Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
addClaim

[Mammography and mammary ultrasonography: which examination sequence is preferable?].

Authors: M, Müller-Schimpfle; W, Stern; P, Stoll; J W, Kaiser; C D, Claussen;

[Mammography and mammary ultrasonography: which examination sequence is preferable?].

Abstract

To compare primary mammography diagnosis (ultrasound report available) with primary ultrasound diagnosis (mammography report available).89 preoperative patients with suspicious lesions were included. Mammography and ultrasound of all patients were evaluated by two independent experienced readers under clinical conditions. The reports of the complementary modality were available to both observers. Lesion evaluation was done on a per breast basis, in cases of multiple lesions in respect of the lesion with the greatest risk of malignancy.39 benign and 59 malignant lesions were found. Primary mammography and primary ultrasound yielded 3 and 8 false positives and 10 and 13 false negatives. Concerning the palpable lesions (n = 59), primary mammography and primary ultrasound had no and 4 false positives and 7 and 8 false negatives, respectively, for the non palpable lesions, the figures were 3 and 4 false positive and 3 and 5 false negatives.Mammography remains the method of first choice in early detection of breast cancer, whereas breast ultrasound should be performed after and in knowledge of the mammogram, in consideration of the known indications (equivocal palpable lesion and mammographic opacity, dense breast).

Related Organizations
Keywords

Adolescent, Breast Neoplasms, Middle Aged, Sensitivity and Specificity, Diagnosis, Differential, Breast Diseases, Evaluation Studies as Topic, Humans, False Positive Reactions, Female, Prospective Studies, Ultrasonography, Mammary, False Negative Reactions, Aged, Mammography

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    citations
    The total number of citations received by all articles of the researcher of interest.
    4
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Average
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
citations
The total number of citations received by all articles of the researcher of interest.
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
4
Average
Average
Average
Related to Research communities
Cancer Research
Upload OA version
Are you the author of this publication? Upload your Open Access version to Zenodo!
It’s fast and easy, just two clicks!