Dijagnostička vrednost ultrazvučnog pregleda dojke kod žena sa mamografskom kategorijom BI-RADS 0 i lezijom koja je klinički nejasna ili sumnjiva na malignitet

  • Aleksandar Z Dobrosavljevic Clinic of Obstetrics and Gynecology “Narodni Front”, Belgrade, Serbia
  • Snežana Rakić Clinic of Obstetrics and Gynecology “Narodni Front”, Belgrade, Serbia
  • Branka Nikolić Clinic of Obstetrics and Gynecology “Narodni Front”, Belgrade, Serbia
  • Svetlana Janković Ražnatović Clinic of Obstetrics and Gynecology “Narodni Front”, Belgrade, Serbia
  • Svetlana Dragojević Dikić Clinic of Obstetrics and Gynecology “Narodni Front”, Belgrade, Serbia
  • Zorica Milošević Faculty of Medicine, University of Belgrade, Belgrade, Serbia
  • Aleksandar Jurišić Clinic of Obstetrics and Gynecology “Narodni Front”, Belgrade, Serbia
  • Milica Skrobić Clinic of Obstetrics and Gynecology “Narodni Front”, Belgrade, Serbia
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2298/6059
Ključne reči: breast neoplasms||, ||dojka, neoplazme, diagnosis, differential||, ||dijagnoza, diferencijalna, mammography||, ||mamografija, ultrasonography, doppler, color||, ||ultrasonografija, dopler kolor, predictive value of tests||, ||testovi, prognostička vrednost, risk assessment||, ||rizik, procena,

Sažetak


Uvod/Cilj. Ultrazvučnim pregledom može ne samo da se napravi razlika između cističnih i solidnih promena u tkivu dojke, kao što je bilo na početku njegove primene, već i da se napravi diferencijalna dijagnoza u smislu razlikovanja benignih od malignih promena. Cilj rada bio je procena uloge ultrazvuka u dijagnostici palpabilnih promena u dojci u skladu sa terminologijom Breast Imaging Reporting and Data Systems (BI-RADS) i korelacija kategorija BI-RADS 4 i BI-RADS 5 sa patohistološkim nalazom. Metode. Retrospektivna studija sprovedena je u grupi od 30 žena sa palpabilnim promenama u dojci, sa mamografskom kategorijom BI-RADS 0 i ultrazvučnim kategorijama BI-RADS 4 i 5. Sonografske kategorije su korelisane sa patohistološkim nalazom. Rezultati. Eksciziona biopsija 30 promena je pokazala: malignitet (56,7%), fibroadenom (26,7%), fibrocističnu displaziju sa ili bez atipije (10%), lipom (3,3%) i intramamarni limfni nodus (3,3%). Korelacija između BI-RADS kategorija i patohistološkog nalaza je dokazana (p < 0,05). Sve BI-RADS 5 promene bile su maligne, dok je u BI-RADS 4A kategoriji dominirao fibroadenom. Ukupno 53,8% svih benignih promena pronađene su kod žena starosti 49 godina ili mlađih u poređenju sa 35,3% malignih promena u ovoj grupi (p < 0,05). Zaključak. Upotreba ultrazvučne BI-RADS nomenklature poboljšala je klasifikaciju promena u dojci. U slučaju ultrazvučnih kategorija BI-RADS 4 (A, B, C) i BI-RADS 5 trebalo bi raditi biopsiju.

 

 

Reference

Milošević Z. Newspapers mammography in the diagnosis of breast cancer. In: Nešković-Konstantinović Z, Borojević N, Vučković-Dekić Lj, editors. Newspapers in the diagnosis and treatment of breast cancer. Belgrade: Akademija medicinskih nauka Srpskog lekarskog društva, Institut za onkologiju i radiologiju Srbije; 2008. p. 41−52. (Serbian)

Crystal P, Strano SD, Shcharynski S, Koretz MJ. Using sonography to screen women with mammographically dense breasts. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2003; 181(1): 177−82.

Pichler E. Ultrasound breast atlas: differential diagnosis and intervention techniques. Zagreb: Školska knjiga; 2005. (Croa-tian)

Levy L, Suissa M, Chiche JF, Teman G, Martin B. BIRADS ultrasonography. Eur J Radiol 2007; 61(2): 202−11.

Dobrosavljević A, Brković V, Vujković B, Milošević Z. Basic constitutional and reproductive parameters in optimalise application of mammography in the diagnosis of breast diseases. Medicinski podmladak 2004; 55: 61−3. (Serbian)

Milošević Z. Malignant tumors of the breast. In: Goldner B, Milošević Z, Jovanović T, editors. Mammography in the diagnosis of breast diseases. Belgrade: Velarta; 2001. p. 217−82. (Ser-bian)

Park CS, Lee JH, Yim HW, Kang BJ, Kim HS, Jung JI, et al. Ob-server Agreement Using the ACR Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS)-Ultrasound, First Edition (2003). Korean J Radiol 2007; 8(5): 397−402.

Jovićević BA. Epidemiology and prevention of breast cancer. In: Nešković-Konstantinović Z, Borojević N, Vučković-Dekić Lj, editors. Newspapers in the diagnosis and treatment of breast cancer. 2nd ed. Belgrade: Akademija medicinskih nauka Srpskog lekarskog društva i Institut za onkologiju i radiologiju Srbije. 2008. p. 11−24. (Serbian)

American College of Radiology. ACR Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System, Breast Imaging Atlas. 4th ed. Reston, VA: American College of Radiology; 2003.

Stavros AT, Thickman D, Rapp CL, Dennis MA, Parker SH, Sisney GA. Solid breast nodules: use of sonography to distinguish between benign and malignant lesions. Radiology 1995; 196(1): 123−34.

Ko ES, Lee BH, Kim H, Noh W, Kim MS, Lee S. Triple-negative breast cancer: correlation between imaging and pathological findings. Eur Radiol 2009; 20(5): 1111−7.

Radisky ES, Radisky DC. Matrix metalloproteinase-induced epithelial-mesenchymal transition in breast cancer. J Mammary Gland Biol Neoplasia 2010; 15(2): 201−12.

Kinoshita T, Yashiro N, Yoshigi J, Ihara N, Fukuma E, Narita M. Inflammatory intramammary lymph node mimicking the malignant lesion in dynamic MRI: a case report. Clin Imaging 2002; 26(4): 258−62.

Tabár L, Duffy SW, Vitak B, Chen HH, Prevost TC. The natural history of breast carcinoma: what have we learned from screening. Cancer 1999; 86(3): 449−62.

Graf O, Helbich TH, Hopf G, Graf C, Sickles EA. Probably benign breast masses at US: is follow-up an acceptable alternative to biopsy. Radiology 2007; 244(1): 87−93.

Izumori A, Takebe K, Sato A. Ultrasound findings and histological features of ductal carcinoma in situ detected by ultrasound examination alone. Breast Cancer 2010; 17(2): 136−41.

Objavljeno
2017/01/24
Broj časopisa
Vol. 73 Br. 3 (2016)
Rubrika
Originalni članak