Clinical examination, xeromammography, and fine-needle aspiration cytology in diagnosis of breast tumours.

Thomas, J. M.; Fitzharris, B.; Redding, W H; Williams, Julian; Trott, P. A.; Powles, T. J.; Ford, H. T.; Gazet, J.‐C.

doi:10.1136/bmj.2.6145.1139

Cited by 60 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In another study the accuracy of clinical diagnosis was 93% for benign breast disease. 17 Although it is recommended that fibroadenomas can be managed conservatively in women less than 35 years 3 after adequate triple assessment, only 3.3% of our patients were treated conservatively since Indian women usually prefer excision for follow up because of the social stigma associated with it.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 78%

Benign breast diseases: experience at a teaching hospital in rural India

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 78%

Benign breast diseases: experience at a teaching hospital in rural India

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Approximately 95% of symptomatic breast malignancies will be diagnosed using this so-called triple assessment. [1][2][3] Each of these diagnostic modalities, by itself, has an appreciable falsenegative rate. Conventional x-ray mammography produces false-negative results in 5% to 15% of patients with palpable breast cancers, especially in younger patients with mammographically dense breast tissue and in the lobular cancers that are not normally associated with microcalcification.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It is generally accepted that Ͼ95% of palpable malignant breast lesions can be diagnosed in this way. [1][2][3] However, the specificity of this method of diagnosis continues to give rise to concerns that false-positive results will lead to both psychological and physical problems. Attempts at improving the accuracy of triple assessment have focused principally on three areas: scoring systems, core needle biopsy, and improvements in the quality of imaging.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Prospective Comparison of Standard Triple Assessment and Dynamic Magnetic Resonance Imaging of the Breast for the Evaluation of Symptomatic Breast Lesions

Drew¹,

Turnbull²,

Chatterjee³

et al. 1999

Annals of Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Several groups of researchers have evaluated the diagnostic efficacy of what is known as the triple test score, or the clinical-radiologic-cytological triad [8][9][10][11][12]. Majority of them advocate this system of diagnosis and suggest that it should be followed by definitive treatment, based on the high accuracy values obtained by the studies.…”

Section: Review Of Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

Accuracy of Clinical Examination of Breast Lumps in Detecting Malignancy: A Retrospective Study

Ravi

Rodrigues

2012

Indian J Surg Oncol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Clinical examination is a simple method to detect breast lumps and their nature as it is inexpensive and noninvasive and if found to be accurate, might be of great value as a diagnostic tool. The aim of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of clinical examination and its contribution towards the diagnosis of a palpable breast lump. The study was record based and conducted at a University Medical College Hospital and a tertiary referral centre of South India. Patient files of those women who presented with a breast lump between January to December 2011 were studied. A total of 120 patients were obtained following necessary exclusions. The accuracy of clinical assessment at an outpatient facility was determined by comparing the physician's diagnosis with the final histopathological diagnosis. The inter-observer agreement (kappa) for diagnosing a breast lump was 81 % (95 % Confidence Interval071 % to 92 %) indicating a good agreement between clinical and pathological diagnoses. McNemar test also indicated a high degree of concordance between the two diagnoses (4.17 % discordance). Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values of clinical breast examination in comparison to histopathology were 95, 88, 87, and 95 % respectively, with an overall accuracy of 90.8 %. 11 lumps were wrongly diagnosed at the time of clinical examination. Clinical examination of breast lumps was found to have a high sensitivity (94.5 %) and specificity (87.7 %) and can be used as the diagnostic tool to identify the nature of the lump, however, its value in diagnosing breast malignancy remains contributory due to the possibility that malignant lumps could be overlooked and present as advanced cancer at a later stage. Histopathology is recommended in all cases unless clinical examination is supported with strong evidence of benignity based on repeated breast imaging via ultrasound or mammogram (>35 yrs).

show abstract

Clinical examination, xeromammography, and fine-needle aspiration cytology in diagnosis of breast tumours.

Cited by 60 publications

References 3 publications

Benign breast diseases: experience at a teaching hospital in rural India

Benign breast diseases: experience at a teaching hospital in rural India

Prospective Comparison of Standard Triple Assessment and Dynamic Magnetic Resonance Imaging of the Breast for the Evaluation of Symptomatic Breast Lesions

Accuracy of Clinical Examination of Breast Lumps in Detecting Malignancy: A Retrospective Study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About