The demands of screening mammography on surgical inpatient services of breast cancer

American Surgeon

Volumn 67, Issue 7, 2001, Pages 648-653

  Paajanen, Hannu ^a   Pulliainen, Lea ^a   Hendolin, Niilo ^a   Hermunen, Heikki ^a   Helle, Markku ^a   Dean, Peter B ^b,c  

^a MIKKELI CENTRAL HOSPITAL   (Finland)

^b UNIVERSITY OF TURKU   (Finland)

^c Radiological Society of Finland   (Finland)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BIOPSY; BREAST; BREAST NEOPLASMS; FEMALE; FINLAND; HUMAN; MAMMOGRAPHY; MASS SCREENING; MIDDLE AGED; PATHOLOGY; PATIENT REFERRAL; PREDICTIVE VALUE; RADIOGRAPHY; ARTICLE; BREAST TUMOR; PREDICTION AND FORECASTING;

BIOPSY; BREAST; BREAST NEOPLASMS; FEMALE; FINLAND; HUMANS; MAMMOGRAPHY; MASS SCREENING; MIDDLE AGED; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS; REFERRAL AND CONSULTATION;

EID: 0035403851     PISSN: 00031348     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (18)

1. Tabar L, Fagerberg CJG, Gad A, et al. Reduction in mortality from breast cancer after mass screening with mammography. A randomized trial from the breast cancer screening working group of the Swedish National Board of Health and Welfare. Lancet 1985;1:829-32.
2. Sixteen-year mortality from breast cancer in the UK trial of early detection of breast cancer. Lancet 1999;353:1909-14.
3. Alexander FE, Anderson TJ, Brown HK, et al. Fourteen years of follow-up from the Edinburgh: A randomized trial of breast-cancer screening. Lancet 1999;353:1903-8.
4. Jatoi I. Breast cancer screening. Am J Surg 1999;177: 518-24.
5. Dean PB, Pamilo M. Screening mammography in Finland: 1.5 million examinations with 97 per cent specificity. Acta Oncol Suppl 1999;13:47-54.
6. Kerlikowske K, Grady D, Rubin SM, et al. Efficacy of screening mammography: A meta-analysis. JAMA 1995;273: 149-54.
7. Lidbrink E, Elfving J, Frisell J, Jonsson E. Neglected aspects of false positive findings of mammography in breast cancer screening: Analysis of false positive cases from the Stockholm trial. Br Med J 1996;312:273-6.
8. Pamilo M, Dean PB, Räsänen O. Mammography screening for breast cancer: Four years of nationwide screening in Finland. Eur Radiol 1993;3:44-5.
9. Holmberg L, Adami HO, Persson I, et al. Demands on surgical inpatients services after mass mammographic screening. Br Med J 1986;27:779-82.
10. Cancer Incidence in Finland in 1995: Cancer Statistics of the National Research and Development Centre for Welfare and Health. Helsinki, Finland: Institute for Statistical and Epidemiological Cancer Research, 1997.
11. Sterns EE. Changing emphasis in breast diagnosis: The surgeon's role in evaluating mammographic abnormalities. J Am Coll Surg 1997;184:297-302.
12. Cady B. Traditional and future management of nonpalpable breast cancer. Am Surg 1997;63:55-8.
13. Klemi PJ, Joensuu H, Toikkanen S, et al. Aggressiveness of breast cancers found with and without screening. Br Med J 1992; 304:467-9.
14. Gibbs NM. Comparative study of the histopathology of breast cancer in a screened and unscreened population investigated by mammography. Histopathology 1985;9:1307-18.
15. Cady B, Stone MD, Schuler J, et al. The new era in breast cancer: Invasion, size and nodal involvement dramatically decreasing as a result of mammographic screening. Arch Surg 1996;131: 301-8.
16. Bennington JL, Lagios MD, Margolin FR. Impact of mam mographic screening on the size and the relative frequency of invasion in breast cancers seen in a community hospital from 1975-1988. Pathology 1992;1:11-21.
17. Brenner RJ, Fajardo L, Fisher PR, et al. Percutaneous core biopsy of the breast: Effect of operator experience and number of samples on diagnostic accuracy. Am J Roentgenol 1996;166: 341-6.
18. Gajdos C, Levy M, Herman Z, et al. Complete removal of nonpalpable breast malignancies with a stereotactic percutaneous vacuum-assisted biopsy instrument. J Am Coll Surg 1999;189: 237-40.