切换至 "中华医学电子期刊资源库"

中华乳腺病杂志(电子版) ›› 2007, Vol. 01 ›› Issue (01) : 25 -28. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.1674-0807.2007.01.008

临床研究

全数字化乳腺X 线成像技术对乳腺癌及有关乳腺疾病诊断价值的临床评估
李继光1, 黎庶2, 刘群1, 赵婷婷1   
  1. 1.110001 沈阳,中国医科大学附属第一医院肿瘤学教研室、中国医科大学肿瘤研究所乳腺癌研究室
    2.110001 沈阳,中国医科大学附属第一医院放射科
  • 收稿日期:2006-09-05 出版日期:2007-01-25
  • 基金资助:
    辽宁省医学科技创新工程资助项目(辽卫函字[2004]378 号)

Clinical evaluation on the values of FFDM and BI-RADS for breast diseases

Jiguang Li1, Shu Li1, Qun Liu1, Tingting Zhao1   

  1. 1.Department of Oncology, The First Affiliated Hospital of China Medical University,Shenyang 110001, China
  • Received:2006-09-05 Published:2007-01-25
引用本文:

李继光, 黎庶, 刘群, 赵婷婷. 全数字化乳腺X 线成像技术对乳腺癌及有关乳腺疾病诊断价值的临床评估[J/OL]. 中华乳腺病杂志(电子版), 2007, 01(01): 25-28.

Jiguang Li, Shu Li, Qun Liu, Tingting Zhao. Clinical evaluation on the values of FFDM and BI-RADS for breast diseases[J/OL]. Chinese Journal of Breast Disease(Electronic Edition), 2007, 01(01): 25-28.

目的

评价全数字化平板乳腺成像技术的外科意义及临床应用价值。

方法

2004年1 月1 日至2005 年12 月31 日间收治的乳腺癌、纤维腺瘤、导管内乳头状瘤及乳腺病等共831 例,包括871 个病灶。 全数字化平板乳腺X线检查的诊断采用美国放射学会推荐的乳腺影像报告和数据系统,并将Ⅳ级及Ⅴ级初步认定为恶性诊断,将Ⅰ级、Ⅱ级及Ⅲ级初步认定为良性诊断。

结果

FFDM对本组乳腺疾病病灶性质诊断的敏感度80.9% ,特异度90.0% ,阳性预测值88.4% ,阴性预测值83.3%及准确度85.5% 。 影像诊断为Ⅴ级时乳腺癌占97.7% (260/266), 在Ⅳ级的诊断中乳腺癌占67.8% (82/121) ,在Ⅰ、Ⅱ及Ⅲ级中尚有16.7% (81/484)为乳腺癌。

结论

乳腺X 线诊断为Ⅴ级时手术活检是唯一的治疗方案,Ⅳ级时应积极建议手术活检。 要慎重对待Ⅰ、Ⅱ及Ⅲ级的诊断,应由临床医师根据其他临床证据及有关因素决定治疗方案。

Objective

To evaluate the values of full-field digital mammography (FFDM) and Breast imaging reporting and data system (BI-RADS) for breast diseases.

Methods

In this work, we analyzed 831 patients with 871 focuses who underwent imaging examinations with FFDM before the operation during Jan 1, 2004 to Dec 31, 2005.All the patients received operations, and had identify pathological diagnosis including breast cancer, breast fibroma, intraductal pappiloma and mastosis.The radiological diagnosis followed BI-RADS suggested by American College of Radiology.

Results

The imaging diagnostic sensitivity of overall focuses was 80.9% , the specificity was 90.0% , positive predictive value was 88.4% ,negative predictive value was 83.3% , the diagnose accuracy was 85.5%.If the radiological diagnosis of focuses were BI-RADS Category Ⅴ, 97.7% (260/266) was pathological diagnosed breast cancer.When they were BI-RADS Category Ⅳ, 67.8% (82/121) was breast cancer.In BI-RADS Category Ⅰ, Ⅱ and Ⅲ focuses, 16.7% (81/484)was breast cancer.

Conclusions

When the radiological diagnosis is BI-RADS Category Ⅴ, surgery biopsy is the exclusive treatment.To Category Ⅳ focuses, surgery biopsy should be suggested.As to Category Ⅰ, Ⅱ and Ⅲ focuses, the management should be prudent, and other factors should be considered, including the social and economic factors, and the follow up is feasible or not.

表1 BI-RADS 诊断分级与病理诊断的关系(n,% )
表2 简要的影像学诊断分类与与病理诊断的关系
表3 可触及乳腺结节而FFDM 无异常所见的统计
[1]
Skaane P, Skjennald A.Screen-film mammography versus full-field digital mammography with soft-copy reading:randomized trial in a population-based screening program-the Oslo Ⅱ Study[J].Radiology,2004,232:197 -204.
[2]
American College of Radiology (ACR).Breast imaging reporting and data system(BI-RADS)[M].3th ed.Reston:Am College Radiol,1998:1 -90.
[3]
顾雅佳,吴斌,张帅,等.使用乳腺影像报告及数据系统诊断乳腺疾病的体会[J].中华放射学杂志,2004,38:931 -936.
[4]
Fischmann A, Siegmann K C, Wersebe A, etal.Comparison of full-field digital mammography and film-screen mammography:image quality and lesion detection[J].Br J Radiol,2005,78:312-315.
[5]
Hollingsworth A B, Taylor L D, Rhodes D C.Establishing a histologic basis for fales-negative mammograms[J].Am J Surg,1993,166:643-647.
[6]
顾雅佳,周康荣,陈彤箴,等.乳腺癌的X线表现及病理基础[J].中华放射学杂志,2003,37:439 -443.
[1] 侯中光, 詹韵韵, 毕玉, 王佳佳, 吴瑕璧, 彭梅. 三维反转成像技术在BI-RADS 4类乳腺肿块应用中的初步研究[J/OL]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2024, 21(04): 370-376.
[2] 刘群, 田洁, 刘千琪, 李东旭, 王希, 吴长君. 声触诊组织成像定量技术联合BI-RADS分类在乳腺病变中的诊断价值[J/OL]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2019, 16(04): 264-269.
[3] 张一丹, 徐超丽, 张丽娟, 黄鹏飞, 谢霓, 黄丽, 杨斌. 弹性成像技术联合自动乳腺全容积成像鉴别诊断乳腺影像报告与数据系统4类病灶良恶性的价值[J/OL]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2017, 14(12): 903-908.
[4] 朱罗茜, 包凌云, 朱庆庆, 谭艳娟. 自动乳腺全容积成像技术及常规超声检查鉴别诊断乳腺影像报告和数据系统4类病灶良恶性的价值比较[J/OL]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2016, 13(12): 931-935.
[5] 姜专基, 高波, 管玲, 张斌明, 刘鸿雁. 68例超声检查假阴性乳腺癌的特征分析[J/OL]. 中华乳腺病杂志(电子版), 2021, 15(01): 11-15.
[6] 汪洁, 戚晓东, 高海凤, 马祥君. 乳腺彩超和X射线摄影在普查中的合理应用分析[J/OL]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2010, 06(05): 327-332.
[7] 丁尚伟, 谢玉环, 陈沛芬, 刘俊峰, 何志忠, 陈颖聪, 陈俊君. 结合弹性成像调整超声BI-RADS分级后对乳腺肿块的诊断价值[J/OL]. 中华普通外科学文献(电子版), 2018, 12(01): 24-27.
[8] 熊妮, 李雨涵, 宋小伟. 超声弹性成像联合S-Detect技术对老年人乳腺BI-RADS 4类结节良恶性的鉴别诊断效能[J/OL]. 中华老年病研究电子杂志, 2022, 09(04): 22-25.
阅读次数
全文


摘要