Reynolds H E, Jackson V P, Musick B S
Department of Radiology, Indiana University Hospital, Indianapolis 46202.
Radiology. 1993 Apr;187(1):71-3. doi: 10.1148/radiology.187.1.8451439.
To evaluate the current state of interventional mammography in the United States, surveys were sent to 1,000 randomly selected active members of the American College of Radiology (group 1) and the entire 1991 membership (n = 73) of the Society of Breast Imaging (group 2). Three hundred seventy-one (37%) group 1 and 49 (67%) group 2 responses were received. Some respondents did not answer all questions. Of group 1 respondents, 331 (93%) performed preoperative needle localization and 272 (73%) used a hook wire; 92 (25%), a J wire; and 55 (15%), a needle-dye technique. For group 2 respondents and these techniques, the results were 45 (94%), 32 (65%), eight (16%), and seven (14%), respectively. One hundred ninety-nine (62%) group 1 and 24 (55%) group 2 physicians administered local anesthetic during needle localization. Fifty-six (16%) group 1 and 25 (56%) group 2 physicians performed fine-needle aspiration cytology, as opposed to 11 (3%) and nine (20%) for core-needle biopsy, respectively. Cyst aspiration was performed by 245 (70%) group 1 and 40 (82%) group 2 respondents, galactography by 126 (36%) of group 1 and 30 (61%) of group 2, and pneumocystography by 57 (16%) of group 1 and 23 (48%) of group 2. For most procedures, informed consent was obtained by a minority of radiologists in both groups.
为评估美国介入性乳腺造影的现状，向随机抽取的1000名美国放射学会活跃会员（第1组）以及乳腺影像学会1991年全体会员（n = 73，第2组）发放了调查问卷。收到了371份（37%）第1组和49份（67%）第2组的回复。一些受访者没有回答所有问题。在第1组受访者中，331人（93%）进行术前针定位，272人（73%）使用钩丝；92人（25%）使用J形丝；55人（15%）使用针染技术。对于第2组受访者及这些技术，结果分别为45人（94%）、32人（65%）、8人（16%）和7人（14%）。第1组199名（62%）和第2组24名（55%）医生在针定位时给予局部麻醉。第1组56名（16%）和第2组25名（56%）医生进行细针穿刺细胞学检查，相比之下，分别有11名（3%）和9名（20%）进行粗针活检。第1组245名（70%）和第2组40名（82%）受访者进行囊肿抽吸，第1组126名（36%）和第2组30名（61%）进行乳管造影，第1组57名（16%）和第2组23名（48%）进行气囊造影。对于大多数操作，两组中少数放射科医生获得了知情同意。
