乳腺肿块Sono CT高频超声显像与钼靶X线诊断对照研究

目的 分析比较Sono CT高频超声显像与钼靶X线摄影法对乳腺肿块的临床诊断价值。方法 193例乳腺肿块患者，其中乳腺癌58例，良性肿块135例，在术前1周内同时行Sono CT高频超声显像和钼靶X线摄影检查。结果 超声诊断早期乳腺癌46例，其敏感性79．31％，特异性94．81％，准确性90．16％。钼靶诊断早期乳腺癌47例，其敏感性和特异性为81．03％和89．63％，准确性为87．05％。超声对于良性肿瘤分类诊断的敏感性、特异性和准确性均高于钼靶。结论 Sono CT高频超声与钼靶X线摄影比较，发现前者对早期乳腺癌的敏感性和阴性预测值近于后者，特异性和阳性预测值则高于后者，而对于良性肿瘤的分类诊断前者优于后者。     

术前乳腺B超及MRI检查对乳腺癌患者腋窝淋巴结状态评估的准确性

目的 比较术前乳腺B超和乳腺MRI检查评估乳腺癌患者腋窝淋巴结状态的准确性.方法 回顾性分析2010年8月至2011年2月于上海瑞金医院乳腺疾病诊治中心进行乳腺B超、MRI检查以及根治性手术的293例乳腺癌病例.结果 293例乳腺癌患者中3例为双侧乳腺癌,共296例腋窝.总体人群中,B超敏感性达60.0％,特异性达90.6％,阳性预测值80.2％,阴性预测值78.0％;MRI敏感性达50.5％,特异性达90.8％,阳性预测值77.9％,阴性预测值74.0％;两项检查联用敏感性70.6％,特异性97.2％.两项检查的四项指标之间差异均无统计学意义(均P＞0.05),在亚组分析中两种检查的准确性及预测价值差异亦无统计学意义(P＞0.05).B超联合MRI检查的敏感性为70.6％,特异性为97.2％.结论 术前B超及MRI对乳腺癌患者腋窝淋巴结状态评估的准确性及预测价值相当.联合使用乳腺B超及MRI检查特异性更高,两种检查均提示腋窝淋巴结转移的患者可考虑免去前哨淋巴结活检.     

MR弥散加权成像在前列腺癌诊断中的应用价值

目的 探讨MR弥散加权成像(MRDWI)在前列腺癌(PCa)诊断中的应用价值. 方法 临床怀疑PCa患者57例行MRDWI与T_2 WI检查,通过表观弥散系数(ADC)图对可疑病灶进行良恶性评判.并与穿刺或手术病理结果 进行比较,利用曲线下面积(ROC)分析比较MRDWI与T_2 WI在PCa病灶检出中的价值.同时对30例直肠指检无结节,前列腺穿刺活检阴性患者行MRDWI检查,通过ADC值将可疑病灶按照Ⅰ(良性)～Ⅴ(恶性)级标准划分,在经直肠超声横断面上对异常区域进行定位穿刺.评价以MRDWI定位再次穿刺的价值. 结果 57例患者MRDWI与T_2WI的ROC分别为0.830和0.742,MRDWI诊断敏感性为85%、特异性为82%、阳性预测值80%、阴性预测值86%、准确率为83%;T_2 WI的敏感性为77%、特异性为71%、阳性预测值69%、阴性预测值79%、准确率为74%.MRDWI诊断准确性优于TzWl(P<0.05).30例穿刺定位患者中ADC图诊断为PCa 24例(≥Ⅳ级),BPH 6例(Ⅰ～Ⅲ级).穿刺病理证实为PCa 17例(85%),以Ⅳ级为界划分良恶性,诊断敏感性100%、特异性46%、阳性预测值71%、阴性预测值100%、准确率77%.如果以至少有1个区域为V级划为恶性,则17例PCa患者中DWI诊断恶性13例,敏感性77%、特异性85%、阳性预测值87%、阴性预测值73%、准确率80%. 结论 MR弥散加权成像诊断PCa准确性优于T2加权成像,能有效提高PSA持续升高患者前列腺再次穿刺活检的检出率.     

99mTc-MIBI乳腺显像与乳腺X线照相在乳腺癌诊断中的价值

目的评价^99m Tc-MIBI乳腺显像与乳腺X线照相检测乳腺癌的实用性。方法对100例106个经临床检查可疑乳腺病灶的妇女进行乳腺钼靶X线照相和^99m Tc-MIBI乳腺显像检查,并与病理学诊断结果进行对比。结果与病理组织学诊断比较,钼靶照相检测乳腺癌特异性为44．6％,阳性预测值为31．7％;^99m Tc-MIBI显像检测乳腺癌的特异性为87．8％,阳性预测值为76．9％。结论^99m Tc--MIBI乳腺显像对乳腺癌的诊断较乳腺X线照相具有较大的临床价值。     

磁共振成像对乳腺钙化灶的诊断价值

目的:探讨磁共振成像(magnetic resonance imaging,MRI)对超声检查阴性乳腺钙化灶的诊断价值。方法:回顾性分析2011年1月至2014年3月209例因乳腺X线检查发现226个BI-RADS 4-5级钙化灶(超声检查阴性)而接受活检病人的MRI检查表现,并与病理结果对比分析。226个钙化灶中,42个为恶性,184个为良性。结果:对于超声检查阴性钙化灶恶性的判断,乳腺X线检查和MRI的灵敏度分别为69.0%和85.7%(P=0.068),特异度分别为64.7%和88.0%(P     

X线钼靶摄影与超声诊断乳腺微钙化灶的对比研究

目的：比较X线钼靶摄影与超声在乳腺微钙化灶诊断中的价值。方法：收集伴随微钙化灶（经X线钼靶摄影确诊）的乳腺良性、恶性疾病患者117例,分析超声对乳腺微钙化的检出率;比较X线钼靶摄影与超声检查对乳腺微钙化灶病例诊断的敏感性、特异性及准确性。结果：乳腺微钙化的超声检出率为66.7%,其中乳腺恶性病灶的微钙化超声检出率为87.5%,乳腺良性病变的微钙化灶超声检出率为33.3%,超声诊断乳腺微钙化灶病例的敏感性、特异性和准确性分别为69.4%、86.7%和76.1%,X线钼靶摄影分别为75.0%、73.3%、74.3%,两者联合应用为90.2%、91.1%、90.5%。结论：X线钼靶摄影与超声相比,前者具有较高的敏感性,后者具有较高的特异性,而两者联合应用可提高对乳腺微钙化灶病例诊断的准确率,对于乳腺癌的早期诊断具有较高的临床实用价值。     

高频超声检出并定位不能扪及的乳腺癌

目的：探讨高频超声检出乳腺不能扪及病灶的可行性及其定位活检方法。方法：常规高频超声检查以发现临床不能扪及的病灶．拟诊为肿瘤性病灶则在超声引导下行Hookwire穿刺，并由此引导作手术活检。结果：对980例共1247处不能扪及的病灶进行了超声诊断并引导活检。共计查出乳腺癌115处，上皮不典型增生131处。超声对不能扪及的乳腺癌检查的敏感性、特异性分别为69％和88％，良、恶性诊断符合率为96％；对有活检指征的乳腺癌和癌前期病变检出的敏感性、特异性分别为77％和74％。用本法定位方便、手术顺利地找到病灶并完成活检。结论：高频超声可以检出临床不能扪及的乳腺癌及癌前病变，超声引导穿刺定位方法简便易行。     

乳腺血氧功能成像系统在乳腺疾病诊断中的应用

目的探讨乳腺血氧功能成像系统(血氧三算子)在乳腺疾病诊断中的应用价值。方法 2010年3月～9月对120例乳腺疾病进行血氧三算子、超声和乳腺钼靶检查(患者≤35岁不接受钼靶检查),3项检查至少有一项提示有手术指征,通过与术后病理对比,比较3种影像学诊断的准确性、敏感性、特异性、阳性预测值及阴性预测值。结果血氧三算子与超声、乳腺钼靶的准确率分别为93.3%(112/120)、87.5%(105/120)、82.4%(70/85);敏感性分别为93.5%(29/31)、74.2%(23/31)、61.5%(16/26);特异性分别为93.2%(83/89)、92.1%(82/89)、91.5%(54/59);阳性预测值分别为82.9%(29/35)、76.7%(23/30)、76.2%(16/21);阴性预测值为97.6%(83/85)、91.1%(82/90)、84.4%(54/64)。血氧三算子对乳腺病灶诊断的准确性、敏感性、阴性预测值优于乳腺钼靶(Z=2.212,P=0.027;Z=2.623,P=0.009;Z=2.735,P=0.006),但二者特异性和阳性预测值无统计学差异(Z=0.066,P=0.948;Z=0.395,P=0.693)。结论血氧三算子对乳腺病灶诊断具有较高的准确性、敏感性、阴性预测值,对乳腺癌的诊断有较大应用价值。     

超声弹性成像对乳腺良恶性肿块的鉴别诊断价值

目的探讨超声弹性成像新评分标准(7分法)在诊断乳腺良、恶性病变的诊断价值及其最佳诊断界点。方法对手术病理结果证实的475个乳腺病灶的超声弹性成像图进行回顾性分析,用ROC曲线法探讨用7分法超声弹性成像评分标准的最佳诊断界点。结果7分法弹性成像评分标准对乳腺病灶的最佳诊断界点为5分,其ROC曲线下面积为0.959,其敏感性、特异性、准确性、阳性预测值、阴性预测值、Youden指数分别为:81.60%、99.14%、94.53%、97.14%、93.78%和0.81。结论7分法超声弹性成像评分标准使用简便,有助于鉴别乳腺良恶性肿块。     

触诊阴性乳腺病灶的诊治体会(附85例分析)

目的探讨触诊阴性乳腺病灶的临床表现特点和诊治方法。方法回顾性分析85例触诊阴性乳腺病灶的临床资料。结果触诊阴性乳腺病灶一般没有明显临床症状,少数有乳房胀痛、乳头溢液（血）或乳房外观改变,临床上诊治相对困难。85例中良性病变69例,占81．2％,恶性病变16例,占18．8％。结论通过超声引导下或X线立体定位针吸细胞学检查、穿刺病理学检查、手术活检以及乳腺导管镜检查对触诊阴性乳腺病灶基本可以做出明确诊断。     

常用乳腺影像诊断方法的比较研究

目的 比较彩色多普勒超声、钼靶和近红外线在乳腺癌及乳腺良性疾病诊断中的作用。方法 以术后病理结果为金标准，比较术前3种检查方法的诊断准确性。结果 共计565例乳腺疾病患者接受检查，其中乳腺癌274例，良性乳腺疾病291例。对乳腺癌彩超、钼靶和近红外线检查的灵敏度分别为83．7％（200／239）、84．2％（64／76）和76．9％（100／130），特异度分别为88．6％（226／255）、93．2％（69／74）和82．6％（114／138），诊断符合率分别为86．2％（426／494）、88．7％（133／150）和79．9％（214／268），其中彩超和钼靶检查的诊断符合率优于近红外线（P〈0．05），尤其对≤2cm的乳腺癌，近红外线对其诊断有较高的假阴性率（48．8％，21／43）。对乳腺炎性病变和导管瘤，彩超的检出率分别为58．8％（10／17）和69．2％（18／26），高于近红外线的检出率[分别为0和23．5％（4／17），P〈0．05和P〈0．01]。对乳腺癌在无查体配合诊断情况下行近红外线检查，其灵敏度和诊断符合率明显下降[灵敏度从76．9％（100／130）降到56．9％（74／130），P〈0．01；诊断符合率从79．9％（214／298）降到61．9％（166／268），P〈0．01]。结论 彩色多普勒超声和钼靶是有价值的常用乳腺影像诊断方法。     

数字化乳腺摄影联合超声与MRI对乳腺良、恶性疾病诊断的对照观察

目的评价数字化乳腺摄影联合超声与MRI在乳腺良恶性疾病诊断中的意义及临床应用价值。方法对105例乳腺疾病患者的数字化乳腺摄影联合超声诊断结果与MRI诊断结果进行回顾性分析。结果 105例患者共110个病灶,其中恶性62个,良性48个。所有病灶均被病理证实。数字化乳腺摄影联合超声对乳腺恶性病变的诊断敏感度、特异度分别为90.32%（56/62）、91.67%（44/48）;MRI对乳腺恶性病变的诊断敏感度、特异度分别为91.94%（57/62）、87.50%（42/48）。结论数字化乳腺摄影联合超声检查诊断准确性高,适用于乳腺疾病的常规检查;MRI空间分辨力及组织分辨力高,适用于前二者检查难以定性的病变及乳腺癌的术前评估。     

Technetium-99m sestamibi scintimammography complements mammography in the detection of breast cancer

Mammography remains the technique of choice for the detection of early breast cancer. The sensitivity of mammography is 85%, but is decreased in patients with dense breasts. Sestamibi scintimammography (SCM) has been suggested as an adjunctive modality to improve the detection of breast cancer. We conducted a study to determine the impact of SCM in patient management. A prospective study was conducted in 95 patients presenting with palpable masses and/or abnormal mammography scheduled for biopsy. Injection of 20-30 mCi of technetium-99m (Tc-99m) sestamibi into a pedal vein was performed. Ten-minute images of the breast and axilla were obtained in multiple projections. The mammography and SCM were correlated with pathology and clinical findings. The median age was 44 years (range 28-86 years). The total number of lesions was 104, as eight patients had bilateral lesions and one patient had two lesions in the same breast. Fifty-nine patients presented with palpable lesions and 45 patients with nonpalpable lesions (42 with abnormal mammography only and 3 with nipple discharge). A comparison of sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, and overall accuracy of SCM and mammography were performed. The sensitivity and specificity for SCM were 83% and 83%, respectively, and for mammography were 65%, and 72%, respectively. The sensitivity and specificity for combined SCM and mammography were 87% and 94%, respectively. The p-value for mammography versus combined SCM and mammography was 0.0003 and that for SCM versus SCM and mammography was 0.0098. There were 80 (77%) benign and 24 (23%) malignant lesions. Of the 24 malignancies, SCM missed six (25%), versus eight (33%) by mammography. In two patients (9%) SCM detected malignancy in the breast that was not visualized by mammography or found on clinical examination. Sestamibi SCM improves the sensitivity of mammography and it detects up to 9% of malignancies not detected by mammography or clinical examination. This testing could impact the management of 16,500 patients in the United States every year. More studies are needed to better define its role in breast cancer detection.     

乳腺癌腋窝淋巴结B超检查特异性回顾性分析

目的 探讨各辅助检查方法对乳腺癌腋窝淋巴结转移的诊断价值。方法 对天津医科大学附属肿瘤医院2009年3月至2009年6月253例经手术病理证实乳腺癌病人术前B超与钼靶、MRI、PET-CT资料进行回顾性分析,比较灵敏度、特异度、阳性及阴性预测值和准确性。结果 B超（253例）灵敏度,特异度,阳性及阴性预测值,准确性为70.6%,87.4%,84.8%,75.0%和79.1%;钼靶（220例）为14.6%,100%,100%,53.9%和57.3%;MRI（27例）为50.0%,100%,100%,71.4%,77.8%;PET-CT（23例）为90.0%,92.3%,90.0%,92.3%,91.3%。B超与病理对照的Kappa值为0.581,与病理的一致性一般;高年资组B超医师的灵敏度、特异度、准确性为与低年资组比较差异有统计学意义（P＜0.05）。结论 判断乳腺癌腋窝淋巴结转移状况B超优于其他检查,而且超声检查者的经验影响诊断结果。     

Effectiveness of Breast-Specific Gamma Imaging (BSGI) for Breast Cancer in Korea: A Comparative Study

Abstract: Despite the fact that mammography has been the golden standard in breast cancer detection for several decades, its sensitivity decreases for women with dense breast tissue, which happens to be common in Korea. As an alternative, breast ultrasonography can be effective diagnostic modalities that complement the defect of mammography. Recently, breast‐specific gamma imaging (BSGI) has been introduced as a new diagnostic modality for breast cancer. This study was designed to analyze the effectiveness of BSGI in particular. In a retrospective study, 471 patients underwent BSGI, breast ultrasonography, and mammography simultaneously during the period between February 2009 and March 2010. The indications of BSGI were as follows: (a) patient who was diagnosed with malignancy prior to surgery, (b) patient who is under follow up after cancer surgery, (c) patient with lesions which cannot be evaluated by breast ultrasonography or mammography, (d) patient with multiple benign lesions, and (e) patient with suspicious lesion who refuses biopsy. Among these patients, 121 patients underwent biopsy, whereas others were followed up with imaging studies. We compared the BSGI results with those of mammography, breast ultrasonography, and pathology. The mean age of the patients was 49.63 ± 10.43 years. There were 107 patients with 110 malignant lesions and 364 patients with benign lesions. Total 474 lesions were evaluated. The sensitivities of BSGI, mammography, and breast ultrasonography were 94.45%, 93.64%, and 98.18%, respectively, whereas the specificities of BSGI, mammography, and breast ultrasonography were 90.93%, 90.66%, and 87.09%, respectively. The sensitivity and specificity of BSGI for axillary lymph node (LN) status were 44.7 4% and 87.88%, respectively. BSGI is a good complementary imaging modality with high sensitivity and high specificity for breast cancer detection. However, it has low efficacy for the evaluation for axillary LN status.     

Can Breast Magnetic Resonance Imaging Prevent Biopsy or Change the Management of BI-RADS® Category 4 Breast Lesions?

The BI-RADS® category 4 includes suspicious breast lesions which requires biopsy. The aim of this study is to investigate the contribution of breast magnetic resonance imaging to the management of BI-RADS® category 4 breast lesions detected by mammography and∕or ultrasonography. Thirty-four lesions classified as BI-RADS® category 4A, 4B, or 4C by conventional methods were evaluated with magnetic resonance imaging. All lesions were coded by using the American College of Radiology BI-RADS® lexicon. Each lesion was verified with the result of pathology. Lesions were evaluated as BI-RADS® category 1 in 1 patient (2.9%), category 3 (20.6%) in 7 patients, category 4 in 25 patients (73.6%), and category 5 in 1 patient (2.9%) with breast magnetic resonance imaging. Only the BI-RADS® 4A lesion categories were changed by breast magnetic resonance imaging, and these lesions were pathologically diagnosed as benign. The negative predictive value of breast MRI for BI-RADS® category 4A lesions was calculated as 100%. In all BI-RADS® category 4 lesions, pathologically 4 lesions found to be high risk and 3 lesions found to be malignant. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive, and negative predictive value of breast magnetic resonance imaging in BI-RADS® category 4 lesions were calculated as 100, 29.6, 26.9, and 100%, respectively. The area under the ROC curve was calculated 0.648. Breast magnetic resonance imaging is promising to be used as a problem-solving modality in BI-RADS® category 4A breast lesions.     

Breast self-examination: defining a cohort still in need

Background

The value of breast self-examination (BSE) to detect early breast cancer is controversial.

Methods

Within an institutional review board-approved prospective study, 147 high-risk women were enrolled from 2004 to 2007. Yearly clinical examination, BSE teaching, and mammography were performed simultaneously followed by interval breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Women underwent additional BSE teaching at 6 months. Women reporting a mass on BSE underwent clinical evaluation.

Results

Fourteen breast cancers were detected in 12 women. BSE detected 6/14 breast cancers versus 6/14 detected by MRI and 2/14 by mammography. Of 24 masses detected by BSE, 6/24 were malignant. The sensitivity, specificity, and predictive value of BSE to detect breast cancer were 58.3%, 87.4%, and 29.2%, respectively. The sensitivity, specificity, and predictive value of a Breast Image Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) score of ≥4 on MRI were 66.7%, 88.9%, and 34.8%, respectively.

Conclusions

BSE detects new breast cancers in high-risk women undergoing screening mammogram, CBE, and yearly breast MRI.