Correlating sonography, mammography, and pathology in the assessment of breast cancer size - 03/09/11
, Jacqueline Harrison, M.D. a, b, Jose Herreros, M.D. a, b, Jose M Velasco, M.D. a, bAbstract |
Background: With the increasing use of neoadjuvant and minimally invasive therapy, the accuracy of preoperative determination of breast tumor size becomes important. Therefore, we undertook this study to compare mammography and ultrasonography (US).
Methods: A total of 180 invasive breast cancer patients were prospectively examined by mammography and US; 146 eligible patients had tumors visualized by both modalities.
Results: In 69% of cases, US was better than or equivalent to mammography in determining tumor size. Both underestimated tumor size; mean (median) underestimation was 3.8 ± 0.7 mm (1.7 mm) by US and 3.5 ± 0.9 mm (2 mm) by mammogram. Maximal tumor dimension was accurate within 5 mm in 65% of cases by mammography and 75% of cases by US. For mammographically determined size (versus pathologic size) correlation, r, was 0.4 and for US it was 0.63 and improved for only T1 and T2 tumors.
Conclusions: These data suggest that US is more accurate than mammography in assessing breast cancer size.
Le texte complet de cet article est disponible en PDF.Keywords : Breast ultrasonography, Tumor size, Breast cancer
Plan
Vol 182 - N° 4
P. 351-354 - octobre 2001 Retour au numéro
Article précédent
- The learning curve and sentinel node biopsy
- Lorraine Tafra
- Upgrade rate of core biopsy-determined atypical ductal hyperplasia by open excisional biopsy
- Robert O Maganini, David A Klem, Bernard J Huston, Elizabeth S Bruner, H.Kurt Jacobs
Bienvenue sur EM-consulte, la référence des professionnels de santé.
L’accès au texte intégral de cet article nécessite un abonnement.
Déjà abonné à cette revue ?