Analysis of Previous Screening Examinations for Patients with Breast Cancer.
10.3348/jkrs.2007.56.2.191
- Author:
Eun Hye LEE
1
;
Joo Hee CHA
;
Daehee HAN
;
Dae Sik RYU
;
Young Ho CHOI
;
Ki Tae HWANG
;
Jin Ho KWAK
;
Woo Kyung MOON
Author Information
1. Department of Radiology and Breast Center, Seoul Municipal Boramae Hospital, Korea. jhcha@radiol.snu.ac.kr
- Publication Type:Original Article
- Keywords:
Cancer screening;
Breast radiography;
Breast, US;
Breast neoplasms;
Quality assurance
- MeSH:
Breast Neoplasms*;
Breast*;
Early Detection of Cancer;
Education;
Humans;
Mass Screening*;
Retrospective Studies
- From:Journal of the Korean Radiological Society
2007;56(2):191-202
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:Korean
-
Abstract:
PURPOSE: We wanted to improve the quality of subsequent screening by reviewing the previous screening of breast cancer patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty-four breast cancer patients who underwent previous screening were enrolled. All 24 took mammograms and 15 patients also took sonograms. We reviewed the screening retrospectively according to the BI-RADS criteria and we categorized the results into false negative, true negative, true positive and occult cancers. We also categorized the causes of false negative cancers into misperception, misinterpretation and technical factors and then we analyzed the attributing factors. RESULTS: Review of the previous screening revealed 66.7% (16/24) false negative, 25.0% (6/24) true negative, and 8.3% (2/24) true positive cancers. False negative cancers were caused by the mammogram in 56.3% (9/16) and by the sonogram in 43.7% (7/16). For the false negative cases, all of misperception were related with mammograms and this was attributed to dense breast, a lesion located at the edge of glandular tissue or the image, and findings seen on one view only. Almost all misinterpretations were related with sonograms and attributed to loose application of the final assessment. CONCLUSION: To improve the quality of breast screening, it is essential to overcome the main causes of false negative examinations, including misperception and misinterpretation. We need systematic education and strict application of final assessment categories of BI-RADS. For effective communication among physicians, it is also necessary to properly educate them about BI-RADS.
