磁共振成像及超声诊断乳腺导管内乳头状瘤的价值对比被引量：4

Value comparison of magnetic resonance imaging and ultrasonography in the diagnosis of intraductal papilloma of breast

下载PDF

导出

摘要目的:探讨磁共振成像(MRI)及超声诊断乳腺导管内乳头状瘤的效果。方法:收治乳腺导管内乳头状瘤患者34例。所有患者手术前均进行乳腺超声、乳腺X射线以及乳腺专用MRI平扫和动态增强检测。结果:MRI检测出35个病灶,超声检测出28个病灶。结论:MRI诊断乳腺导管内乳头状瘤的检测准确率明显高于超声诊断,因而MRI诊断的应用价值比超声诊断高。 Objective:To evaluate the effect of magnetic resonance imaging and ultrasonography in diagnosis of intraductal papillomaof breast.Methods:34patients with intraductal papilloma of the breast were selected.All of the patients underwent breast ultrasonography,X ray,and MRI scan and dynamic enhanced breast scan.Results:35lesions were detected by MRI,and28lesionswere detected by ultrasound.Conclusion:The accuracy of MRI in the diagnosis of intraductal papilloma of breast is higher thanthat of ultrasound diagnosis,so the value of MRI diagnosis is higher than that of ultrasound diagnosis.

作者侯发欣 Hou Faxin(The Municipal Authority Hospital Zibo City,255001)

机构地区淄博市市级机关医院

出处《中国社区医师》 2017年第24期93-93,95,共2页 Chinese Community Doctors

关键词磁共振成像超声诊断乳腺导管内乳头状瘤价值对比 Magnetic resonance imaging Ultrasonic diagnosis Intraductal papilloma of breast Value comparison

分类号 R737.9 [医药卫生—肿瘤]

引文网络
相关文献

参考文献5

1张颖,王觉,王萌,张东坡.磁共振成像及超声在乳腺导管内乳头状瘤诊断中的价值[J].中国医学装备,2017,14(2):39-42. 被引量：8
2师红莉,许秋霞.多模态核磁共振成像技术对乳腺癌的诊断价值[J].中国实用医药,2016,11(26):121-122. 被引量：10
3郭宝琴,李华,陈轶,刘浩,付娟.MRI对乳腺导管内乳头状瘤的早期诊断价值[J].实用放射学杂志,2016,32(10):1539-1541. 被引量：17
4谢菲,周波,王殊,曹迎明,刘鹏,袁飞.磁共振成像及超声诊断乳腺导管内乳头状瘤的价值比较[J].中国医药,2016,11(2):271-274. 被引量：11
5高明月,邓春霞.磁共振成像及超声在乳腺导管内乳头状瘤诊断中的价值评估[J].中国医学装备,2016,13(10):40-43. 被引量：11

二级参考文献42

1Fattaneh A.Tavassoli,Peter Devilee著.乳腺及女性生殖器官肿瘤病理学和遗传学[M].北京:人民卫生出版社,2006.168.
2Collins LC, Schnitt SJ. Papillary lesions of the breast: selected diagnostic and management issues [ J ]. Histopathology, 2008, 52 ( 1 ) :20-29. DOI: 10.1111/j. 1365-2559. 2007. 02898. x.
3Jagmohan P, Pool F J, Putti TC, et al. Papillary lesions of the breast: imaging findings and diagnostic challenges[ J ]. Diagn In- terv Radiol, 2013,19 (6) :471-478. DOI: 10. 5152/dir. 2013. 13041.
4Palestrant S, Comstock CE, Moy L. Approach to breast magnetic resonance imaging interpretation [ J ]. Radiol Clin North Am, 2014,52(3) :563-583. DO1: lO. 1016/j. re/. 2013.12. 001.
5American College of Radiology. Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) [ M]. 4th ed. Reston, VA: American Col- lege of Radiology, 2003 : 1-2.
6Ya MR, Sohn JS, Kim KW, et al. Clinicopathologie review of the intraductal papilloma of breast[J]. J Breast Cancer, 2010,13(1 ) : 31-36. DOI: 10.4048/jbc. 2010.13.1.31.
7Kim TH, Kang DK, Kim SY, et al. Sonographic differentiation of benign and malignant papillary lesions of the breast [ J]. J Ultra- sound Med, 2008,27 ( 1 ) :75-82.
8Sarica O, Uluc F, Tasmali D. Magnetic resonance imaging fea- tures of papillary breast lesions[ J]. Eur J Radiol, 2014,83(3 ): 524-530. DOI: 10. 1016/j. ejrad. 2013.12. 007.
9Tominaga J, Hama H, Kimura N, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging of intraductal papillomas of the breast[J1. J Comput Assist Tomogr, 2011,35 ( 1 ) : 153-157. DOI: 10. 1097/RCT. 0bO 13 e31820020f0.
10Kuzmiak CM, Lewis MQ, Zeng D, et al. Rote of sonography in the differentiation of benign, high-risk, and malignant papillary lesionsof the breast [ J ]. J Ultrasound Med, 2014,33 ( 9 ) : 1545- 1552. DOI: 10. 7863/ultra. 33.9. 1545.