Observational studyMedicine2017
Analysis of background parenchymal echogenicity on breast ultrasound: Correlation with mammographic breast density and background parenchymal enhancement on magnetic resonance imaging.
Observational study in Medicine, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evaluation of background parenchymal enhancement in breast contrast-enhanced ultrasound with SonazoidJournal of medical ultrasonics (2001) · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to analyze the background parenchymal echotexture (BP echo) on breast ultrasound in detail and to evaluate the relation BP echo with menopausal status. In addition, we correlated BP echo with mammographic breast density (MGD) and background parenchymal enhancement (BPE) on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI).The institutional review board of our hospital approved this retrospective study, and the requirement of informed consent was waived. We studied 138 women (mean age 51.6 years, range from 26 to 79 years) with newly diagnosed invasive breast cancer, who had performed preoperative mammography, ultrasound, and MR from June 2013 to June 2015. BP echo was classified as homogeneous and heterogeneous according to the BI-RADS US lexicon. MGD was described into fatty, scattered, heterogeneously dense, and extremely dense. BPE was categorized as minimal, mild, moderate, and marked. The relationship between the BP echo and menopausal status was investigated. Associations between the degree of BP echo with MGD grades and BPE grades were also evaluated.Of the 138 women, 74 (54%) were premenopausal and 64 (46%) were postmenopausal. Premenopausal women were more likely to have heterogeneous BP echo (60/74, 81%) compared with postmenopausal women (10/64, 16%) (P = .000). BP echo showed significant correlation with BPE in both premenopausal and postmenopausal women (P = .000). However, MGD showed no significant correlation with BP echo or BPE, regardless of menopausal states. In the postmenopausal group, 70% women (21/30) with dense MGD showed homogeneous BP echo and 77% women (23/30) with dense MGD showed nondense BPE.In conclusion, we demonstrated that the BP echo was influenced by menopausal status. Our data support the concept that BP echo is influenced by breast hormonal changes. Because there was a significant association between BP echo and BPE in pre- and post-menopausal women, the BP echo might be a good predictor for BPE.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.