You are seeing this message because your Web browser does not support basic Web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.


ABOUT ARCHIVES
Advanced Search

Welcome   | My Account | E-mail Alerts | Access Rights | Sign In


  Vol. 125 No. 11, November 1990 TABLE OF CONTENTS
  Archives
  •  Online Features
  ORIGINAL ARTICLES
 This Article
 •References
 •Full text PDF
 •Send to a friend
 • Save in My Folder
 •Save to citation manager
 •Permissions
 Citing Articles
 •Citation map
 •Citing articles on HighWire
 •Contact me when this article is cited
 Related Content
 •Similar articles in this journal
 Social Bookmarking
  Add to CiteULike Add to Connotea Add to Del.icio.us Add to Digg Add to Reddit Add to Technorati Add to Twitter What's this?

Needle-Localized Mammographic Lesions

Results and Evolving Treatment Strategy

H. Richard Alexander, MD; Frank C. Candela, MD; D. David Dershaw, MD; David W. Kinne, MD

Arch Surg. 1990;125(11):1441-1444.


Abstract

• From January 1981 to December 1987, 932 needle-localization breast biopsies were performed at our institution for mammographically detected abnormalities. We reviewed 531 needle-localization breast biopsy procedures performed during two periods (January 1981 to June 1984, n=311; and January to August 1987, n = 220) to compare results and treatment patterns, and to determine the prevalence of the missed lesions. Mammographic abnormalities detected on routine screening accounted for a larger proportion of needle-localization breast biopsies in the later series (94 [30%] of 311 vs 94 [43%] of 220). However, the rate at which carcinoma was identified remained constant at 29% as did the percentage of cancers that were invasive (46% vs 51 %). Overall, the rate of malignant diagnoses after needle-localization breast biopsy was lowest in asymptomatic women undergoing routine screening mammography (44 [24%] of 188) and significantly higher in women undergoing mammographic follow-up of the contralateral breast after treatment for breast cancer (28 [43%] of 65). There were seven missed lesions in 531 needle-localization breast biopsies, necessitating a second procedure in six and interval mammograms in one.

(Arch Surg. 1990;125:1441-1444)



Author Affiliations

From the Departments of Surgery (Breast Service) (Drs Alexander, Candela, and Kinne) and Medical Imaging (Dr Dershaw), Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY.


Footnotes

Accepted for publication July 1, 1990.

Reprint requests to Surgery Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bldg 10, Room 2B05, Bethesda, MD 20892 (Dr Alexander).



Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter     What's this?

THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Management of Microcalcifications Developing at the Lumpectomy Bed After Conservative Surgery and Radiation Therapy
Gunhan-Bilgen and Oktay
Am. J. Roentgenol. 2007;188:393-398.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Lesion Miss Rates and False-Negative Rates for 1115 Consecutive Cases of Stereotactically Guided Needle-localized Open Breast Biopsy with Long-term Follow-up
Riedl et al.
Radiology 2005;237:847-853.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Current Management of Patients with Ductal Carcinoma-in-Situ
Chabner et al.
The Oncologist 1997;2:76-82.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Preoperative Evaluation of Abnormal Mammographic Findings to Avoid Unnecessary Breast Biopsies
Morrow et al.
Arch Surg 1994;129:1091-1096.
ABSTRACT  

The Natural History of Mammographic Calcifications Subjected to Interval Follow-up
Berend et al.
Arch Surg 1992;127:1309-1313.
ABSTRACT  





HOME | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | TOPIC COLLECTIONS | CME | SUBMIT | SUBSCRIBE | HELP
CONDITIONS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
 
© 1990 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.