...
首页> 外文期刊>Annals of surgical oncology >The predictive value of ductography and magnetic resonance imaging in the management of nipple discharge.
【24h】

The predictive value of ductography and magnetic resonance imaging in the management of nipple discharge.

机译:乳腺造影对乳腺导管检查和磁共振成像的预测价值。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

BACKGROUND: Standard evaluation (physical examination, mammography, sonography) often fails to identify an underlying lesion in patients with suspicious nipple discharge. The aim of this study was to determine the predictive value of ductography (DG) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in this setting. METHODS: Using ICD-9 codes, we retrospectively identified 376 patients who presented with suspicious nipple discharge (ND) (1995-2005); 306 patients (68%) had negative standard evaluation. RESULTS: Among 306 patients, 186 (61%) underwent further evaluation with DG (n = 163) and/or MRI (n = 52), 35 (11%) underwent major duct excision alone (MDE), and 85 (28%) were followed clinically. Ultimately, 182/306 (59%) patients underwent surgery and/or biopsy. Overall incidence of malignant or high-risk pathology was 15% (46/306). DG was completed in 139/163 (85%) studies and detected 12 cancers and seven high-risk lesions (HRL), but failed to identify four cancers and 2 HRL (PPV 19%, NPV 63%). MRI detected sevencancers and three HRL, but failed to identify one cancer and one HRL (PPV 56%, NPV 87%). MDE alone (n = 35) detected five cancers and three HRL. Of all patients not having surgery, (142/306, 41%), one (0.01%) presented with an invasive cancer at 102 months (median follow-up, 6.3 months; range, 0-124 months). CONCLUSIONS: An underlying malignancy was identified in 30/306 (10%) patients with ND and negative standard evaluation. Ductography is a poor predictor of underlying pathology and cannot exclude malignancy. MRI's higher predictive values may allow for improved patient selection and treatment planning; however, MRI should not replace MDE as the gold standard to exclude malignancy in patients with ND and negative standard evaluation.
机译:背景:标准评估(体格检查,乳房X光检查,超声检查)通常无法识别出可疑乳头溢液患者的潜在病变。这项研究的目的是确定在这种情况下的造影(DG)和磁共振成像(MRI)的预测价值。方法:采用ICD-9编码,回顾性分析了376例1995年至2005年出现可疑乳头溢液(ND)的患者。 306名患者(68%)的标准评估为阴性。结果:在306例患者中,有186例(61%)接受了DG(n = 163)和/或MRI(n = 52)的进一步评估,其中35例(11%)仅接受了大导管切除术(MDE),85例(28%) )进行临床随访。最终,有182/306(59%)位患者接受了手术和/或活检。恶性或高危病理的总发生率为15%(46/306)。 DG在139/163(85%)研究中完成,发现了12种癌症和7种高危病变(HRL),但未能识别出4种癌症和2种HRL(PPV 19%,NPV 63%)。 MRI检测出7种癌症和3种HRL,但未能鉴定出1种癌症和1种HRL(PPV 56%,NPV 87%)。仅MDE(n = 35)就检测出五种癌症和三种HRL。在所有未接受手术的患者中(142/306,41%),其中一名(0.01%)在102个月时出现浸润性癌(中位随访时间为6.3个月;范围为0-124个月)。结论:30/306(10%)ND和阴性标准评估患者中发现了潜在的恶性肿瘤。导管造影不能很好地预测潜在的病理,不能排除恶性肿瘤。 MRI较高的预测值可以改善患者选择和治疗计划;但是,MRI不能代替MDE作为排除ND和阴性标准评估患者恶性肿瘤的金标准。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号