Você pesquisou por y - Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia
You searched for:"Hilton Augusto Koch"
We found (2) results for your search.Summary
Rev Bras Ginecol Obstet. 2005;27(9):515-523
DOI 10.1590/S0100-72032005000900003
PURPOSE: the technological improvements in image quality have increased the importance of ultrasound as an imaging method in the study of breast pathologies. The need for a standardized method for lesion characterization, description and reporting in image analysis motivated the development of a breast sonographic report classification system. METHODS: the classification grouped the breast sonographic images in five classes: I - normal; II - benign; III - indeterminate, IV - suspect, and V - highly suspect. The used morphologic ultrasound features were shape, border, contour, echogenicity, echotexture, sound transmission, orientation, and secondary signals. The gold standard test, in the study of 450 lesions, considered sonographic follow-up of the lesions for a period from 6 to 24 months and the histopathology of surgical cases. RESULTS: breast sonographic classification for the diagnosis of breast cancer showed a sensitivity of 90.2% (CI: 82.8-94.9%), a specificity of 96.2% (CI: 94.0-97.6%), a positive predictive value of 84.1% (CI: 76.0-89.9%), and a negative predictive value of 97.8% (CI: 95.9-98.9%), obtaining an accuracy of 95.1%. CONCLUSIONS: the adoption of a sonographic classification system results in the standardization and optimization of the reports. It also aids the comparison with clinical findings, histopathological tests and breast images, avoiding unnecessary procedures and therefore leading to more adequate therapeutical management.
Summary
Rev Bras Ginecol Obstet. 2005;27(9):515-523
DOI 10.1590/S0100-72032005000900003
PURPOSE: the technological improvements in image quality have increased the importance of ultrasound as an imaging method in the study of breast pathologies. The need for a standardized method for lesion characterization, description and reporting in image analysis motivated the development of a breast sonographic report classification system. METHODS: the classification grouped the breast sonographic images in five classes: I - normal; II - benign; III - indeterminate, IV - suspect, and V - highly suspect. The used morphologic ultrasound features were shape, border, contour, echogenicity, echotexture, sound transmission, orientation, and secondary signals. The gold standard test, in the study of 450 lesions, considered sonographic follow-up of the lesions for a period from 6 to 24 months and the histopathology of surgical cases. RESULTS: breast sonographic classification for the diagnosis of breast cancer showed a sensitivity of 90.2% (CI: 82.8-94.9%), a specificity of 96.2% (CI: 94.0-97.6%), a positive predictive value of 84.1% (CI: 76.0-89.9%), and a negative predictive value of 97.8% (CI: 95.9-98.9%), obtaining an accuracy of 95.1%. CONCLUSIONS: the adoption of a sonographic classification system results in the standardization and optimization of the reports. It also aids the comparison with clinical findings, histopathological tests and breast images, avoiding unnecessary procedures and therefore leading to more adequate therapeutical management.
Summary
Rev Bras Ginecol Obstet. 2009;31(2):75-81
DOI 10.1590/S0100-72032009000200005
PURPOSE: to evaluate the factors leading to delays in obtaining definitive diagnosis of suspicious lesions for breast cancer. METHODS: a cross-sectional, observational study was carried out with 104 women attending a cancer hospital with a diagnosis or suspected diagnosis of breast cancer. A semistructured questionnaire on the patients' demographic, clinical characteristics and the use of services was applied.Variables were compared using t-Student test, Mann-Whitney test, Pearson's χ2 test or Fisher's exact test, as appropriate. In order to identify the variables associated with delays in breast cancer diagnosis, the Odds Ratio (OR) were calculated together with their respective 95% confidence intervals (95%CI) and a logistic regression model was constructed. RESULTS: age of patients was 54±12.6 years (mean±standard deviation). Most of the women were white (48.1%), married (63.5%), living in the city of Rio de Janeiro (57.7%) and poorly educated (60.6%). The median time between the first sign or symptom of the disease and first consultation was one month and the mean time between first consultation and confirmation of diagnosis was 6.5 months. In 51% of the women, diagnosis was late (stages II-IV). Symptomatic presentation and longer delay between symptom onset and the first evaluation and between symptom onset and the diagnosis were found to be significant factors (p<0.05) for delays in obtaining definitive diagnosis of suspicious lesions. CONCLUSIONS: the results of this study suggest that efforts must be made to reduce the time needed to get an appointment with a doctor and to confirm a diagnosis of suspicious lesions, as well as to educate physicians and the women themselves regarding the importance of breast symptoms and the value of prompt evaluation, diagnosis, and treatment.
Summary
Rev Bras Ginecol Obstet. 2009;31(2):75-81
DOI 10.1590/S0100-72032009000200005
PURPOSE: to evaluate the factors leading to delays in obtaining definitive diagnosis of suspicious lesions for breast cancer. METHODS: a cross-sectional, observational study was carried out with 104 women attending a cancer hospital with a diagnosis or suspected diagnosis of breast cancer. A semistructured questionnaire on the patients' demographic, clinical characteristics and the use of services was applied.Variables were compared using t-Student test, Mann-Whitney test, Pearson's χ2 test or Fisher's exact test, as appropriate. In order to identify the variables associated with delays in breast cancer diagnosis, the Odds Ratio (OR) were calculated together with their respective 95% confidence intervals (95%CI) and a logistic regression model was constructed. RESULTS: age of patients was 54±12.6 years (mean±standard deviation). Most of the women were white (48.1%), married (63.5%), living in the city of Rio de Janeiro (57.7%) and poorly educated (60.6%). The median time between the first sign or symptom of the disease and first consultation was one month and the mean time between first consultation and confirmation of diagnosis was 6.5 months. In 51% of the women, diagnosis was late (stages II-IV). Symptomatic presentation and longer delay between symptom onset and the first evaluation and between symptom onset and the diagnosis were found to be significant factors (p<0.05) for delays in obtaining definitive diagnosis of suspicious lesions. CONCLUSIONS: the results of this study suggest that efforts must be made to reduce the time needed to get an appointment with a doctor and to confirm a diagnosis of suspicious lesions, as well as to educate physicians and the women themselves regarding the importance of breast symptoms and the value of prompt evaluation, diagnosis, and treatment.