A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@gmail.com&api_key=61f08fa0b96a73de8c900d749fcb997acc09&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

Accuracy of Breast Magnetic Resonance Imaging Compared to Mammography in the Preoperative Detection and Measurement of Pure Ductal Carcinoma In Situ: A Retrospective Analysis. | LitMetric

Rationale And Objectives: Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) hinders imaging detection due to multifocal appearance and discontinuous growth. Preoperative determination of its extent is therefore challenging. Aim of this study was to investigate the additional benefit of breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to mammography (MG) in the diagnosis of DCIS according to size and grading.

Materials And Methods: Retrospective analysis of 295 patients with biopsy-proven, pure DCIS. Mean patient age was 57.0 years (27-87 years). All patients obtained MG. Additional MRI was performed in 41.7% (123/295). Mammographic breast density, background parenchymal enhancement (BPE), tumor size and grading were analysed. Tumor size on MG and MRI were compared to histopathological size of the surgical specimen.

Results: Mean tumor size was 39.6 mm. DCIS was occult on MG in 24.4% (30/123) and on MRI in 1.6% (2/123). Size was underestimated by 4.6 mm (mean) mammographically. DCIS was high grade in 54.5% (67/123), intermediate grade in 40.7% (50/123) and low grade in 4.9% (6/123). MG was exact regarding tumor size in low grade DCIS, underestimated intermediate grade DCIS by 1 mm (median) and high grade DCIS by 10.5 mm. MRI overestimated low grade DCIS by 1 mm (median), was exact regarding intermediate grade DCIS and underestimated high grade DCIS by 1 mm. BPE did not influence tumor detection and measurement.

Conclusion: MRI outperforms MG in the detection and size estimation of DCIS and can reduce positive margin rates.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.acra.2018.07.013DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

grade dcis
24
tumor size
16
dcis
12
high grade
12
intermediate grade
12
low grade
12
grade
9
breast magnetic
8
magnetic resonance
8
resonance imaging
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!