• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

在中国人群中,对高乳腺癌风险女性进行超声与乳腺 X 线摄影比较的横断面观察性研究。

A Cross-Sectional Observational Study to Compare the Role of Ultrasound with Mammography in Women Identified at High Risk for Breast Cancer in a Population in China.

机构信息

Medical Ultrasound Center, Northwest Women's and Children's Hospital, Xi'an, Shaanxi, China (mainland).

出版信息

Med Sci Monit. 2020 Jun 24;26:e919777. doi: 10.12659/MSM.919777.

DOI:10.12659/MSM.919777
PMID:32576809
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7334879/
Abstract

BACKGROUND Currently, there is no national breast cancer screening program in China. In countries that have screening programs, screening mammography is used. This study aimed to compare the imaging parameters and diagnostic findings between ultrasound and mammography in women at high risk who had a histologically confirmed diagnosis of breast cancer in a population in China. MATERIAL AND METHODS A cross-sectional observational study included 1,687 women with a risk score of ≥30, according to the cancer risk assessment model, who underwent breast ultrasound and mammography. Women who had a Breast Imaging-Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) score of 4 or 5 were identified, and 155 women had breast cancer confirmed by breast biopsy and histology. The ultrasound and mammography findings were evaluated and compared. RESULTS Breast ultrasound resulted in significantly fewer inconclusive results (BI-RADS score, 0), when compared with mammography (p=0.046). In cases with a histologically confirmed diagnosis of breast cancer (BI-RADS score, 4), the diagnostic sensitivity of breast ultrasound and mammography were 0.989 and 0.859, respectively. In cases with a histologically confirmed diagnosis of breast cancer (BI-RADS score, 5), the diagnostic sensitivity of breast ultrasound and mammography were 1.000 and 0.984, respectively. In cases with a histologically confirmed diagnosis of benign breast lesions (BI-RADS score, 2), there was no significant difference between breast ultrasound and mammography. CONCLUSIONS In a population of women in China, breast ultrasound was a more sensitive diagnostic imaging method for women with high risk BI-RADS 4 and 5 breast lesions.

摘要

背景

目前,中国尚未建立全国性乳腺癌筛查项目。在有筛查项目的国家,通常使用乳房 X 线摄影术进行筛查。本研究旨在比较中国人群中经组织学证实患有乳腺癌的高风险女性中超声与乳房 X 线摄影术的影像学参数和诊断结果。

材料与方法

本横断面观察性研究纳入了 1687 名风险评分≥30 的女性,她们均接受了乳房超声和乳房 X 线摄影术检查。BI-RADS 评分为 4 或 5 的女性被确定为有乳腺癌风险,其中 155 名女性经乳房活检和组织学证实患有乳腺癌。评估和比较了超声和乳房 X 线摄影术的检查结果。

结果

与乳房 X 线摄影术相比,超声检查的不确定结果(BI-RADS 评分 0)明显更少(p=0.046)。在经组织学证实患有乳腺癌(BI-RADS 评分 4)的病例中,超声和乳房 X 线摄影术的诊断敏感度分别为 0.989 和 0.859。在经组织学证实患有乳腺癌(BI-RADS 评分 5)的病例中,超声和乳房 X 线摄影术的诊断敏感度分别为 1.000 和 0.984。在经组织学证实患有良性乳腺病变(BI-RADS 评分 2)的病例中,超声和乳房 X 线摄影术之间无显著差异。

结论

在中国人群中,对于 BI-RADS 评分为 4 和 5 的高危乳腺病变女性,超声检查是一种更敏感的诊断性影像学方法。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c5cd/7334879/081d5ef26e8b/medscimonit-26-e919777-g006.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c5cd/7334879/5b9554f9c90e/medscimonit-26-e919777-g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c5cd/7334879/d2b85f0b7604/medscimonit-26-e919777-g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c5cd/7334879/4f5611ee0937/medscimonit-26-e919777-g003.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c5cd/7334879/6e25f869c406/medscimonit-26-e919777-g004.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c5cd/7334879/23fa70453ad3/medscimonit-26-e919777-g005.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c5cd/7334879/081d5ef26e8b/medscimonit-26-e919777-g006.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c5cd/7334879/5b9554f9c90e/medscimonit-26-e919777-g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c5cd/7334879/d2b85f0b7604/medscimonit-26-e919777-g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c5cd/7334879/4f5611ee0937/medscimonit-26-e919777-g003.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c5cd/7334879/6e25f869c406/medscimonit-26-e919777-g004.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c5cd/7334879/23fa70453ad3/medscimonit-26-e919777-g005.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c5cd/7334879/081d5ef26e8b/medscimonit-26-e919777-g006.jpg

相似文献

1
A Cross-Sectional Observational Study to Compare the Role of Ultrasound with Mammography in Women Identified at High Risk for Breast Cancer in a Population in China.在中国人群中,对高乳腺癌风险女性进行超声与乳腺 X 线摄影比较的横断面观察性研究。
Med Sci Monit. 2020 Jun 24;26:e919777. doi: 10.12659/MSM.919777.
2
Comparison of Mammography and Mammography with Supplemental Whole-Breast US Tomography for Cancer Detection in Patients with Dense Breasts.乳腺钼靶摄影与联合补充性全乳腺超声断层成像术在致密型乳腺患者中用于癌症检测的比较。
Radiology. 2024 Jun;311(3):e231680. doi: 10.1148/radiol.231680.
3
Recall rate of screening ultrasound with automated breast volumetric scanning (ABVS) in women with dense breasts: a first quarter experience.在乳腺致密的女性中使用自动乳腺容积扫描(ABVS)进行筛查超声的召回率:第一季度经验
Clin Imaging. 2014 Jul-Aug;38(4):439-444. doi: 10.1016/j.clinimag.2014.03.012. Epub 2014 Apr 1.
4
Application of the downgrade criteria to supplemental screening ultrasound for women with negative mammography but dense breasts.将降级标准应用于乳腺钼靶检查阴性但乳腺致密的女性的补充筛查超声检查。
Medicine (Baltimore). 2016 Nov;95(44):e5279. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000005279.
5
The challenge of imaging dense breast parenchyma: is magnetic resonance mammography the technique of choice? A comparative study with x-ray mammography and whole-breast ultrasound.致密乳腺实质成像的挑战:磁共振乳腺造影是首选技术吗?一项与乳腺X线摄影和全乳超声的对比研究。
Invest Radiol. 2009 Jul;44(7):412-21. doi: 10.1097/RLI.0b013e3181a53654.
6
Performance of hand-held whole-breast ultrasound based on BI-RADS in women with mammographically negative dense breast.基于 BI-RADS 的手持全乳房超声在乳腺 X 线摄影阴性致密乳腺女性中的应用性能。
Eur Radiol. 2011 Apr;21(4):667-75. doi: 10.1007/s00330-010-1955-8. Epub 2010 Sep 19.
7
[Analysis for the breast cancer screening among urban populations in China, 2012-2013].[2012 - 2013年中国城市人群乳腺癌筛查分析]
Zhonghua Yu Fang Yi Xue Za Zhi. 2016 Oct 6;50(10):887-892. doi: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.0253-9624.2016.10.010.
8
The diagnostic performance of automated versus handheld breast ultrasound and mammography in symptomatic outpatient women: a multicenter, cross-sectional study in China.自动化手持式乳腺超声与乳腺 X 线摄影对有症状门诊女性的诊断性能比较:中国多中心横断面研究。
Eur Radiol. 2021 Feb;31(2):947-957. doi: 10.1007/s00330-020-07197-7. Epub 2020 Aug 27.
9
Sensitivity of screening mammography by density and texture: a cohort study from a population-based screening program in Denmark.基于丹麦人群筛查项目的研究:密度和纹理对筛查性乳腺 X 光摄影的敏感性。
Breast Cancer Res. 2019 Oct 17;21(1):111. doi: 10.1186/s13058-019-1203-3.
10
Screening Ultrasound in Women with Negative Mammography: Outcome Analysis.乳腺钼靶检查阴性女性的超声筛查:结果分析
Yonsei Med J. 2015 Sep;56(5):1352-8. doi: 10.3349/ymj.2015.56.5.1352.

引用本文的文献

1
Cost-effectiveness evaluation of risk-based breast cancer screening in Urban Hebei Province.基于风险的乳腺癌筛查在河北省城市地区的成本效益评价。
Sci Rep. 2023 Feb 27;13(1):3370. doi: 10.1038/s41598-023-29985-z.
2
Evidence and assessment of parenchymal patterns of ultrasonography for breast cancer detection among Chinese women: a cross-sectional study.中文译文:超声检查乳腺癌中国女性实质模式的证据和评估:一项横断面研究。
BMC Med Imaging. 2021 Oct 19;21(1):152. doi: 10.1186/s12880-021-00687-0.
3
Ultrasound Image Features under Deep Learning in Breast Conservation Surgery for Breast Cancer.

本文引用的文献

1
Contrast ultrasound versus ultrasound elastography for diagnosis of breast lumps: A cross-sectional study.对比超声与超声弹性成像在乳腺肿块诊断中的应用:一项横断面研究。
Medicine (Baltimore). 2019 Jun;98(26):e16132. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000016132.
2
Primum Non Nocere.首要的是不伤害。
Cancer Cytopathol. 2017 Oct;125(10):745-747. doi: 10.1002/cncy.21908. Epub 2017 Aug 24.
3
Core-needle biopsy of breast cancer is associated with a higher rate of distant metastases 5 to 15 years after diagnosis than FNA biopsy.与细针穿刺活检(FNA)相比,乳腺癌粗针活检在诊断后5至15年发生远处转移的几率更高。
深度学习在乳腺癌保乳手术中的超声图像特征。
J Healthc Eng. 2021 Sep 17;2021:6318936. doi: 10.1155/2021/6318936. eCollection 2021.
Cancer Cytopathol. 2017 Oct;125(10):748-756. doi: 10.1002/cncy.21909. Epub 2017 Aug 24.
4
Comparison of mammography and ultrasound in detecting residual disease following bioptic lumpectomy in breast cancer patients.乳腺癌患者行活检切除术后,乳腺钼靶摄影与超声检查在检测残留病灶方面的比较。
Mol Clin Oncol. 2016 Mar;4(3):419-424. doi: 10.3892/mco.2016.729. Epub 2016 Jan 14.
5
A multi-centre randomised trial comparing ultrasound vs mammography for screening breast cancer in high-risk Chinese women.一项比较超声与乳腺X线摄影术在高危中国女性中筛查乳腺癌的多中心随机试验。
Br J Cancer. 2015 Mar 17;112(6):998-1004. doi: 10.1038/bjc.2015.33.
6
Screening mammography may be less effective than thought.乳腺钼靶筛查的效果可能比预想的要差。
J Midwifery Womens Health. 2014 Jul-Aug;59(4):465-7. doi: 10.1111/jmwh.12215_1.
7
Breast cancer in China.中国的乳腺癌。
Lancet Oncol. 2014 Jun;15(7):e279-89. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(13)70567-9.
8
Overdiagnosing overdiagnosis.过度诊断过度诊断。
Oncologist. 2014 Feb;19(2):103-6. doi: 10.1634/theoncologist.2014-0036.
9
Effects of age, breast density and volume on breast cancer diagnosis: a retrospective comparison of sensitivity of mammography and ultrasonography in China's rural areas.年龄、乳腺密度和体积对乳腺癌诊断的影响:中国农村地区乳腺X线摄影和超声检查敏感性的回顾性比较
Asian Pac J Cancer Prev. 2013;14(4):2277-82. doi: 10.7314/apjcp.2013.14.4.2277.
10
Interobserver variability of ultrasound elastography and the ultrasound BI-RADS lexicon of breast lesions.超声弹性成像的观察者间变异性及乳腺病变的超声BI-RADS词典
Breast Cancer. 2015 Mar;22(2):153-60. doi: 10.1007/s12282-013-0465-3. Epub 2013 Apr 13.