Mammotome? and EnCor?: comparison of two systems for stereotactic vacuum-assisted core biopsy in the characterisation of suspicious mammographic microcalcifications alone
详细信息    查看全文
  • 作者:Giovanna Mariscotti ; Manuela Durando ; Mattia Robella…
  • 关键词:Breast cancer ; Vacuum ; assisted core biopsy ; Microcalcifications
  • 刊名:La radiologia medica
  • 出版年:2015
  • 出版时间:April 2015
  • 年:2015
  • 卷:120
  • 期:4
  • 页码:369-376
  • 全文大小:967 KB
  • 参考文献:1. Luparia, A, Durando, M, Campanino, P (2011) Efficacy and cost-effectiveness of stereotactic vacuum-assisted core biopsy of nonpalpable breast lesions: analysis of 602 biopsies performed over 5?years. Radiol Med 116: pp. 477-488 CrossRef
    2. Park, HL, Kim, LS (2011) The current role of vacuum assisted breast biopsy system in breast disease. J Breast Cancer 14: pp. 1-7 CrossRef
    3. Perry, N, Broeders, M, Wolf, C (2008) European guidelines for quality assurance in breast cancer screening and diagnosis. Fourth edition––summary document. Ann Oncol 19: pp. 614-622 CrossRef
    4. Wilson R, Liston J (2010) Clinical Guidelines for Breast Cancer Screening Assessment, 3rd edn. NHSBSP Publication No 49. Available from: http://www.cancerscreening.nhs.uk/breastscreen/publications/nhsbsp49.html. Accessed 1 Mar 2014
    5. Bernardi, D, Borsato, G, Pellegrini, M (2012) On the diagnostic accuracy of stereotactic vacuum-assisted biopsy of nonpalpable breast abnormalities. Results in a consecutive series of 769 procedures performed at the Trento Department of Breast Diagnosis. Tumori 98: pp. 113-118
    6. Wallis, M, Tardivon, A, Helbich, T, Schreer, I (2007) Guidelines from the European Society of Breast Imaging for diagnostic interventional breast procedures. Eur Radiol 17: pp. 581-588 CrossRef
    7. American College of Radiology (2003) Guidance chapter. Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System Atlas (BI-RADS? Atlas). Reston, Va: ? American College of Radiology, pp 253-59
    8. Ellis, IO, Humphreys, S, Michell, M (2004) Best practice no 179. Guidelines for breast needle core biopsy handling and reporting in breast screening assessment. J Clin Pathol 57: pp. 897-902 CrossRef
    9. Dhillon, MS, Bradley, SA, England, DW (2006) Mammotome biopsy: impact on preoperative diagnosis rate. Clin Radiol 61: pp. 276-281 CrossRef
    10. Wang, ZL, Liu, G, Huang, Y (2012) Percutaneous excisional biopsy of clinically benign breast lesions with vacuum-assisted system: comparison of three devices. Eur J Radiol 81: pp. 725-730 CrossRef
    11. Lourenco, AP, Mainiero, MB, Lazarus, E (2007) Stereotactic breast biopsy: comparison of histologic underestimation rates with 11- and 9-gauge vacuum-assisted breast biopsy. AJR Am J Roentgenol 189: pp. W275-W279 CrossRef
    12. Venkataraman, S, Dialani, V, Gilmore, HL, Mehta, TS (2012) Stereotactic core biopsy: comparison of 11 gauge with 8 gauge vacuum assisted breast biopsy. Eur J Radiol 81: pp. 2613-2619 CrossRef
    13. Liberman, L, Kaplan, JB, Morris, EA (2002) To excise or to sample the mammographic target: what is the goal of stereotactic 11-gauge vacuum-assisted breast biopsy?. AJR Am J Roentgenol 179: pp. 679-683 CrossRef
    14. Penco, S, Rizzo, S, Bozzini, AC (2010) Stereotactic vacuum-assisted breast biopsy is not a therapeutic procedure even when all mammographically found calcifications are removed: analysis of 4,086 procedures. AJR Am J Roentgenol 195: pp. 1255-1260 CrossRef
    15. Zuiani, C, Mazzarella, F, Londero, V (2007) Stereotactic vacuum-assisted breast biopsy: results, follow-up and correlation with radiological suspicion. Radiol Med 112: pp. 304-317 CrossRef
    16. Balleyguier, C, Ayadi, S, Nguyen, K (2007) BIRADS classification in mammography. Eur J Radiol 61: pp. 192-194
  • 刊物主题:Imaging / Radiology; Diagnostic Radiology; Interventional Radiology; Neuroradiology; Ultrasound;
  • 出版者:Springer Milan
  • ISSN:1826-6983
文摘
Purpose The authors sought to compare the diagnostic performance of the Mammotome? and EnCor? vacuum-assisted breast biopsy (VABB) systems in the assessment of suspicious mammographic microcalcifications. Materials and methods Between January 2011 and July 2012, a total of 169 VABB were performed by stereotactic guidance on a prone table. The Mammotome? 11G (S1) or EnCor? 10G (S2) probes were used randomly. Sampling time and the number of frustules collected were considered; sensitivity, specificity, diagnostic accuracy, positive and negative predictive value (PPV, NPV) of both procedures were evaluated, considering the final histological examination as reference (B1, B3, B5 lesions underwent surgical excision; B2 lesion were considered confirmed after a negative follow-up of at least 1?year). Results There were no statistically significant differences between the two groups of patients according to the number of procedures (S1 82/169; S2 87/169), average age, BIRADS category (4a, b), and average size of the lesions. The two systems did not differ statistically for correlation with the final histology (S1?k?=?0.94?±?0.06; S2?k?=?0.92?±?0.08) and underestimation of B3 lesions or in situ (S1 4.5?%; S2 4.3?%). Sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV, diagnostic accuracy of S1 and S2 were also not statistically different. The systems differed only in sampling time (S1 80; S2 63?s), but not in total procedure time. Conclusions Our study confirms the effectiveness of VABB in the assessment of microcalcifications and highlights the lack of significant differences between the two systems in terms of diagnostic performance.
NGLC 2004-2010.National Geological Library of China All Rights Reserved.
Add:29 Xueyuan Rd,Haidian District,Beijing,PRC. Mail Add: 8324 mailbox 100083
For exchange or info please contact us via email.