촉지성 유방암과 비축지성 유방암의 유방촬영술 및 병리 소견의 비교
Comparison Between Palpable and Nonpalpable breast Cancers : Mammographic and Pathological Findings
소속 상세정보
김민정/Min Jung Kim
김은경/김성준/오기근/이경식/이병찬/Eun Kyung Kim/Sung Jun Kim/Ki Keun Oh/Kyong Sik Lee/Byung Chan Lee
KMID : 0386119990410010181
Abstract
목적 : 촉지성과 비촉지성 유방암의 유방촬영소견 및 병리소견을 비교 분석 하고자 하였다.
대상 및 방법 : 최근 2년간 본원에서 유방절제술로 유방암의 병기가 확진 된 362예를 대상
으로 하였다. 수술 전 유방 종괴가 만져졌던 317예를 1군으로, 만져지지 않았던 45예를 2군
으로 하여 유방촬영술 소견 및 병리 소견을 비교하였다.
결과 : 유방촬영술에서 종괴로 보이는 경우가 1군은 51.4%, 2군은 33.3%, 석회화만 보인 경
우가 각각 7.6%, 24.4%로 통계적으로 유의한 차이가 있었고(p<0.05), 그 모양은 1군에선 불
규칙한 형태가 48.6%, 2군에선 원형이 46.2군에선 원형이 46.2%(p<0.05)로, 병리학적 병변의
크기가 평균 3.01㎝, 1.93㎝으로 (p<0.05), 그리고 림프절 전이는 평균 47.9%, 28.2%(p<0.05)
로 통계적으로 유의한 차이가 있었다. 전체 병기는 1군에선 2병기가 53.7%, 2군에선 1병기
가 31.1%로 (p<0.05) 통계적 유의성이 있었다.
결론 : 촉지성과 비촉지성 유방암은 유방촬영술 상 발현 양상, 종괴의 모양 및 범주에 있어
서 통계적으로 유의한 차이가 있었으나 종괴의 경계는 차이가 없었다. 또한 나이, 조직학적
유형, 병변의 크기, 림프절 전이 그리고 병기에서도 유의한 차이가 있었다.
#초록#
Purpose : To analyze the differences in mammographic and pathologic findings between
palpable and nonpalpable breast carcinoma.
Materials and Methods : Among 362 patients with surgically proven breast carcinoma,
317, whose chief complaint during preoperative evaluation was a palpable mass,
Comprised group Ⅰ, and 45 with no masses comprised group Ⅱ. We compared
mammographic and pathologic findings between the two groups.
Results : As regards the pattern of mammographic presentation, mass alone accounted
for 51.4% of group Ⅰ and 33.3% of group Ⅱ, while calcification alone was seen in 7.6%
of group Ⅰ and 24.4% of group Ⅱ(p<0.05). In group Ⅰ, 48.6% of masses were of
irregular shape, and in group Ⅱ, 46.2% were round. According to ACRBIRADS, 47.6%
of group Ⅰ was classified as category 5, and 51.1% of group Ⅱ as category 4(p<0.05).
On the other hand, the margin of the mass showed no statistical difference. Among the
352 patients, the mean age of group Ⅰ was 48.1(range, 28-79) years, while that of
group Ⅱ was 51.7(range, 30-73) years (p<0.05). Histologically, infiltrative ductal
carcinoma was seen in 84.9% of group Ⅰ, and DCIS in 8.5%, while for group Ⅱ the
respective figures were 62.2% and 28.9% (p<0.05). For group Ⅰ, mean lesional size was
3.01㎝, with 47.9% lymph node metastasis in the axilla, while for group Ⅱ the
corresponding figures were 1.93㎝(p<0.05) and 28.2%(p<0.05). Differences were
statistically significant. Under the TMN system, 30% of group Ⅰ were at stage Ⅱ,
while 35.6% of group Ⅱ were at stage Ⅰ(p<0.05).
Conclusion : Palpable and non-palpable cancers showed statistically significant
differences in mammographic findings such as mass shape and category, but not in the
margin of the mass, there were also statistically significant differences with regard to
age, histology, lesion size, axillary lymph node metastasis, and staging.
키워드
Breast neoplasms diagnosis; Breast neoplasms radiography;
원문 및 링크아웃 정보
등재저널 정보