Abstract
Objective: To compare breast carcinoma on mammography and sonomammography keeping biopsy as gold standard and to check advantages of biopsy over imaging modalities.
Study design: It is an observational study.
Place and duration of study: The was carried out in Jahangir SON-X Diagnostic Center, Rawalpindi.
Material and Methods: This is an observational study of 150 female patients having breast cancer diagnosed on mammography and sonomammography whose biopsies were also available.
Results: On sonography 123 (82%) patients have shown true positive and 09 (6%) have shown true negative results.18 (12%) patients have shown false positive results. No (0%) patients have shown false negative results. On mammography 123 (82%) have shown have shown true positive results .09 (6%) have shown true negative and 09 (6%) have shown false positive results and 09 (6%) have shown false negative results.In comparison to 100% sensitivity of biopsy, sonomammography is also 100% and mammography is 93.3%. Mammography is 50% specific and sonography is 33.3% specific. Diagnostic accuracy of mammography and sonomammography is 88.2% than 100% accuracy of biopsy.
Conclusion: The research illustrates the importance of mammography and sonomammography as its diagnostic accuracy is 88.2% compared to 100% accuracy of biopsy. So,its importance cannot be denied and must be used in correlation to biopsy as in index test for breast carcinoma.
Keywords: Breast carcinoma, Mammography, Sonomammography,Fine needle aspiration (FNA),Ultrasound(US)
References
Abdullah R, Abdelmonem L, Nasry N, Ayoub M. Contrast Enhanced Mammography: The added value in the assessment of Suspicious Breast Lesions. QJM: An International Journal of Medicine. 2020 Mar 2;113.
Abhisheka B, Biswas SK, Purkayastha B. A comprehensive review on breast cancer detection, classification and segmentation using deep learning. Archives of Computational Methods in Engineering. 2023 Jul 7:1-30.
Antabe R, Kansanga M, Sano Y, Kyeremeh E, Galaa Y. Utilization of breast cancer screening in Kenya: what are the determinants?. BMC health services research. 2020 Dec;20(1):1-9.
Edmonds CE, Lamb LR, Mercaldo SF, Sippo DA, Burk KS, Lehman CD. Frequency and cancer yield of BI-RADS category 3 lesions detected at high-risk screening breast MRI. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2020 Feb 1;214(2):240-8.
Edmonds CE, Zuckerman SP, Guerra CE. Racial disparities persist in cancer screening: New USPSTF Colorectal Cancer Screening Guidelines illuminate inadequate breast cancer screening guidelines for black women. Journal of General Internal Medicine. 2022 May;37(6):1534-6.
Ezeofor SN, Iloanusi NI, Okere PC. Concerns About Breast Pain: How Useful Is Imaging?. Health Scope. 2022 Aug 31;11(3).
Hussein AM, EL-Shinnawy MA, Moftah SG, Nada OM, Hussein RS. Contrast-Enhanced Mammography Versus Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced MRI in the Evaluation of Sonomammographic BI-RADS 3 &4 Breast Lesions. QJM: An International Journal of Medicine. 2023 Jun 1;116(Supplement_1):hcad069-709.
Hussein AM, EL-Shinnawy MA, Moftah SG, Nada OM, Hussein RS. Contrast-Enhanced Mammography Versus Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced MRI in the Evaluation of Sonomammographic BI-RADS 3 &4 Breast Lesions. QJM: An International Journal of Medicine. 2023 Jun 1;116(Supplement_1):hcad069-709.
Khan MD, Banerjee S, Tarafdar S, Kundu D. Role of sonomammography and its diagnostic accuracy for evaluating benign and malignant breast lesions. Int J Res Med Sci. 2021 May;9(5):1448-53.
Kopans DB, Sharpe Jr RE, Eby PR. Including the method of detection for breast cancer in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database is long overdue. Journal of Medical Screening. 2023 Aug 25:09691413231197131.
Monticciolo DL, Malak SF, Friedewald SM, Eby PR, Newell MS, Moy L, Destounis S, Leung JW, Hendrick RE, Smetherman D. Breast cancer screening recommendations inclusive of all women at average risk: update from the ACR and Society of Breast Imaging. Journal of the American College of Radiology. 2021 Sep 1;18(9):1280-8.
Patro S, Das S, Mohapatra SS. A Comparative Study of Mammography and Sonomammography with FNAC Correlation in Evaluating Palpable Breast Masses. Annals of the Romanian Society for Cell Biology. 2021 May 4:14429-39.
Pichert G, Bolliger B, Buser K, Pagani O. Evidence-based management options for women at increased breast/ovarian cancer risk. Annals of oncology. 2003 Jan 1;14(1):9-19.
Priyanka B, Ismail M, Shashikumar M, Rajendrakumar N, Nanjaraj CP. A Comparative Study of Mammography and Sonomammography with Histopathology in Evaluating Palpable Breast Masses.
Qaseem A, Lin JS, Mustafa RA, Horwitch CA, Wilt TJ, Clinical Guidelines Committee of the American College of Physicians*. Screening for breast cancer in average-risk women: a guidance statement from the American College of Physicians. Annals of internal medicine. 2019 Apr 16;170(8):547-60.
Rolfes M, Borde J, Möllenhoff K, Kayali M, Ernst C, Gehrig A, Sutter C, Ramser J, Niederacher D, Horváth J, Arnold N. Prevalence of cancer predisposition germline variants in male breast cancer patients: results of the German Consortium for Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer. Cancers. 2022 Jul 5;14(13):3292.
Runjjala K, Naidu YT. Combined Mammographic and Sonomammographic Evaluation of Breast Masses. International Journal of Contemporary Medicine Surgery and Radiology. 2020;5(1):A162-5.
Sedguli S, Gowda RS, Ranganathan R. Diagnostic Accuracy of MR Mammography in Comparison with Digital Mammography and Sonomammography. Galician Medical Journal. 2022 Mar 1;29(1):E202214-.
Sengupta S, Chhabi SR, Singh A. MR Mammography and Sono-mammography in Characterization of Breast Lesions in a Tertiary Care Centre of Eastern India. Annals of International Medical and Dental Research.;7(2):22.
Shi J, Liu J, Tian G, Li D, Liang D, Wang J, He Y. Association of radiotherapy for stage I–III breast cancer survivors and second primary malignant cancers: a population-based study. European Journal of Cancer Prevention. 2023:10-97.
Tang Y, Tian W, Xie J, Zou Y, Wang Z, Li N, Zeng Y, Wu L, Zhang Y, Wu S, Xie X. Prognosis and dissection of immunosuppressive microenvironment in breast cancer based on fatty acid metabolism-related signature. Frontiers in Immunology. 2022 Mar 31;13:843515.
van den Brandt PA, Ziegler RG, Wang M, Hou T, Li R, Adami HO, Agnoli C, Bernstein L, Buring JE, Chen Y, Connor AE. Body size and weight change over adulthood and risk of breast cancer by menopausal and hormone receptor status: a pooled analysis of 20 prospective cohort studies. European Journal of Epidemiology. 2021 Jan;36:37-55.
Yamakanamardi S, Hiremath BV. Accuracy of mammography and sonomammography and its correlation with histopathology in the detection of breast cancer. International Surgery Journal. 2021 Jan 29;8(2):624-30.
Zielonke N, Gini A, Jansen EE, Anttila A, Segnan N, Ponti A, Veerus P, de Koning HJ, van Ravesteyn NT, Heijnsdijk EA, Heinävaara S. Evidence for reducing cancer-specific mortality due to screening for breast cancer in Europe: A systematic review. European journal of cancer. 2020 Mar 1;127:191-206.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Copyright (c) 2023 Sumiya Abid, Sana Shahzadi, Ayesha Imtiaz , Areeba Ikram, irum rasheed