天津医药
天津醫藥
천진의약
TIANJIN MEDICAL JOURNAL
2014年
9期
928-930
,共3页
杨培胜%程秀富%郝晋阳%王旭%黄淑华
楊培勝%程秀富%郝晉暘%王旭%黃淑華
양배성%정수부%학진양%왕욱%황숙화
乳腺肿瘤%超声检查,多普勒,彩色%误诊%乳腺微小癌
乳腺腫瘤%超聲檢查,多普勒,綵色%誤診%乳腺微小癌
유선종류%초성검사,다보륵,채색%오진%유선미소암
breast neoplasms%ultrasonography,doppler,color%diagnostic errors%minimal breast carcinoma
目的：探讨高频超声诊断乳腺微小癌的常见误诊原因。方法回顾性分析经病理证实的90例乳腺微小癌的超声征象，根据病灶最大径，分为0.5~1.0 cm组55例和≤0.5 cm组35例，2组又分别分为正确提示组与误诊组。采用SIEMENZ S2000型、GE vivid7及vivid9大型彩色多普勒超声仪器，仔细观察二维声像图结果，分析其误诊原因。结果90例乳腺微小癌，误诊32例，病灶最大径0.5~1.0 cm组与≤0.5 cm组误诊原因在边缘清晰度上差异有统计学意义。最大径0.5~1.0 cm组的病灶边缘清晰度、微钙化在正确组与误诊组间差异有统计学意义。病灶最大径≤0.5 cm组，其中纵横比、多发结节在其正确提示组与误诊组间差异有统计学意义。结论乳腺微小癌的误诊原因在不同病灶大小之间有所不同，病灶最大径在0.5~1.0 cm者表现为边缘清晰、无微钙化等良性结节声像图特征时易误诊，最大径≤0.5 cm者表现为纵横比<1、多发结节特征时易误诊。
目的：探討高頻超聲診斷乳腺微小癌的常見誤診原因。方法迴顧性分析經病理證實的90例乳腺微小癌的超聲徵象，根據病竈最大徑，分為0.5~1.0 cm組55例和≤0.5 cm組35例，2組又分彆分為正確提示組與誤診組。採用SIEMENZ S2000型、GE vivid7及vivid9大型綵色多普勒超聲儀器，仔細觀察二維聲像圖結果，分析其誤診原因。結果90例乳腺微小癌，誤診32例，病竈最大徑0.5~1.0 cm組與≤0.5 cm組誤診原因在邊緣清晰度上差異有統計學意義。最大徑0.5~1.0 cm組的病竈邊緣清晰度、微鈣化在正確組與誤診組間差異有統計學意義。病竈最大徑≤0.5 cm組，其中縱橫比、多髮結節在其正確提示組與誤診組間差異有統計學意義。結論乳腺微小癌的誤診原因在不同病竈大小之間有所不同，病竈最大徑在0.5~1.0 cm者錶現為邊緣清晰、無微鈣化等良性結節聲像圖特徵時易誤診，最大徑≤0.5 cm者錶現為縱橫比<1、多髮結節特徵時易誤診。
목적：탐토고빈초성진단유선미소암적상견오진원인。방법회고성분석경병리증실적90례유선미소암적초성정상，근거병조최대경，분위0.5~1.0 cm조55례화≤0.5 cm조35례，2조우분별분위정학제시조여오진조。채용SIEMENZ S2000형、GE vivid7급vivid9대형채색다보륵초성의기，자세관찰이유성상도결과，분석기오진원인。결과90례유선미소암，오진32례，병조최대경0.5~1.0 cm조여≤0.5 cm조오진원인재변연청석도상차이유통계학의의。최대경0.5~1.0 cm조적병조변연청석도、미개화재정학조여오진조간차이유통계학의의。병조최대경≤0.5 cm조，기중종횡비、다발결절재기정학제시조여오진조간차이유통계학의의。결론유선미소암적오진원인재불동병조대소지간유소불동，병조최대경재0.5~1.0 cm자표현위변연청석、무미개화등량성결절성상도특정시역오진，최대경≤0.5 cm자표현위종횡비<1、다발결절특정시역오진。
Objective To evaluate the possible causes of misdiagnosis of minimal breast carcinoma (MBC). Meth-ods The possible causes of misdiagnosis of 90 cases of MBC confirmed by pathology were retrospective analyzed. Accord-ing to the maximum diameter of the lesion, 90 cases were divided into 0.5-1.0 cm group (n=55) and≤0.5 cm group (n=35). And these two groups were subdivided into correct and misdiagnosed groups. The two-dimensional ultrasound findings were observed by using SIEMENZ S2000, GE vivid7 and GE vivid9 color Doppler ultrasound instruments, and reasons of misdiag-nosis were analyzed. Results There were 32 cases were misdiagnosed in 90 patients with MBC. There was significant differ-ence in boundary of misdiagnosis between diameter 0.5-1.0 cm group and≤0.5 cm group. There were significant differences in boundary and calcification between misdiagnosed group and correct group in diameter 0.5-1.0 cm group (P<0.05). There were also significant differences in A/T ratio and accompanying by multiple benign nodules between misdiagnosed group and correct group in diameter≤0.5 cm group (P<0.05). Conclusion The misdiagnosis in MBC is because of different lesion sizes. The misdiagnosis happens in the maximum diameter of the lesions between 0.5-1.0 cm that showed manifestation of sharp edges, no micro-calcification in sonographic features of benign. The misdiagnosis happens in maximum diameter of le-sions≤0.5 cm that manifested as the aspect A/T ratio<1 and characterized by multiple nodules.
