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1991-03-16

3.  Comparison of breast tumours evaluated by ultrasound, mammography, and clinical investigation.

Authors:  H De Gezelle; A Vanpeperstraete; P Defoort; R Serreyn; D Vandekerckhove
Journal:  Arch Gynecol       Date:  1981

4.  A comparison between ultrasonography and mammography, computed tomography and digital subtraction angiography for the detection of breast cancers.

Authors:  N Tohnosu; K Okuyama; Y Koide; T Kikuchi; T Awano; H Matsubara; T Sano; H Nakaichi; Y Funami; K Matsushita
Journal:  Surg Today       Date:  1993       Impact factor: 2.549

5.  The accuracy of ultrasound in the diagnosis of breast disease.

Authors:  J A Smallwood; P Guyer; K Dewbury; S Mengatti; A Herbert; G T Royle; I Taylor
Journal:  Ann R Coll Surg Engl       Date:  1986-01       Impact factor: 1.891

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.