Mamografide Mikrokalsifikasyon Tespit Edilen Hastalarda Kontrastlı Spektral Mamografi ile Dinamik Meme MRG’nin Etkinliğinin Karşılaştırılması: Tek Merkez Deneyimi

Kamber Göksu, A. Vural
{"title":"Mamografide Mikrokalsifikasyon Tespit Edilen Hastalarda Kontrastlı Spektral Mamografi ile Dinamik Meme MRG’nin Etkinliğinin Karşılaştırılması: Tek Merkez Deneyimi","authors":"Kamber Göksu, A. Vural","doi":"10.29058/mjwbs.960285","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Aim: The aim of this study is to compare the diagnostic performance of contrast-enhanced spectral mammography (CESM) and breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in patients with microcalcification detected by mammography. CESM and MRI the for in the study, the that the were diagnosed histopathologically and that both CESM and Breast were performed were sought. The presence of pathological enhancement for CESM and Breast MRI compared statistically using the Fisher-Freeman-Halton Exact test together with histopathological diagnosis. CESM and Breast MRI examinations were performed in 75 patients with microcalcifications. Pathological contrast enhancement was detected in 47 cases in breast MRI examinations of these patients. With CESM examination, 49 patients had contrast enhancement in the microcalcification region. Forty-seven patients with contrast enhancement with both examinations were common. Contrast enhancement rates of those who were found benign as a result of the biopsy were the same for CESM and MRI (48.9%). Contrast enhancement rates of malignant ones for CESM, 88% for MRI, and 60% for CESM and Breast MRI for premalignant lesions. When contrast enhancement of the lesions was compared according to the biopsy results, no statistically significant difference was found for CESM and Breast MRI. Conclusion: CESM shows less background enhancement and has a similar sensitivity to breast MRI in detecting breast cancer. CESM is an easily accessible alternative to Breast MRI and the procedure time is significantly shorter. For these reasons, it has the potential to play an important role in breast cancer detection and staging.","PeriodicalId":309460,"journal":{"name":"Medical Journal of Western Black Sea","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medical Journal of Western Black Sea","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.29058/mjwbs.960285","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Aim: The aim of this study is to compare the diagnostic performance of contrast-enhanced spectral mammography (CESM) and breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in patients with microcalcification detected by mammography. CESM and MRI the for in the study, the that the were diagnosed histopathologically and that both CESM and Breast were performed were sought. The presence of pathological enhancement for CESM and Breast MRI compared statistically using the Fisher-Freeman-Halton Exact test together with histopathological diagnosis. CESM and Breast MRI examinations were performed in 75 patients with microcalcifications. Pathological contrast enhancement was detected in 47 cases in breast MRI examinations of these patients. With CESM examination, 49 patients had contrast enhancement in the microcalcification region. Forty-seven patients with contrast enhancement with both examinations were common. Contrast enhancement rates of those who were found benign as a result of the biopsy were the same for CESM and MRI (48.9%). Contrast enhancement rates of malignant ones for CESM, 88% for MRI, and 60% for CESM and Breast MRI for premalignant lesions. When contrast enhancement of the lesions was compared according to the biopsy results, no statistically significant difference was found for CESM and Breast MRI. Conclusion: CESM shows less background enhancement and has a similar sensitivity to breast MRI in detecting breast cancer. CESM is an easily accessible alternative to Breast MRI and the procedure time is significantly shorter. For these reasons, it has the potential to play an important role in breast cancer detection and staging.
目的:本研究的目的是比较对比增强光谱乳房x线摄影(CESM)和乳房磁共振成像(MRI)对乳房x线摄影检测到的微钙化患者的诊断效果。在研究中,CESM和MRI是最重要的,组织病理学诊断和CESM和乳腺检查都是最重要的。使用Fisher-Freeman-Halton精确测试和组织病理学诊断,CESM和乳腺MRI病理增强的存在进行统计学比较。对75例微钙化患者进行了CESM和乳腺MRI检查。47例乳腺MRI检查发现病理对比增强。经CESM检查,49例患者微钙化区造影增强。47例患者在两项检查中均有增强。活检结果显示为良性的对比增强率CESM和MRI相同(48.9%)。CESM对恶性病变的对比增强率,MRI为88%,CESM和乳腺MRI对癌前病变的对比增强率为60%。根据活检结果对病变进行对比增强时,CESM与乳腺MRI无统计学差异。结论:CESM对乳腺癌的本底增强效果较小,与乳腺MRI的敏感性相近。CESM是一种容易获得的替代乳房MRI的方法,而且手术时间明显缩短。由于这些原因,它有可能在乳腺癌的检测和分期中发挥重要作用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信