Role Of Sonography And Digital Mammography In The Evaluation To Ductal Carcinoma In Situ Of Breast

Objective:To compare the diagnostic value with ultrasound(US) plus mammography (M) vs US alone and M alone in ductal carcinoma in situ(DCIS).Methods:All recorded 52 cases of DCIS diagnosed in women between January 2007 and December 2010 were extracted from the Socond People's hospital of Shenzhen.The diagnostic yield and the characteristic of microcalcification of different grades DCIS in US and M and combined US+M were compared.Results:High-grade DCIS was 25 cases,intermediate-grade DCIS was 13 cases, low-grade 14 cases,pure DCIS was 41 cases, and DCIS with microinvasion was 11 cases.The diagnostic yield for US to DCIS, high-grade DCIS, intermediate-grade DCIS, low-grade DCIS were 67.31%(35/52),76.00%(19/25),69.23%(9/13), 50.00%(7/14), respectively.The diagnostic yields for M to DCIS, high-grade DCIS, intermediate-grade DCIS low-grade DCIS were 69.23%(36/52),92.00%(23/25), 53.85%(7/13),42.86%(6/14), respectively. The diagnostic yield for US+M to DCIS, high-grade DCIS, intermediate-grade DCIS, low-grade DCIS were 82.69%(43/52), 96.00%(24/25),76.92%(10/13),64.29%(9/14), respectively. Detection yield of microcalcifications in the group cases was 65.38%(34/52), and detection yield of microcalcifications on US was 67.65%(23/34).Conclusions:1. The results of ultrasound and mammagraphic diagnosis to DCIS haven't different, and ultrasound combined with mammagraphy can increase the positive diagnostic yield of the breast DCIS.2. The diagnostic yield of mammography in high-grade DCIS higher than intermediate-grade DCIS, low-grade DCIS. The diagnostic yield of ultrasound in all grades DCIS is not apparent different.3. Ultrasound can't diagnose DCIS that there aren't definite mass. Mammography ignore easily non-calcifications DCIS in dense breast.