Pulmonary sequestration is a congenital anomaly of lung in which a portion of lung par-enchyma has no communication with the tracheobronchial tree and receives its blood supply via systemic artery. Sequestration represents a developmental anomaly of tracheobronchial branching with persistence and localized development of a separated branch fragment and retention of its embryonic systemic vascular supply. In the review of the literature, this disease is so rare that only 540 cases were reported worldwide. The anomaly is divided into 2 types; intralobar and extralobar. The ratio of intralobar type and extralobar type is about 3.5 : 1 and intralobar type is more common than the latter in all age groups. The intralobar type is contiguous with normal lung parenchyma and within the same visceral pleural envelope ; in contrast, the extralobar type is enclosed within its own pleural membrane, usually close to a normal lung but separated and discovered most commonly in the left hemithorax with rare cases in the abdominal cavity. Traditionally, this disease has been presented as an incidental lung mass in routine chest X-ray in the postnatal period and with confirmation by aortic angiography, but recently, pulmonary sequestration is diagnosed in the antenatal period along with the development of antenatal ultrasonography. Ultrasonography shows the pulmonary sequestration as a hyperechogenic mass near the diaphragm with posterior echo-free shadow. We have experienced one case of pulmonary sequestration which was found by antenatal ultrasonography and confirmed by operation and histopathologic report in the neonatal period, and we present the case with a brief review of the literatures.
Abdominal Cavity ; Angiography ; Arteries ; Bronchopulmonary Sequestration* ; Diaphragm ; Humans ; Lung ; Membranes ; Thorax ; Ultrasonography*

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study is to evaluate the accuracy of differentiation between benign and malignant clustered microcalcifications without mass on mammogram. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Fourty six mammogramsof 44 patients showing clustered microcalcifications without mass were interpreted blindly by five independent observers majoring in breast imaging from different institutions. Twenty two were malignant (10 infiltratingductal carcinomas, 12 intraductal carcinomas) and 24 were benign (all fibrocystic disease). The observers judgebenignancy or malignancy of microcalcifications. The authors assess the accuracy of differential diagnosis of clustered microcalcifications. RESULT: Of 24 cases proved benign microcalcifications, five radiologists correctly interpreted 20 on average as benign and of malignant 22 cases, 16 on average were correctly interpreted asmalignant. The diagnostic accuracy of malignant microcalcifications was 71.8% on average(63.6%-81.8%) and the diagnostic accuracy for benign microcalcifications was 83% on average(71% - 92%). It was 9 among total 46 cases that were misinterpreted by more than three radiologists. Among these 9 cases, malignant microcalcifications thathad been misinterpreted as benign were seven, benign microcalcifications misinterpreted as malignant were two. CONCLUSION: The diagnostic accuracy of clustered malignant microcalcifications(71.8%) without mass on mammogramwas lower than that of benign microcalcifications(83.3%). So, in case of suspected malignant microcalcification onmammogram, it is preferable that along with magnification view, histopathologic confirmation by core biopsy mustbe obtained.
Biopsy ; Breast ; Diagnosis, Differential ; Humans ; Mammography*