Literature DB >> 9074335

A clinical algorithm for the management of abnormal mammograms. A community hospital's experience.

D Gist1, J Llorente, J Mayer.   

Abstract

Mammography is an important tool in the early detection of breast cancer, but its use has been criticized for stimulating the performance of unnecessary breast biopsies. We retrospectively reviewed the results of breast biopsies preceded by abnormal mammograms at a community hospital for three 5-month periods--baseline, postintervention, and follow-up--to determine the effectiveness of algorithm-based care for patients with an abnormal mammogram. Cases in which there was a definite or implied recommendation for biopsy by a radiologist revealed a baseline positive predictive value of 4% (2/45), a postintervention positive predictive value of 21% (9/42), and a follow-up phase positive predictive value of 18% (5/28). A Fisher's exact test of the preintervention and postintervention positive predictive values after an abnormal mammogram with a "recommendation for biopsy" was significant (n = 87, P = .023). A Kruskal-Wallis analysis of variance to determine if there had been an increase in the mean lesion size of breast cancers detected over the 3 study periods was not significant. The results of this study suggest that developing a clinical algorithm under the leadership of an opinion leader combined with continuing medical education efforts may be efficacious in reducing the incidence of unnecessary surgical procedures.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1997        PMID: 9074335      PMCID: PMC1303952     

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  West J Med        ISSN: 0093-0415


  45 in total

1.  Preoperative localization of nonpalpable breast lesions.

Authors:  F M Hall; H A Frank
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  1979-01       Impact factor: 3.959

2.  Treatment of benign breast disease.

Authors:  R S Murley
Journal:  Ann R Coll Surg Engl       Date:  1976-09       Impact factor: 1.891

3.  [Mass screening for breast cancer in Herault county. First results in women between 40 and 70 years old].

Authors:  J P Daures; P Peray; J Bousquet; A Stoebner; C Gouzes; J L Lamarque; J C Laurent; J Cherif Cheikh; P Boulet; J Pujol
Journal:  J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod (Paris)       Date:  1992

4.  Improving the yield of positive breast biopsies: a statistical analysis of mammographic patterns in a private practice.

Authors:  J L Lasser; S Lasser
Journal:  R I Med       Date:  1994-02

5.  Mammographic features of "early" breast cancer.

Authors:  E A Sickles
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  1984-09       Impact factor: 3.959

6.  Breast cancer: age-specific growth rates and screening strategies.

Authors:  M Moskowitz
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1986-10       Impact factor: 11.105

7.  The Texas Breast Screening Project: Part I. Mammographic and clinical results.

Authors:  G N Peters; V G Vogel; W P Evans; M Bondy; S Halabi; J Lord; E A Laville
Journal:  South Med J       Date:  1993-04       Impact factor: 0.954

8.  Preoperative evaluation of abnormal mammographic findings to avoid unnecessary breast biopsies.

Authors:  M Morrow; R Schmidt; B Cregger; C Hassett; S Cox
Journal:  Arch Surg       Date:  1994-10

9.  Evaluation of abnormal screening mammograms.

Authors:  E Shaw de Paredes
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  1994-07-01       Impact factor: 6.860

10.  Cancer statistics, 1995.

Authors:  P A Wingo; T Tong; S Bolden
Journal:  CA Cancer J Clin       Date:  1995 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 508.702

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.