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   What's this?

Ferris M. Hall, MD

Arch Surg. 1990;125(3):298-299.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

The recent report of the Council on Scientific Affairs of the American Medical Association¹ summarizes the status of screening mammography as follows: "There is strong epidemiologic evidence that mammography screening in asymptomatic women aged 50 years or older reduces breast cancer mortality.. [and] suggest reductions in mortality and better survival in younger women as well."

Documentation of the benefits of screening mammography makes cost the major limiting factor in large-scale adoption of this examination. Surprisingly, in this country probably less than one half of the total costs of screening mammography actually relate to the screening examination.² The remaining "downstream" expenses relate to the false-positive mammographic diagnosis of cancer with subsequent physician consultation, roentgenographic localization, and surgical biopsy.

I believe that too many breast biopsies are recommended for minimally suspicious nonpalpable lesions and that the cost of performing these biopsies jeopardizes mammography screening programs. As a partial remedy to . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

Author Affiliations
From the Department of Radiology, Beth Israel Hospital, and Harvard Medical School, Boston, Mass.

Footnotes
Accepted for publication December 13, 1989.

Reprint requests to Department of Radiology, Beth Israel Hospital, 330 Brookline Ave, Boston, MA 02215 (Dr Hall).

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