A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Diagnostic potential of targeted electrical impedance scanning in classifying suspicious breast lesions. | LitMetric

Rationale And Objective: To evaluate the potential of targeted electrical impedance scanning (EIS) for classifying suspicious breast lesions.

Methods: EIS was performed in full knowledge of mammographic findings and findings of clinical breast examination. One hundred seventeen patients with a total of 129 breast lesions were examined with EIS before breast biopsy (surgical excision or vacuum core biopsy). Diagnostic indexes of targeted EIS were calculated depending on major lesion characteristics. Capacitance and conductivity of all positive spots (S) and the surrounding normal breast tissue (NBT) were quantified using ROI measurements. The ratio S/NBT was calculated to compare true positive (n = 44) and false positive (n = 18) spots.

Results: With respect to histology, of the 129 lesions 71 were malignant and 58 lesions were benign. Overall sensitivity of targeted EIS was 62%, specificity 69%, PPV 71%, and NPV 60%. Sensitivity of EIS varied depending on the tumor size, which was between 48% (> 20 mm) and 71% (11-20 mm). Highest specificity (86%) was observed for large lesions (> 20 mm); however, the NPV was only 35% for lesions of that size. NPV was higher for nonpalpable lesions (74%) and clusters of microcalcifications (85.7%) compared with palpable lesions (39%) and solid lesions (44%). There was no statistical difference of S/NBT ratio neither for conductivity nor capacitance of true and false positive spots. Compared with true positive spots a trend of a higher conductivity ratio at 100 Hz and 200 Hz was seen for false positive spots.

Conclusion: EIS showed mediocre overall diagnostic accuracy for classifying suspicious breast lesions. Quantitative analysis of positive EIS findings did not help to differentiate between false and true positive spots.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/00004424-200202000-00003DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

positive spots
16
classifying suspicious
12
suspicious breast
12
breast lesions
12
true positive
12
false positive
12
lesions
10
potential targeted
8
targeted electrical
8
electrical impedance
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!