Clinical impact of the use of additional ultrasonography in diagnostic breast imaging

European Radiology

Volumn 18, Issue 10, 2008, Pages 2076-2084

  Vercauteren, Luc D B ^a   Kessels, Alphons G H ^a   van der Weijden, Trudy ^a   Koster, Dick ^a   Severens, Johan L ^a   van Engelshoven, Jos M A ^a   Flobbe, Karin ^a  

^a MAASTRICHT UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Breast ultrasonography; Diagnostic imaging; Guidelines; Sensitivity and specificity

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ANXIETY; ARTICLE; BREAST CANCER; BREAST DISEASE; BREAST TUMOR; CONTROLLED STUDY; CORRELATION ANALYSIS; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; ECHOMAMMOGRAPHY; EVIDENCE BASED MEDICINE; FALSE NEGATIVE RESULT; FALSE POSITIVE RESULT; FAMILY HISTORY; FEASIBILITY STUDY; FEMALE; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MAMMOGRAPHY; OUTCOMES RESEARCH; PATIENT REFERRAL; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SCREENING TEST; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY;

BREAST NEOPLASMS; FEMALE; GUIDELINE ADHERENCE; HUMANS; MIDDLE AGED; PHYSICIAN'S PRACTICE PATTERNS; PRACTICE GUIDELINES AS TOPIC; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; RISK ASSESSMENT; RISK FACTORS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; ULTRASONOGRAPHY, MAMMARY;

EID: 52049121821     PISSN: 09387994     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s00330-008-0983-0     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. Grol R, Grimshaw J (2003) From best evidence to best practice: Effective implementation of change in patients' care. Lancet 362(9391):1225-1230
2. Irani J, Brown CT, van der Meulen J, Emberton M (2003) A review of guidelines on benign prostatic hyperplasia and lower urinary tract symptoms: Are all guidelines the same? BJU Int 92(9):937-942
3. Sackett D, Straus S, Richardson W, Rosenberg W, Haynes R (2000) Evidence-based medicine: How to practice and teach EBM, 2nd ed. Churchill Livingston, London
4. Flobbe K, Bosch AM, Kessels AG, Beets GL, Nelemans PJ, von Meyenfeldt MF et al (2003) The additional diagnostic value of ultrasonography in the diagnosis of breast cancer. Arch Intern Med 163(10):1194-1199
5. Zonderland HM, Coerkamp EG, Hermans J, van de Vijver MJ, van Voorthuisen AE (1999) Diagnosis of breast cancer: Contribution of US as an adjunct to mammography. Radiology 213(2):413-422
6. Grol R, Wensing WME (2005) Improving patient care. The implementation of change in clinical practice. Elsevier, Edinburgh
7. Mendelson EB, Tobin CE (1995) Critical pathways in using breast US. Radiographics 15(4):935-945
8. CBO DIfH (2000) Breast cancer: Guideline for screening and diagnosis. Utrecht
9. ACR ACoR (2006) ACR Practice guidelines for the performance of a breast ultrasound examination. Reston (VA): American College of Radiology
10. ACR ACoR (2003) ACR Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System, Breast Imaging Atlas, 4th ed. Reston (VA): American College of Radiology (ACR)
11. de Rijke JM, Schouten LJ, Schreutelkamp JL, Jochem I, Verbeek AL (2000) A blind review and an informed review of interval breast cancer cases in the Limburg screening programme, the Netherlands. J Med Screen 7(1):19-23
12. Glas AS, Lijmer JG, Prins MH, Bonsel GJ, Bossuyt PM (2003) The diagnostic odds ratio: A single indicator of test performance. J Clin Epidemiol 56(11):1129-1135
13. Burstin HR, Conn A, Setnik G, Rucker DW, Cleary PD, O'Neil AC et al (1999) Benchmarking and quality improvement: The Harvard Emergency Department Quality Study. Am J Med 107(5):437-449
14. Grilli R, Lomas J (1994) Evaluating the message: The relationship between compliance rate and the subject of a practice guideline. Med Care 32(3):202-213
15. Grol R (2001) Successes and failures in the implementation of evidence-based guidelines for clinical practice. Med Care 39(8 Suppl 2):II46-II54
16. Duijm LE, Guit GL, Zaat JO, Koomen AR, Willebrand D (1997) Sensitivity, specificity and predictive values of breast imaging in the detection of cancer. Br J Cancer 76(3):377-381
17. Flobbe K, van der Linden ES, Kessels AG, van Engelshoven JM (2001) Diagnostic value of radiological breast imaging in a non-screening population. Int J Cancer 92(4):616-618
18. Kolb TM, Lichy J, Newhouse JH (2002) Comparison of the performance of screening mammography, physical examination, and breast US and evaluation of factors that influence them: An analysis of 27,825 patient evaluations. Radiology 225(1):165-175
19. Casarella WJ (2002) A patient's viewpoint on a current controversy. Radiology 224(3):927
20. Kerlikowske K, Grady D, Barclay J, Sickles EA, Ernster V (1996) Effect of age, breast density, and family history on the sensitivity of first screening mammography. Jama 276(1):33-38
21. Lannin DR, Harris RP, Swanson FH, Edwards MS, Swanson MS, Pories WJ (1993) Difficulties in diagnosis of carcinoma of the breast in patients less than fifty years of age. Surg Gynecol Obstet 177(5):457-62
22. Zonderland HM, Pope TL Jr, Nieborg AJ (2004) The positive predictive value of the breast imaging reporting and data system (BI-RADS) as a method of quality assessment in breast imaging in a hospital population. Eur Radiol 14(10):1743-1750
23. Corsetti V, Ferrari A, Ghirardi M, Bergonzini R, Bellarosa S, Angelini O et al (2006) Role of ultrasonography in detecting mammographically occult breast carcinoma in women with dense breasts. Radiol Med (Torino) 111(3):440-448
24. Crystal P, Strano SD, Shcharynski S, Koretz MJ (2003) Using sonography to screen women with mammographically dense breasts. AJR Am J Roentgenol 181(1):177-182
25. Kolb TM, Lichy J, Newhouse JH (1998) Occult cancer in women with dense breasts: Detection with screening US-diagnostic yield and tumor characteristics. Radiology 207(1):191-199