Cargando…

Evaluation of the accuracy of mammography, ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging in suspect breast lesions

OBJECTIVES: In breast cancer diagnosis, mammography (MMG), ultrasonography (USG) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) are the imaging methods most used. There is a scarcity of comparative studies that evaluate the accuracy of these methods in the diagnosis of breast cancer. METHODS: A cross-sectiona...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Pereira, Renato de Oliveira, da Luz, Larissa Almondes, Chagas, Diego Cipriano, Amorim, Jefferson Rodrigues, Nery-Júnior, Elmo de Jesus, Alves, Araci Castelo Branco Rodrigues, de Abreu-Neto, Flávio Teixeira, Oliveira, Maria da Conceição Barros, Silva, Danylo Rafhael Costa, Soares-Júnior, José Maria, da Silva, Benedito Borges
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Faculdade de Medicina / USP 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7362717/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32725074
http://dx.doi.org/10.6061/clinics/2020/e1805
_version_ 1783559542563405824
author Pereira, Renato de Oliveira
da Luz, Larissa Almondes
Chagas, Diego Cipriano
Amorim, Jefferson Rodrigues
Nery-Júnior, Elmo de Jesus
Alves, Araci Castelo Branco Rodrigues
de Abreu-Neto, Flávio Teixeira
Oliveira, Maria da Conceição Barros
Silva, Danylo Rafhael Costa
Soares-Júnior, José Maria
da Silva, Benedito Borges
author_facet Pereira, Renato de Oliveira
da Luz, Larissa Almondes
Chagas, Diego Cipriano
Amorim, Jefferson Rodrigues
Nery-Júnior, Elmo de Jesus
Alves, Araci Castelo Branco Rodrigues
de Abreu-Neto, Flávio Teixeira
Oliveira, Maria da Conceição Barros
Silva, Danylo Rafhael Costa
Soares-Júnior, José Maria
da Silva, Benedito Borges
author_sort Pereira, Renato de Oliveira
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES: In breast cancer diagnosis, mammography (MMG), ultrasonography (USG) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) are the imaging methods most used. There is a scarcity of comparative studies that evaluate the accuracy of these methods in the diagnosis of breast cancer. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was carried out through the review of electronic medical records of 32 female patients who underwent breast imaging examinations at a imaging diagnostic center in Teresina, State of Piauí, Brazil. Patients who had these three imaging methods at the time of the evaluation of the same nodule were included. The nodule must have been classified as suspect by the BI-RADS(®) system in at least one of the methods. Data from each method were compared with the histopathological examination. Statistical analysis used the calculation of proportions in Excel 2010. RESULTS: MMG showed 56.2%, 87.5%, 81.8%, 66.7% and 71.8% of sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV) and accuracy, respectively. USG had 75%, 18.8%, 48%, 42.8% and 46.9% of sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV and accuracy, respectively. In turn, MRI had 100%, 50%, 66.7%, 100% and 75% of sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV and accuracy, respectively. CONCLUSION: Thus, MRI and MMG were more accurate in evaluating suspicious breast lumps. MRI had a low specificity, mainly to high breast density, while MMG had also sensitivity limited due to high breast density and USG has been proven to be useful in these patients.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7362717
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Faculdade de Medicina / USP
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-73627172020-08-13 Evaluation of the accuracy of mammography, ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging in suspect breast lesions Pereira, Renato de Oliveira da Luz, Larissa Almondes Chagas, Diego Cipriano Amorim, Jefferson Rodrigues Nery-Júnior, Elmo de Jesus Alves, Araci Castelo Branco Rodrigues de Abreu-Neto, Flávio Teixeira Oliveira, Maria da Conceição Barros Silva, Danylo Rafhael Costa Soares-Júnior, José Maria da Silva, Benedito Borges Clinics (Sao Paulo) Original Article OBJECTIVES: In breast cancer diagnosis, mammography (MMG), ultrasonography (USG) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) are the imaging methods most used. There is a scarcity of comparative studies that evaluate the accuracy of these methods in the diagnosis of breast cancer. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was carried out through the review of electronic medical records of 32 female patients who underwent breast imaging examinations at a imaging diagnostic center in Teresina, State of Piauí, Brazil. Patients who had these three imaging methods at the time of the evaluation of the same nodule were included. The nodule must have been classified as suspect by the BI-RADS(®) system in at least one of the methods. Data from each method were compared with the histopathological examination. Statistical analysis used the calculation of proportions in Excel 2010. RESULTS: MMG showed 56.2%, 87.5%, 81.8%, 66.7% and 71.8% of sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV) and accuracy, respectively. USG had 75%, 18.8%, 48%, 42.8% and 46.9% of sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV and accuracy, respectively. In turn, MRI had 100%, 50%, 66.7%, 100% and 75% of sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV and accuracy, respectively. CONCLUSION: Thus, MRI and MMG were more accurate in evaluating suspicious breast lumps. MRI had a low specificity, mainly to high breast density, while MMG had also sensitivity limited due to high breast density and USG has been proven to be useful in these patients. Faculdade de Medicina / USP 2020-07-15 2020 /pmc/articles/PMC7362717/ /pubmed/32725074 http://dx.doi.org/10.6061/clinics/2020/e1805 Text en Copyright © 2020 CLINICS http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Article
Pereira, Renato de Oliveira
da Luz, Larissa Almondes
Chagas, Diego Cipriano
Amorim, Jefferson Rodrigues
Nery-Júnior, Elmo de Jesus
Alves, Araci Castelo Branco Rodrigues
de Abreu-Neto, Flávio Teixeira
Oliveira, Maria da Conceição Barros
Silva, Danylo Rafhael Costa
Soares-Júnior, José Maria
da Silva, Benedito Borges
Evaluation of the accuracy of mammography, ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging in suspect breast lesions
title Evaluation of the accuracy of mammography, ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging in suspect breast lesions
title_full Evaluation of the accuracy of mammography, ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging in suspect breast lesions
title_fullStr Evaluation of the accuracy of mammography, ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging in suspect breast lesions
title_full_unstemmed Evaluation of the accuracy of mammography, ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging in suspect breast lesions
title_short Evaluation of the accuracy of mammography, ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging in suspect breast lesions
title_sort evaluation of the accuracy of mammography, ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging in suspect breast lesions
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7362717/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32725074
http://dx.doi.org/10.6061/clinics/2020/e1805
work_keys_str_mv AT pereirarenatodeoliveira evaluationoftheaccuracyofmammographyultrasoundandmagneticresonanceimaginginsuspectbreastlesions
AT daluzlarissaalmondes evaluationoftheaccuracyofmammographyultrasoundandmagneticresonanceimaginginsuspectbreastlesions
AT chagasdiegocipriano evaluationoftheaccuracyofmammographyultrasoundandmagneticresonanceimaginginsuspectbreastlesions
AT amorimjeffersonrodrigues evaluationoftheaccuracyofmammographyultrasoundandmagneticresonanceimaginginsuspectbreastlesions
AT neryjuniorelmodejesus evaluationoftheaccuracyofmammographyultrasoundandmagneticresonanceimaginginsuspectbreastlesions
AT alvesaracicastelobrancorodrigues evaluationoftheaccuracyofmammographyultrasoundandmagneticresonanceimaginginsuspectbreastlesions
AT deabreunetoflavioteixeira evaluationoftheaccuracyofmammographyultrasoundandmagneticresonanceimaginginsuspectbreastlesions
AT oliveiramariadaconceicaobarros evaluationoftheaccuracyofmammographyultrasoundandmagneticresonanceimaginginsuspectbreastlesions
AT silvadanylorafhaelcosta evaluationoftheaccuracyofmammographyultrasoundandmagneticresonanceimaginginsuspectbreastlesions
AT soaresjuniorjosemaria evaluationoftheaccuracyofmammographyultrasoundandmagneticresonanceimaginginsuspectbreastlesions
AT dasilvabeneditoborges evaluationoftheaccuracyofmammographyultrasoundandmagneticresonanceimaginginsuspectbreastlesions