Radiology
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by de Lafontan, B.
Right arrow Articles by Pujol, H.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by de Lafontan, B.
Right arrow Articles by Pujol, H.

Radiology, Vol 190, 479-483, Copyright © 1994 by Radiological Society of North America

ARTICLES

Isolated clustered microcalcifications: diagnostic value of mammography- -series of 400 cases with surgical verification

B de Lafontan, JP Daures, B Salicru, F Eynius, J Mihura, P Rouanet, JL Lamarque, A Naja and H Pujol
Centre Claudius Regaud, Toulouse, France.

PURPOSE: To determine the diagnostic value of mammographic criteria in cases of isolated clustered microcalcifications. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Four hundred mammographic studies of isolated clustered microcalcifications for which surgical verification was available were reviewed. A descriptive statistical study was performed to evaluate the distribution of each criterion relative to histopathologic results, followed by a multivariate study to determine statistically significant criteria. Seven breast specialists gave a consensus opinion on the need for surgery. RESULTS: There were 302 benign lesions and 98 cancers. The most useful criteria were vermicular form, linear/branching shape, and irregular size of microcalcification. The number of biopsies recommended with use of these three criteria was 177 instead of the 172 recommended by the experts. CONCLUSION: Use of these three preoperative criteria permits correct diagnosis of most such malignancies (90% in our series vs 67% diagnosed by the experts).


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
I. Leichter, R. Lederman, S. S. Buchbinder, P. Bamberger, B. Novak, and S. Fields
Computerized Evaluation of Mammographic Lesions: What Diagnostic Role Does the Shape of the Individual Microcalcifications Play Compared with the Geometry of the Cluster?
Am. J. Roentgenol., March 1, 2004; 182(3): 705 - 712.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 RadiologyHome page
S. S. Buchbinder, I. S. Leichter, R. B. Lederman, B. Novak, P. N. Bamberger, M. Sklair-Levy, G. Yarmish, and S. I. Fields
Computer-aided Classification of BI-RADS Category 3 Breast Lesions
Radiology, March 1, 2004; 230(3): 820 - 823.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
L. Becker, D. Taves, L. McCurdy, G. Muscedere, S. Karlik, and S. Ward
Stereotactic Core Biopsy of Breast Microcalcifications: Comparison of Film Versus Digital Mammography, Both Using an Add-On Unit
Am. J. Roentgenol., December 1, 2001; 177(6): 1451 - 1457.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
RADIOLOGY RADIOGRAPHICS RSNA JOURNALS ONLINE
Copyright © 1994 by the Radiological Society of North America.