Cargando…

Comparison of written reports of mammography, sonography and magnetic resonance mammography for preoperative evaluation of breast lesions, with special emphasis on magnetic resonance mammography

Patients with abnormal breast findings (n = 413) were examined by mammography, sonography and magnetic resonance (MR) mammography; 185 invasive cancers, 38 carcinoma in situ and 254 benign tumours were confirmed histologically. Sensitivity for mammography was 83.7%, for sonography it was 89.1% and f...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Malur, Sabine, Wurdinger, Susanne, Moritz, Andreas, Michels, Wolfgang, Schneider, Achim
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2001
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13900/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11250746
_version_ 1782119847897858048
author Malur, Sabine
Wurdinger, Susanne
Moritz, Andreas
Michels, Wolfgang
Schneider, Achim
author_facet Malur, Sabine
Wurdinger, Susanne
Moritz, Andreas
Michels, Wolfgang
Schneider, Achim
author_sort Malur, Sabine
collection PubMed
description Patients with abnormal breast findings (n = 413) were examined by mammography, sonography and magnetic resonance (MR) mammography; 185 invasive cancers, 38 carcinoma in situ and 254 benign tumours were confirmed histologically. Sensitivity for mammography was 83.7%, for sonography it was 89.1% and for MR mammography it was 94.6% for invasive cancers. In 42 patients with multifocal invasive cancers, multifocality had been detected by mammography and sonography in 26.2%, and by MR mammography in 66.7%. In nine patients with multicentric cancers, detection rates were 55.5, 55.5 and 88.8%, respectively. Carcinoma in situ was diagnosed by mammography in 78.9% and by MR mammography in 68.4% of patients. Combination of all three diagnostic methods lead to the best results for detection of invasive cancer and multifocal disease. However, sensitivity of mammography and sonography combined was identical to that of MR mammography (ie 94.6%).
format Text
id pubmed-13900
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2001
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-139002001-02-27 Comparison of written reports of mammography, sonography and magnetic resonance mammography for preoperative evaluation of breast lesions, with special emphasis on magnetic resonance mammography Malur, Sabine Wurdinger, Susanne Moritz, Andreas Michels, Wolfgang Schneider, Achim Breast Cancer Res Primary Research Patients with abnormal breast findings (n = 413) were examined by mammography, sonography and magnetic resonance (MR) mammography; 185 invasive cancers, 38 carcinoma in situ and 254 benign tumours were confirmed histologically. Sensitivity for mammography was 83.7%, for sonography it was 89.1% and for MR mammography it was 94.6% for invasive cancers. In 42 patients with multifocal invasive cancers, multifocality had been detected by mammography and sonography in 26.2%, and by MR mammography in 66.7%. In nine patients with multicentric cancers, detection rates were 55.5, 55.5 and 88.8%, respectively. Carcinoma in situ was diagnosed by mammography in 78.9% and by MR mammography in 68.4% of patients. Combination of all three diagnostic methods lead to the best results for detection of invasive cancer and multifocal disease. However, sensitivity of mammography and sonography combined was identical to that of MR mammography (ie 94.6%). BioMed Central 2001 2000-11-02 /pmc/articles/PMC13900/ /pubmed/11250746 Text en Copyright © 2000 BioMed Central Ltd on behalf of the copyright holders
spellingShingle Primary Research
Malur, Sabine
Wurdinger, Susanne
Moritz, Andreas
Michels, Wolfgang
Schneider, Achim
Comparison of written reports of mammography, sonography and magnetic resonance mammography for preoperative evaluation of breast lesions, with special emphasis on magnetic resonance mammography
title Comparison of written reports of mammography, sonography and magnetic resonance mammography for preoperative evaluation of breast lesions, with special emphasis on magnetic resonance mammography
title_full Comparison of written reports of mammography, sonography and magnetic resonance mammography for preoperative evaluation of breast lesions, with special emphasis on magnetic resonance mammography
title_fullStr Comparison of written reports of mammography, sonography and magnetic resonance mammography for preoperative evaluation of breast lesions, with special emphasis on magnetic resonance mammography
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of written reports of mammography, sonography and magnetic resonance mammography for preoperative evaluation of breast lesions, with special emphasis on magnetic resonance mammography
title_short Comparison of written reports of mammography, sonography and magnetic resonance mammography for preoperative evaluation of breast lesions, with special emphasis on magnetic resonance mammography
title_sort comparison of written reports of mammography, sonography and magnetic resonance mammography for preoperative evaluation of breast lesions, with special emphasis on magnetic resonance mammography
topic Primary Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13900/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11250746
work_keys_str_mv AT malursabine comparisonofwrittenreportsofmammographysonographyandmagneticresonancemammographyforpreoperativeevaluationofbreastlesionswithspecialemphasisonmagneticresonancemammography
AT wurdingersusanne comparisonofwrittenreportsofmammographysonographyandmagneticresonancemammographyforpreoperativeevaluationofbreastlesionswithspecialemphasisonmagneticresonancemammography
AT moritzandreas comparisonofwrittenreportsofmammographysonographyandmagneticresonancemammographyforpreoperativeevaluationofbreastlesionswithspecialemphasisonmagneticresonancemammography
AT michelswolfgang comparisonofwrittenreportsofmammographysonographyandmagneticresonancemammographyforpreoperativeevaluationofbreastlesionswithspecialemphasisonmagneticresonancemammography
AT schneiderachim comparisonofwrittenreportsofmammographysonographyandmagneticresonancemammographyforpreoperativeevaluationofbreastlesionswithspecialemphasisonmagneticresonancemammography