These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: DIMA enlargement mammography in microcalcifications: a prospective study with ROC analysis.
    Author: Grunert JH, Barbey M, Berndt G, Borchert B, Farber A, Gmelin E, Ratmann R, Rautmann B.
    Journal: Eur Radiol; 2001; 11(2):284-91. PubMed ID: 11218029.
    Abstract:
    The purpose of this study was to investigate whether the four-fold magnification mammography (direct magnification, DIMA) technique would perform better than conventional 1.5-fold magnification mammography in the differentiation of breast microcalcifications into benign and malignant. Fifty patients with non-palpable microcalcifications detected by mammography were examined immediately prior to surgical biopsy using both a conventional (1.5-fold) and the DIMA (fourfold) magnification mammography techniques. The microcalcifications were classified by five experienced radiologists using morphological criteria. A receiver operating characteristics curve (ROC) analysis of the sensitivity and specificity of both techniques in assessing malignancy was then carried out. The DIMA mammography technique was slightly but non-significantly superior to the conventional method in detecting malignancy (p > 0.05). Coarse granular and pleomorphic calcifications were detected more frequently with the DIMA technique. Coarse calcifications were significantly more frequently associated with histologically benign findings, whereas fine granular calcifications were significantly more likely to be malignant lesions. Assessment of malignancy associated with microcalcifications using morphological criteria is not significantly improved by mammography techniques with higher magnification.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]