Cargando…
Comparison of radial and meander-like breast ultrasound with respect to diagnostic accuracy and examination time
PURPOSE: To prospectively compare the diagnostic accuracy of radial breast ultrasound (r-US) to that of conventional meander-like breast ultrasound (m-US), patients of a consecutive, unselected, mixed collective were examined by both scanning methods. METHODS: Out of 1948 dual examinations, 150 reve...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7246244/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32363545 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00404-020-05554-x |
_version_ | 1783537902810038272 |
---|---|
author | Jäggi-Wickes, Claudia Brasier-Lutz, Pascale Schaedelin, Sabine Burian, Rosemarie Schoenenberger, Cora-Ann Zanetti-Dällenbach, Rosanna |
author_facet | Jäggi-Wickes, Claudia Brasier-Lutz, Pascale Schaedelin, Sabine Burian, Rosemarie Schoenenberger, Cora-Ann Zanetti-Dällenbach, Rosanna |
author_sort | Jäggi-Wickes, Claudia |
collection | PubMed |
description | PURPOSE: To prospectively compare the diagnostic accuracy of radial breast ultrasound (r-US) to that of conventional meander-like breast ultrasound (m-US), patients of a consecutive, unselected, mixed collective were examined by both scanning methods. METHODS: Out of 1948 dual examinations, 150 revealed suspicious lesions resulting in 168 biopsies taken from 148 patients. Histology confirmed breast cancers in 36 cases. Sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, PPV, and NPV were calculated for r-US and m-US. The examination times were recorded. RESULTS: For m-US and r-US, sensitivity (both 88.9%), specificity (86.4% versus 89.4%), accuracy (86.9% versus 89.3%), PPV (64.0% versus 69.6%), NPV (both 98.3%), false-negative rate (both 5.6%), and rate of cancer missed by one method (both 5.6%) were similar. The mean examination time for r-US (14.8 min) was significantly (p < 0.01) shorter than for m-US (22.6 min). CONCLUSION: Because the diagnostic accuracy of r-US and m-US are comparable, r-US can be considered an alternative to m-US in routine breast US with the added benefit of a significantly shorter examination time. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7246244 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | Springer Berlin Heidelberg |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-72462442020-06-03 Comparison of radial and meander-like breast ultrasound with respect to diagnostic accuracy and examination time Jäggi-Wickes, Claudia Brasier-Lutz, Pascale Schaedelin, Sabine Burian, Rosemarie Schoenenberger, Cora-Ann Zanetti-Dällenbach, Rosanna Arch Gynecol Obstet Gynecologic Oncology PURPOSE: To prospectively compare the diagnostic accuracy of radial breast ultrasound (r-US) to that of conventional meander-like breast ultrasound (m-US), patients of a consecutive, unselected, mixed collective were examined by both scanning methods. METHODS: Out of 1948 dual examinations, 150 revealed suspicious lesions resulting in 168 biopsies taken from 148 patients. Histology confirmed breast cancers in 36 cases. Sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, PPV, and NPV were calculated for r-US and m-US. The examination times were recorded. RESULTS: For m-US and r-US, sensitivity (both 88.9%), specificity (86.4% versus 89.4%), accuracy (86.9% versus 89.3%), PPV (64.0% versus 69.6%), NPV (both 98.3%), false-negative rate (both 5.6%), and rate of cancer missed by one method (both 5.6%) were similar. The mean examination time for r-US (14.8 min) was significantly (p < 0.01) shorter than for m-US (22.6 min). CONCLUSION: Because the diagnostic accuracy of r-US and m-US are comparable, r-US can be considered an alternative to m-US in routine breast US with the added benefit of a significantly shorter examination time. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2020-05-03 2020 /pmc/articles/PMC7246244/ /pubmed/32363545 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00404-020-05554-x Text en © The Author(s) 2020 Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. |
spellingShingle | Gynecologic Oncology Jäggi-Wickes, Claudia Brasier-Lutz, Pascale Schaedelin, Sabine Burian, Rosemarie Schoenenberger, Cora-Ann Zanetti-Dällenbach, Rosanna Comparison of radial and meander-like breast ultrasound with respect to diagnostic accuracy and examination time |
title | Comparison of radial and meander-like breast ultrasound with respect to diagnostic accuracy and examination time |
title_full | Comparison of radial and meander-like breast ultrasound with respect to diagnostic accuracy and examination time |
title_fullStr | Comparison of radial and meander-like breast ultrasound with respect to diagnostic accuracy and examination time |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparison of radial and meander-like breast ultrasound with respect to diagnostic accuracy and examination time |
title_short | Comparison of radial and meander-like breast ultrasound with respect to diagnostic accuracy and examination time |
title_sort | comparison of radial and meander-like breast ultrasound with respect to diagnostic accuracy and examination time |
topic | Gynecologic Oncology |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7246244/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32363545 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00404-020-05554-x |
work_keys_str_mv | AT jaggiwickesclaudia comparisonofradialandmeanderlikebreastultrasoundwithrespecttodiagnosticaccuracyandexaminationtime AT brasierlutzpascale comparisonofradialandmeanderlikebreastultrasoundwithrespecttodiagnosticaccuracyandexaminationtime AT schaedelinsabine comparisonofradialandmeanderlikebreastultrasoundwithrespecttodiagnosticaccuracyandexaminationtime AT burianrosemarie comparisonofradialandmeanderlikebreastultrasoundwithrespecttodiagnosticaccuracyandexaminationtime AT schoenenbergercoraann comparisonofradialandmeanderlikebreastultrasoundwithrespecttodiagnosticaccuracyandexaminationtime AT zanettidallenbachrosanna comparisonofradialandmeanderlikebreastultrasoundwithrespecttodiagnosticaccuracyandexaminationtime |