Ercolani P, Giuseppetti G M, Greco A, Manna P, Baldassarre S, Giovagnoni A, De Nigris E, Amici F
Istituto di Semeiologia, Diagnostica e Terapia Strumentale, Università degli Studi, USL 12, Ancona.
Radiol Med. 1994 Jan-Feb;87(1-2):36-40.
We report and compare the results obtained with conventional imaging (mammography and US) and MRI in the study of 46 solid nodular breast lesions verified with histologic, cytologic and/or instrumental follow-up examinations for 12-34 months. The variables we compared were relative to the identification, nature and size of the lesions. MRI, which was performed on the basis of previous mammographic and US findings, detected all the lesions but never modified the diagnosis of conventional imaging methods. Questionable MR diagnoses were fewer than mammographic and US ones (2 versus 11), but its role in correcting the questionable diagnoses of conventional imaging methods was controversial. Particularly, of 11 such cases on mammographic and US images, MRI made 8 correct diagnoses but exhibited 2 false positives and 1 false negative for carcinoma. Such MR mistakes are likely to be related to the non-use of contrast medium. As for size, US was more accurate than mammography and MRI; yet, very few misdiagnoses were make on the whole.
我们报告并比较了在对46例实性结节性乳腺病变的研究中,传统成像(乳腺X线摄影和超声)与MRI所获得的结果。这些病变均通过组织学、细胞学和/或仪器随访检查进行了12至34个月的验证。我们比较的变量涉及病变的识别、性质和大小。MRI是根据先前的乳腺X线摄影和超声检查结果进行的,它检测出了所有病变,但从未改变传统成像方法的诊断结果。MRI的可疑诊断少于乳腺X线摄影和超声(分别为2例和11例),但其在纠正传统成像方法的可疑诊断方面的作用存在争议。特别是,在乳腺X线摄影和超声图像上的11例此类病例中,MRI做出了8例正确诊断,但对癌症表现出2例假阳性和1例假阴性。这种MRI错误可能与未使用造影剂有关。至于大小,超声比乳腺X线摄影和MRI更准确;然而,总体上误诊很少。