Mammography as a method for diagnosing breast cancer

Koch, Hilton Augusto

doi:10.1590/0100-3984.2016.49.6e2

Cited by 7 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In the last year, the subject of mammographic screening and percutaneous biopsies has gained visibility in editorials ( 7 , 8 ) and articles ( 9 ) published in the radiology literature of Brazil. In fact, knowledge of clinical practice is fundamental to improving patient care.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Suspicious amorphous microcalcifications detected on full-field digital mammography: correlation with histopathology

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectiveTo evaluate suspicious amorphous calcifications diagnosed on full-field digital mammography (FFDM) and establish correlations with histopathology findings.Materials and MethodsThis was a retrospective study of 78 suspicious amorphous calcifications (all classified as BI-RADS® 4) detected on FFDM. Vacuum-assisted breast biopsy (VABB) was performed. The histopathological classification of VABB core samples was as follows: pB2 (benign); pB3 (uncertain malignant potential); pB4 (suspicion of malignancy); and pB5 (malignant). Treatment was recommended for pB5 lesions. To rule out malignancy, surgical excision was recommended for pB3 and pB4 lesions. Patients not submitted to surgery were followed for at least 6 months.ResultsAmong the 78 amorphous calcifications evaluated, the histopathological analysis indicated that 8 (10.3%) were malignant/suspicious (6 classified as pB5 and 2 classified as pB4) and 36 (46.2%) were benign (classified as pB2). The remaining 34 lesions (43.6%) were classified as pB3: 33.3% were precursor lesions (atypical ductal hyperplasia, lobular neoplasia, or flat epithelial atypia) and 10.3% were high-risk lesions. For the pB3 lesions, the underestimation rate was zero.ConclusionThe diagnosis of precursor lesions (excluding atypical ductal hyperplasia, which can be pB4 depending on the severity and extent of the lesion) should not necessarily be considered indicative of underestimation of malignancy. Suspicious amorphous calcifications correlated more often with precursor lesions than with malignant lesions, at a ratio of 3:1.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Suspicious amorphous microcalcifications detected on full-field digital mammography: correlation with histopathology

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A mammography is an x-ray medical method examining the breast using lower doses of radiation. Because these x-rays do not pass through breast tissue easily, the mammogram machine has two plates that compress the breast to spread the tissue apart, resulting in a more accurate image with less radiation [31]. Over the past decades, technology changed over from the analog to digital picturing.…”

Section: Breast Cancer Screening By Mammography: An Evolutionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Why the Gold Standard Approach by Mammography Demands Extension by Multiomics? Application of Liquid Biopsy miRNA Profiles to Breast Cancer Disease Management

Žúbor

Kubatka

Kajo

et al. 2019

IJMS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the global context, the epidemic of breast cancer (BC) is evident for the early 21st century. Evidence shows that national mammography screening programs have sufficiently reduced BC related mortality. Therefore, the great utility of the mammography-based screening is not an issue. However, both false positive and false negative BC diagnosis, excessive biopsies, and irradiation linked to mammography application, as well as sub-optimal mammography-based screening, such as in the case of high-dense breast tissue in young females, altogether increase awareness among the experts regarding the limitations of mammography-based screening. Severe concerns regarding the mammography as the “golden standard” approach demanding complementary tools to cover the evident deficits led the authors to present innovative strategies, which would sufficiently improve the quality of the BC management and services to the patient. Contextually, this article provides insights into mammography deficits and current clinical data demonstrating the great potential of non-invasive diagnostic tools utilizing circulating miRNA profiles as an adjunct to conventional mammography for the population screening and personalization of BC management.

show abstract

“…In 1913, radiography of breast cancer patients began in Germany. The study was carried out on 3,000 patients by surgeon Salmon [4]. In 1951 ultrasound was used as a research tool to detect breast tumor and identify it as benign or malignant.…”

Section: Introduction a History Of Breast Cancer Detectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Systematic Review of Breast Cancer Detection Using Thermography and Neural Networks

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Mammography as a method for diagnosing breast cancer

Cited by 7 publications

References 5 publications

Suspicious amorphous microcalcifications detected on full-field digital mammography: correlation with histopathology

Suspicious amorphous microcalcifications detected on full-field digital mammography: correlation with histopathology

Why the Gold Standard Approach by Mammography Demands Extension by Multiomics? Application of Liquid Biopsy miRNA Profiles to Breast Cancer Disease Management

A Systematic Review of Breast Cancer Detection Using Thermography and Neural Networks

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About