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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Jäggi-Wickes, Claudia, Brasier-Lutz, Pascale, Schaedelin, Sabine, Burian, Rosemarie, Schoenenberger, Cora-Ann, Zanetti-Dällenbach, Rosanna
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