Mammographic Determination of Breast Volume by Elliptical Cone Estimation

Fung, James; Chan, Siu On; Chiu, Annie Nga-King; Cheung, Pik-To; Lam, Siu‐Ho

doi:10.1007/s00268-009-0283-0

Cited by 40 publications

(38 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Reports underline the importance of breast volume measurement both in determin-ing the best ORBS technique and obtaining more objective assessments of post-surgery cosmetic outcomes (22). Mammographic methods, while expensive, are highly popular due to their accuracy and repeatability (23). However, the most widely used method seen in our study was GRD.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 81%

The Approach of General Surgeons to Oncoplastic and Reconstructive Breast Surgery in Turkey: A Survey of Practice Patterns

Emiroğlu¹,

Sert

Inal

et al. 2015

Balkan Med J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

With the wide acceptance of Fisher's theory that breast cancer is a systemic disease from the start and in the light of improvements in adjuvant treatment, the role of surgery in the treatment of cancer was expected to gradually decrease (1). However today's surgical treatment of breast cancer has developed into oncoplastic and reconstructive surgery (Oncoplastic Breast Surgery (OBS) + Reconstructive Breast Surgery (RBS) = ORBS). Besides establishing ideal regional oncological control, surgeons are often faced with the difficulties of conserving breast aesthetics or achieving optimal results. In a meta-analysis, Losken et al. reported that the rate of surgical margin involvement was 12.3% and 20.6% for patients who underwent OBS and Breast Conserving Surgery (BCS), respectively. In addition, they reported local recurrence rates of 3.6-4.7% and 7% for OBS and BCS, respectively (2). In another study comparing oncological outcomes for BCS and OBS, they reported tumour sizes of 17 mm and 24 mm, surgical margins of 6 mm and 14 mm, and rates of re-excision of 29% and 5.4%, respectively. They suggested that OBS has a positive effect on oncological perspective in breast cancer surgery (3).The Turkish Federation of Breast Disease Societies (TFBDS) made recommendations regarding ORBS at their first Breast Cancer Consensus Meeting in 2006 (4). In TurBackground: Oncoplastic Breast Surgery (OBS), which is a combination of oncological procedures and plastic surgery techniques, has recently gained widespread use. Aims: To assess the experiences, practice patterns and preferred approaches to Oncoplastic and Reconstructive Breast Surgery (ORBS) undertaken by general surgeons specializing in breast surgery in Turkey. Study Design: Cross-sectional study. Methods: Between December 2013 and February 2014, an elevenquestion survey was distributed among 208 general surgeons specializing in breast surgery. The questions focused on the attitudes of general surgeons toward performing oncoplastic breast surgery (OBS), the role of the general surgeon in OBS and their training for it as well as their approaches to evaluating cosmetic outcomes in Breast Conserving Surgery (BCS) and informing patients about ORBS preoperatively. Results:Responses from all 208 surgeons indicated that 79.8% evaluated the cosmetic outcomes of BCS, while 94.2% informed their patients preoperatively about ORBS. 52.5% performed BCS (31.3% themselves, 21.1% together with a plastic surgeon). 53.8% emphasized that general surgeons should carry out OBS themselves. 36.1% of respondents suggested that OBS training should be included within mainstream surgical training, whereas 27.4% believed this training should be conducted by specialised centres. Conclusion: Although OBS procedure rates are low in Turkey, it is encouraging to see general surgeons practicing ORBS themselves. The survey demonstrates that our general surgeons aspire to learn and utilize OBS techniques.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 81%

The Approach of General Surgeons to Oncoplastic and Reconstructive Breast Surgery in Turkey: A Survey of Practice Patterns

Emiroğlu¹,

Sert

Inal

et al. 2015

Balkan Med J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Fung et al concluded that most accurate and reproducible formula for calculating breast volume was the one that assumed the elliptical cone projection rather than circular cone on mammogram [11] . Bullstrode found calculating the breast volume from mammography that has previously been compared to mastectomy samples shown to be reasonably accurate and therefore method of choice [12] .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Breast Volume estimation by Anthropometry

Karwasra¹

2018

jmscr

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The following measurement methods were identified from included studies: anthropometric models [12,13], immersion in water (referred to as 'Archimedes' [12]), breast casts [12,32], the GrossmaneRoudner cone [12], computed tomography [38], magnetic resonance imaging [32,34,39], mammography [11,12,36,40,41] and 3D surface scanning [33,35,42e44].…”

Section: Methods Of Measurementmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Of the measurement methods used in this review, 3D scanning and mammography were the most favoured with five studies in both cases. It is worth noting that three 3D scanning studies assess differential, as opposed to absolute, volumes and one of the mammography studies [41] provided r values only, making indepth analysis difficult.…”

Section: Assessing Errormentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Of the five authors using this method, two assumed a constant density of 0.958 g/cm 3 [32,41], two didn't convert mass to volume [13,34], and one [11] used a radiologist to assess individual proportions of fat/water in the breast (based on the classification method of Stomper et al [45]), varying the density accordingly (range 0.916 g/cm 3 to 1.000 g/cm 3 ). Table 3 gives a summary of our findings from this review which is discussed in more detail below according to the specific method of measurement.…”

Section: Gold Standard Measuresmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The accuracy of breast volume measurement methods: A systematic review

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Breast volume is a key metric in breast surgery and there are a number of different methods which measure it. However, a lack of knowledge regarding a method's accuracy and comparability has made it difficult to establish a clinical standard. We have performed a systematic review of the literature to examine the various techniques for measurement of breast volume and to assess their accuracy and usefulness in clinical practice. Each of the fifteen studies we identified had more than ten live participants and assessed volume measurement accuracy using a gold-standard based on the volume, or mass, of a mastectomy specimen. Many of the studies from this review report large (>200 ml) uncertainty in breast volume and many fail to assess measurement accuracy using appropriate statistical tools. Of the methods assessed, MRI scanning consistently demonstrated the highest accuracy with three studies reporting errors lower than 10% for small (250 ml), medium (500 ml) and large (1000 ml) breasts. However, as a high-cost, non-routine assessment other methods may be more appropriate.

show abstract

Mammographic Determination of Breast Volume by Elliptical Cone Estimation

Cited by 40 publications

References 16 publications

The Approach of General Surgeons to Oncoplastic and Reconstructive Breast Surgery in Turkey: A Survey of Practice Patterns

The Approach of General Surgeons to Oncoplastic and Reconstructive Breast Surgery in Turkey: A Survey of Practice Patterns

Breast Volume estimation by Anthropometry

The accuracy of breast volume measurement methods: A systematic review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About