Literature DB >> 8451440

A private breast imaging practice: medical audit of 25,788 screening and 1,077 diagnostic examinations.

C L Robertson1.   

Abstract

During 1989 and 1990, 25,788 screening and 1,077 diagnostic breast imaging examinations were performed. Audit was performed in 6-month intervals to allow comparison of performance over time. Sensitivity, positive predictive value, and stage of disease were determined for each radiologist, for patients over and those under 50 years of age, and for patients with and for those without a suspect palpable breast abnormality. In the screening portion of the study, 1,539 of 25,788 (5.9%) patients were asked to return for diagnostic breast imaging, 119 of 188 (63%) cancers were stage 0 or stage 1 disease, and a sensitivity of 91% and a positive predictive value of 11% were found. If patients with a palpable breast abnormality were eliminated, 103 of 138 (75%) patients had disease that was less than stage 2. In the diagnostic portion of the study, 296 of 1,077 (27%) patients were referred for biopsy and 53 of 71 (75%) cancers were stage 0 or stage 1 disease. A sensitivity of 97% and a positive predictive value of 24% were found. If patients with a palpable breast abnormality were eliminated, 51 of 63 (81%) patients had disease that was less than stage 2.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1993        PMID: 8451440     DOI: 10.1148/radiology.187.1.8451440

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


  16 in total

1.  Surgical mammography reporting in a limited resource environment.

Authors:  John P Mouton; Justus Apffelstaedt; Karin Baatjes
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2010-11       Impact factor: 3.352

2.  Increased patient concern after false-positive mammograms: clinician documentation and subsequent ambulatory visits.

Authors:  M B Barton; S Moore; S Polk; E Shtatland; J G Elmore; S W Fletcher
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2001-03       Impact factor: 5.128

3.  Scintimammography with technetium-99m methoxyisobutylisonitrile: comparison with mammography and magnetic resonance imaging.

Authors:  H Palmedo; F Grünwald; H Bender; A Schomburg; P Mallmann; D Krebs; H J Biersack
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med       Date:  1996-08

4.  Screening mammograms by community radiologists: variability in false-positive rates.

Authors:  Joann G Elmore; Diana L Miglioretti; Lisa M Reisch; Mary B Barton; William Kreuter; Cindy L Christiansen; Suzanne W Fletcher
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2002-09-18       Impact factor: 13.506

5.  Clinical utility of breast magnetic resonance imaging in patients presenting with primary breast cancer.

Authors:  Tuoc N Dao; Jeffrey P Lamont; Sally M Knox
Journal:  Proc (Bayl Univ Med Cent)       Date:  2007-07

6.  International variation in screening mammography interpretations in community-based programs.

Authors:  Joann G Elmore; Connie Y Nakano; Thomas D Koepsell; Laurel M Desnick; Carl J D'Orsi; David F Ransohoff
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2003-09-17       Impact factor: 13.506

7.  Use of Breast Cancer Screening and Its Association with Later Use of Preventive Services among Medicare Beneficiaries.

Authors:  Stella K Kang; Miao Jiang; Richard Duszak; Samantha L Heller; Danny R Hughes; Linda Moy
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2018-06-05       Impact factor: 11.105

8.  Prospective screening study of 0.5 Tesla dedicated magnetic resonance imaging for the detection of breast cancer in young, high-risk women.

Authors:  Wendy S Rubinstein; Jean J Latimer; Jules H Sumkin; Michelle Huerbin; Stephen G Grant; Victor G Vogel
Journal:  BMC Womens Health       Date:  2006-06-26       Impact factor: 2.809

9.  Sensitivity, specificity and predictive values of breast imaging in the detection of cancer.

Authors:  L E Duijm; G L Guit; J O Zaat; A R Koomen; D Willebrand
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  1997       Impact factor: 7.640

Review 10.  Lobular breast cancer series: imaging.

Authors:  Karen Johnson; Deba Sarma; E Shelley Hwang
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res       Date:  2015-07-11       Impact factor: 6.466

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.