Journals / Türk Fertilite Dergisi / 2002 / Cilt: 10 - Sayı: 3

Diagnostic value of breast ultrasonography in postmenopausal women after physical examination and mammography

Postmenopozal kadınlarda muayene ve mammografiye ek olarak yapılan meme ultrasonografisinin tanısal değeri

Pages
228–234
Publication Date
2022-11-05
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

However, it can not detect early breast cancer and also not be used as a screening method instead of mammography.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Objective: Our aim was to investigate the diagnostic value of breast ultrasonography in addition to physical examination and mammography in postmenopausal women.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Materials and methods: Between 2000-2002 years, 350 postmenopausal women were evaluated with breast ultrasonography in addition to physical and mammography examinations in Başkent University.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:However, it can not detect early breast cancer and also not be used as a screening method instead of mammography.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2000-2002 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Objective: Our aim was to investigate the diagnostic value of breast ultrasonography in addition to physical examination and mammography in postmenopausal women. Materials and methods: Between 2000-2002 years, 350 postmenopausal women were evaluated with breast ultrasonography in addition to physical and mammography examinations in Başkent University. All the pathologic findings documented. The results were compared with breast biopsies in 47 selected cases. Results: Breast sonography revealed fibroadenomas in 11 (16.4%) and one or multiple cysts in 36 (53.7%) of 67 patients whose mammography findings were dense breast. In 34 patients who have asymmetrically density in the mammography, one or multiple cysts in 14 (41.1%) patients and solid mass in one (2.9%) patient were detected by breast sonography. Mammography detected 37patients as "suspicious for malignancy" (according to irregular solid mass or microcalcification). In these patient group breast sonography found irregular masses in only 9 patients and pathologic examinations confirmed breast cancer in 8 of them. The sensitivity of mammography was calculated 87.5 % and specificity 91.2 % in our study population. The addition of breast sonography to the mammography has been increased the sensitivity to 100 % and specificity to 99.7 %. Conclusion: We conclude that breast ultrasonography is useful for the differential diagnosis of masses that have been detected with mammography, inpatients with palpable masses and it is also useful in dense breasts. Breast sonography decreases the false positive or false negative rates of mammography. However, it can not detect early breast cancer and also not be used as a screening method instead of mammography.

Özet

Amaç: Bu çalışmada postmenopozal hastalarda muayene ve mammografiye ek olarak yapılan meme ultrasonografisinin tanısal değerini araştırdık. Materyal metod: 2000-2002 yılları arasında Başkent Üniversitesine başvuran 350 postmenopozal hastaya meme rnuayesi ve mammografiye ek olarak meme ultrasonografisi (USG) yapıldı. Elde edilen tüm patolojik bulgular, biyopsi yapılan 47 hastanın sonuçları ile karşılaştırıldı. Bulgular: Mammografide dens meme görülen 67 hastanın USG'sinde; II 'inde (% 16.4) fibroadenom, 36'sında (%53.7) tek veya tnultibl kist saptanmıştır. Mammografide asimetrik doku opasitesi tespit edilen 34 hastanın USG'sinde 14'ünde (%4l.l) kist, l'inde (%2.9) solid kitle tespit edilmiştir. Mammografide şüpheli kanser (düzensiz konturlu kitle ve şüpheli rnikrokalsifıkasyon) olarak tanımlanan 37 hastanın USG'/eri incelendiğinde; sadece 9'unda düzensiz solid kitle tespit edilmiş olup, 8'ini n biyopsisi malignité ile uyumlu gelmiştir. Çalışma grubumuzda manıografinin duyarlılığı %87.5, özgünlüğü ise %91.2 bulunmuştur. Meme USG'nin eklenmesiyle duyarlılığın %100'e, özgünlüğün ise %97.5'e arttığı görülmüştür. Sonuç: Meme USG özellikle mammografı ile saptanan benign görünümlü kitlelerde kistsoüd ayırımı yapılmasında, palpe edilen kitlelerde, mammografik olarak dens meme tespit edilen hastalarda uygulanması son derece faydalıdır. Mammografinin yanlış pozitif veya yanlış negatifliğini azaltmaktadır. Ancak erken evre meme kanserlerini tanımlayamayacağı gibi, mamografiye alternatif bir tarama yöntemi de olamaz.

🔖

Cite This Article

POURBAGHER, A., TARIM, E., TARIM, A., BAĞIŞ, T., KAZANCI, F., KILIÇDAĞ, E. B. (2022). Diagnostic value of breast ultrasonography in postmenopausal women after physical examination and mammography. Türk Fertilite Dergisi, Cilt: 10 - Sayı: 3, 228–234. https://ajindex.com/articles/623397

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (1)

  1. Parker S, Tong L, Bolden S, Wingo P. Cancer Statistics. 1996. Cancer J Clin 1996:46:8-9 2-Elwood JM, Cox B, Richardson AK. The effec¬tiveness of breast cancer screening by mammography in younger women. Online J Clin Trials 1993;2:32. 3-Moskowitz M. Guidelines for screening breast cancer. Is a revision in order? Radio I Clin North Am 1992;30(l ):221-33. 4-Corpen BN, Sickels EA, Solitto RA. The comper-ative value of mammographic screening for women 40-49 years old versus women 50-64 years old. AJR 1995:164:1099-1103. 5-Elmore JG, Barton MB, Moceri VM, et al. Ten-year risk of false positive screening mammograms and clinical breast examinations. N Engl J Med 1998; 338:1089-96. 6- Moss H, Britton P. How reliable is modern breast imaging in differentiating benign from malig¬nant breast lesions in the symptomatic population?. Clinical Radiology 1999;54:676-82) 7- Stavros A, Thickman D, Rapp C. Solid breast nodules. Use of sonography to distinguish between banign and malignant lesions. Radiology 1995:196:123. 8- Darell N.Smith. Breast Ultrasound. Radiol Clin North America 39:3;485-97. 9- Kolb TM, Linchy J, Newhouse JH. Occult cancer in women with dense breasts: Detection with screening US-diagnostic yield and tumor characteristics. Radiology 207:191-9,1998. 10-Feig SA. Breast masses: mammo graphic and sonographic evaluation. Radiol Clin North Am 1992:30(1 );67-92. 11-Kopans DB, Swann CA, White G, Hall DA. Asymmetric breast tissue. Radiology 1989:171:639-43. 12-Jackson VP. The current role of ultrasonogra-phy in breast imaging. Radiol Clin N Am 1995:33:1161-70. 13-Evans WP. Breast masses: appropriate evalua¬tion. Radiol Clin North Am 1995;33(6);1085-1108. 14-Sickels EA. Non palpable, circumscribed, non calcified solid breast masses -.likelihood of malignancy based on lesion size and age of patient. Radiology 1994:192:439-42. 15-Potterton AJ, Peakman DJ, Young JR. Ultrasound demonstration of small breast cancers detected by mammo graphic screening. Clin Radiol 1994:49:808-13. 16-Jokich PM, Mont ice iolo DL, Adler YT. Breast ultrasonography. Radiol Clin N Am 1992:30:993-1009.