BI-RADS系统与Fisher's评分联合应用在3.0T磁共振对乳腺疾病定性诊断中的价值被引量：5

Value of combined application of BI-RADS system and Fisher 's score in qualitative diagnosis of breast disease in 3.0T MRI

下载PDF

导出

摘要目的评价BI-RADS系统与Fisher＇s评分联合在3.0T磁共振下判断乳腺良恶性病变的价值。方法回顾性分析病理证实的72个乳腺病变病灶,双盲法按照BI-RADS系统联合Fisher＇s评分后进行病理对照分析。结果72个乳腺病变病灶穿刺或手术证实良性病变31个、恶性病变41个。BI-RADS系统与Fischer’s评分联合应用判断良性病变为28个、恶性病变为44个。BI-RADS系统与Fischer’s评分联合应用的敏感性91.23%、特异性86.17%、阳性预测值92.84%、阴性预测值91.45%。BI-RADS系统与Fischer’s评分联合应用与病理结果在肿块形态、肿块边缘及内部强化特点方面比较,差异均有统计学意义（χ^2分别=18.46、21.58、15.74,P均〈0.05）。结论 BI-RADS系统与Fischer’s评分联合应用能更客观评价乳腺良恶性病变。 Objective To evaluate the combined application of the BI-RADS system and Fisher ＇s score under 3.0T MRI on identifying the benign and malignant breast lesions. Methods Seventy-two patients with breast lesions confirmed by pathology were retrospectively analyzed. The pathologic contrast analyzed with combined application of BI-RADS system and Fisher ＇s score according to the double-blinded method. Results In 72 patients with breast lesions, 31 patents were diagnosed as benign and 41 as malignant breast lesions by pathology or surgical confirmed. Using the combined BI-RADS and Fischer＇s scoring system,28 patents were diagnosed as benign and 44 as malignant breast lesions. The combined sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value were 91.23%, 86.17%, 92.84% and91.45%. The tumor shape, mass and internal reinforcement characteristics in the combined application of the BI-RADS system and Fisher ＇s score compared pathological results, the differences were statistically significant（χ^2=18.46,21.58,15.74,P〈0.05）.Conclusions Combined application of BI-RADS and Fischer＇s scoring system could objectively identify the benign and malignant breast lesions.

作者娄晓娟黄文杰陈镇平张健贾玉柱

机构地区临安市人民医院外科浙江省立同德医院放射介入科

出处《全科医学临床与教育》 2016年第4期413-415,419,共4页 Clinical Education of General Practice

关键词磁共振乳腺癌 BI-RADS系统 Fischer's评分 magnetic resonance imaging breast cancer BI-RADS system Fisher ＇s score

分类号 R445.2 [医药卫生—影像医学与核医学]

引文网络
相关文献

参考文献12

1Lee CH, Dershaw DD, Kopans D, et al. Breast cancer screening with imaging: recommendations from the society of breast imaging and the ACR on the use of mammography, breast MRI, breast ultrasound, and other technologies for the detection of clinically occult breast cancer[J]. JACR, 2010,7(1): 18-27.
2Lehman CD, Gatsonis C, Kuhl CK, et al. MRI evaluation of the contralateral breast in women with recently diagnosed breast cancer[J].NEGM, 2007, 356(13): 1295-1303.
3Spick C, Szolar DH, Baltzer PA, et al.Rate of malignancy in MRI-detected probably benign (BI-RADS 3) lesions[J]. AJR, 2014,202(3): 684-689.
4Bahrs SD, Baur A, Hattermann V, et al. BI-RADS 3 lesions at contrast-enhanced breast MRI: is an initial short-interval follow-up necessary? [J]. Acta Radiologica, 2014, 55(3):260-265.
5Gweon HM, Cho N, Seo M,et al.Computer-aided evaluation as an adjunct to revised BI-RADS atlas: improvement in positive predictive value at screening breast MRI[J]. European Radiol, 2014 ,24(8):1800-1807.
6Park CS, Kim SH, Jung NY, et al. Interobserver variability of ultrasound elastography and the ultrasound BI-RADS lexicon of breast lesions[J]. Breast Cancer, 2015,22(2): 153-160.
7Wojcinski S, Boehme E, Farrokh A,et al. Ultrasound real-time elastography can predict malignancy in BI-RADS-US 3 lesions[J]. BMC Cancer, 2013,13(1 ): 159.
8Tozaki M.BI-RADS-MRI terminology and evaluation of intraductal carcinoma and ductal carcinoma in situ[J].Breast Cancer, 2013,20(1 ): 13-20.
9Jiang Y, Lou J, Wang S, et al.Evaluation of the role of dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging for patients with BI-RADS 3 -4 microcalcifications[J]. PLoS One, 2014,9 (6): e99669.
10Drukteinis JS, Chaudhury B, Hall LO, et al.Evolutionary dynamics in breast cancer via MRI textural kinetic analysis[J]. Cancer Res, 2014, 74(19 Supplement): 4188- 4188.