Evaluation of BreastLight as a Tool for Early Detection of Breast Lesions among Females Attending National Cancer Institute, Cairo University

Labib, Nargis Albert; Ghobashi, Maha Mohamed; Moneer, Manar M.; Helal, Maha Hesien; Abdalgaleel, Shaimaa Abdalaleem

doi:10.7314/apjcp.2013.14.8.4647

Cited by 15 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 12 publications

(12 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The mean age of patients with MDE was 33.58±8.81 years in the present study, consistent with another report ( 17 ). However, the mean age of patients with breast cancer was 44.97±11.04 years, inconsistent with Jemal et al ( 18 ) who demonstrated that breast cancer frequently occurred in patients at the age of 50–69 years; however, Labib et al ( 19 ) demonstrated that the mean age was 46.3±12.4 years, similar to the present study.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 87%

Diagnostic evaluations of ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging in mammary duct ectasia and breast cancer

Song

Liu

et al. 2017

Oncol Lett

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The objective of the present study was to evaluate the diagnostic efficiency of ultrasound (US) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in the diagnosis and differential diagnosis of mammary duct ectasia (MDE) and breast cancer. This retrospective study was performed on 35 patients with MDE and 105 patients with breast cancer using US and MRI. Imaging features, semi-quantitative and quantitative parameters were analyzed to determine their diagnostic value for MDE and breast cancer. The average age of patients with breast cancer was increased compared with that of patients with MDE. There were no significant differences in local packages with or without tenderness ratio (P=0.259) and grade of color Doppler flow imaging (P=0.273) between the two groups. However, the morphological changes were significantly increased in breast cancer compared with MDE. In addition, there were significant diagnostic differences in US and MRI between breast cancer and MDE, including resistance index, US elastography, time-signal intensity curve, apparent diffusion coefficient, early-stage enhancement ratio, peak-of-enhancement ratio and Tpeak (P<0.05). However, there were no observable significant diagnostic differences between US, MRI and US with MRI for MDE and breast cancer (P=0.103, P=0.263 and P=0.403 respectively). Diagnosis of MDE and breast cancer requires full evaluation of multiple parameters and morphological changes of US and MRI to increase the diagnostic efficiency. US, MRI and US with MRI were all of diagnostic value for MDE and breast cancer, while US with MRI had the highest efficacy.

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 87%

Diagnostic evaluations of ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging in mammary duct ectasia and breast cancer

Song

Liu

et al. 2017

Oncol Lett

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…[3] Evaluation of 310 patients between 2012 and 2013 in Cairo reported much better results with the breast light, with sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value and total accuracy of 93.0%, 73.7%, 91.4%, 77.8% and 88.2%, respectively. [4] Shiryazdi et al [5] concluded in another Iranian study that the performance of the breast light in detection of lesions ≤1 cm assessed by CBE, mammography and sonography was 4.4%, 7.7% and 12.5%, respectively, and for masses >4 cm, 65%, 100% and 57.1%. [5] The performance of the breast light in detection was significantly increased with larger masses (p<0.001), which once again challenges the notion that this device can be used as a screening tool equivalent to mammography.…”

Section: Breast Lightmentioning

confidence: 99%

Alternative modalities being promoted for breast screening

Edge

Roodt²

2018

S Afr Med J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Sensitivity of 93%, and specificity of 73.7% were also reported by authors. 35 In this study, image processing was conducted by a MATLAB-based software similar to that reported by Godavarty et al 2 For improving the detectability of images. In addition to MATLAB software, NIR images for major and minor vessels were processed by ImageJ software too, and the result was similar (no significant difference was observed).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Near-Infrared Visual Differentiation in Normal and Abnormal Breast Using Hemoglobin Concentrations

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction: Near-infrared (NIR) optical imaging is a non-ionizing modality that is emerging as a diagnostic/prognostic tool for breast cancer according to NIR differentiation of hemoglobin (Hb) concentration. Methods:The transmission values of LED-sourced light at 625 nm were measured by power meter to evaluate the optical properties of Hb in breast phantom containing major and minor vessels. For the simulation of blood variations in cancerous breast condition, we prepared 2 concentrations of pre-menopausal Hb and 4 concentrations of post-menopausal Hb and, for comparison with normal tissue, one concentration of Hb injected inside the phantom's vessels. Imaging procedure on the phantom was also conducted by LED source and CCD camera. The images from the experiments were compared with the results obtained from the images analyzed by MATLAB software. Finally, mammography of phantom including various concentration of Hb was prepared. Results: The transmitting intensities of NIR in blood containing 1, 2 and 4 concentrations of Hb in the major vessels were 52.83 ± 2.85, 43.00 ± 3.11 and 31.17 ± 2.27 µW, respectively, and in minor vessels containing similar Hb concentrations were 73.50 ± 2.43, 60.08 ± 5.09 and 42.42 ± 4.86 µW, respectively. The gray-scale levels on the major vessel were about 96, 124, 162 and on the minor vessel about 72, 100, 130 measured for 1, 2 and 4 Hb concentrations, respectively. The sensitivity and specificity of NIR imaging differentiation were 97.4% and 91.3%, respectively. Conclusion: Significant differences in transmitting intensity, optical imaging as well as software analysis of images were observed for 1, 2 and 4 concentrations of Hb in major and minor breast phantom vessels. Differentiation capability of minor vessels was higher than major vessels for Hb concentrations. Despite a good detection for location of vessels by mammography, it could not show differences between vessels with various concentrations. However, NIR optical imaging demonstrated a good image contrast for showing vessels in terms of concentration. This study recommends NIR optical imaging for prescreening breast cancer due to its potential for early diagnosis.

show abstract

Evaluation of BreastLight as a Tool for Early Detection of Breast Lesions among Females Attending National Cancer Institute, Cairo University

Cited by 15 publications

References 12 publications

Diagnostic evaluations of ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging in mammary duct ectasia and breast cancer

Diagnostic evaluations of ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging in mammary duct ectasia and breast cancer

Alternative modalities being promoted for breast screening

Near-Infrared Visual Differentiation in Normal and Abnormal Breast Using Hemoglobin Concentrations

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About