Article Sidebar
Views PDF: 243
Value of mammography, ultrasound in breast cancer screening with women ≥40 years old
Main Article Content
Abstract
Objective: To research the value of mammography, ultrasound in breast cancer screening with women ≥ 40ys.
Methods: Including of the study was 1319 women (age ≥40) in the range of six months with breast cancer screening at
University Medical Center, Hochiminh city, from 1 June 2014 to 31 May 2016. Mammography and ultrasound were performed
using BI-RADS (The Breast Imaging and Reporting Data System) of the American College of Radiology. Breast cancer was
determined by histopathological results.
Results: The proportion of breast cancer was 1.67% (22/1319). Among 22 cancers detected, 19(14.4/1000) with mammography, 18(13.65/1000) with ultrasound. The sensitivity, specificity of mammography respectively were 86.36% (IC 95%: 65.09-97.09), 99% (98.29-99.47) higher than ultrasound: 81.82% (59.71-94.81); 95.45% (94.18-95.52). When combined two tests, the sensitivity and specificity respectively were 100% (IC 97.5%:84.56-100), 95.37% (94.09-96.45); PPV was decreased (26.83%) (17.63-37.75) compared to mammography (59.38%) (40.64-76.3); NPV was increased (100%)(IC 97.5%: 99.7-100) compared to mammography (99.77%) (99.32-99.95)or ultrasound alone (99.68%)(99.18-99.91).
Conclusions: The sensitivity and specificity of breast cancer screening with mammography were higher than ultrasound
alone. When combined two tests, it was increased the sensitivity, decreased the specificity compared to mammography alone.
Article Details
Keywords
breast cancer screening, mammography, ultrasound
References
2. Hồ Hoàng Thảo Quyên, Võ Tấn Đức, Hứa Thị Ngọc Hà, Hồ Hoàng Phương (2009) “Tình hình bệnh lí tuyến vú của bệnh nhân nữ trên 40 tuổi tại bệnh viện Đại học Y dược TP.HCM”. Tạp chí Y học TP.HCM, Đai học Y Dược Thành phố Hồ Chí Minh, 13 (1), tr:271-278.
3. Nelson HD, Cantor A, Humphrey L, Fu R, Pappas M, Daeges M et al (2016) “Screening for Breast Cancer: A Systematic Review to Update the 2009 U.S. Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation”. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US),
4. McCormack VA, Dos Santos Silva I. (2006) “Breast density and parenchymal patterns as markers of breast cancer risk: a meta-analysis”. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev, 15, pp.1159–69.
5. Nguyễn Trần Bảo Chi, Nguyễn Đỗ Nguyên, Huỳnh Ngọc Minh (2011) “Siêu âm vú kết hợp nhũ ảnh so với nhũ ảnh đơn thuần trong tầm soát ung thư vú ở phụ nữ có nhu mô vú dày: một nghiên cứu theo dõi 6 tháng”. Tạp chí Y học TP.HCM, Đai học Y Dược Thành phố Hồ Chí Minh, tập 15 (3), tr: 167-173.
6. Berg WA, Blume JD, Cormack JB, Mendelson EB, Lehrer D, Bohm-Velez M et al (2008) “Combined screening with ultrasound and mammography vs mammography alone in women at elevated risk of breast cancer: Result of The First Year Screen in ACRIN 6666”. JAMA, 299 (18), pp.2151-2163.
7. Kelly KM, Dean J, Comulada W.C, Lee S.J. . (2010) “Breast cancer detection using automated whole breast ultrasound and mammography in radiographically dense breasts”. Eur Radiol, 20 (3), pp. 734–742.
8. Scheel JR, Lee JM, Sprague BL, Lee CI, Lehman CD. (2015) “Screening ultrasound as an adjunct to mammography in women with ammographically dense breasts.”. Am J Obstet Gynecol, 212 (1), pp.9-17.
9. American College of Radiology (2013) ACR Atlas Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System BI-RADS 2013 American College of Radiology, Reston, VA.
10. Phí Ích Nghị, Võ Tấn Đức, Trương Hiếu Nghĩa. (2009) Hình ảnh học tuyến vú và tầm soát ung thư vú, Nxb Y học, Thành phố Hồ Chí Minh.