ArticlePediatric radiology2024
Evaluating breast ultrasonography as a complementary diagnostic method in girls with central precocious puberty.
Article in Pediatric radiology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Risk factors and preventive strategies for precocious puberty: a narrative review.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2026Review
- Deep learning-assisted diagnosis of pubertal breast development on multicenter ultrasound images.iScience · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAssessment of breast development by physical examination can be difficult in the early stages and in overweight girls.
objectiveTo investigate ultrasonography (US) for evaluation of early breast development. MATERIALS AND
methodsIn a prospective study, 125 girls (age 7.1 ± 1.5 years) with breast development before 8 years underwent US breast staging, breast volume, and elastography, in addition to clinical/hormonal evaluation for precocious puberty. Accuracy of US for determining breast development and predicting progression to central precocious puberty was investigated.
resultsPhysical examination revealed glandular breast enlargement in 100 and predominantly lipomastia in 25. Breast US in the former confirmed glandular breast development in 92 (group 1, physical examination and US positive), but not in 8 (group 2, physical examination positive, US negative). Comparison of the two groups demonstrated lower Tanner and US staging, bone age/chronological age, basal luteinizing hormone (LH), breast volume, and uterine volume in group 2. In the 25 lipomastia patients, US demonstrated no breast tissue in 19 (group 3, physical examination and US negative), but US stage ≥ II in 6 (group 4, physical examination negative, US positive) without differences in clinical parameters. After follow-up of 19.8 ± 4.2 months, 46/125 subjects were diagnosed with precocious puberty. US stage, total breast volume, and shear-wave speeds were significantly higher in these 46 patients. Multivariate analyses demonstrated breast volume > 3.4 cc had odds ratio of 11.0, sensitivity of 62%, and specificity of 89, in predicting progression to precocious puberty, being second only to stimulated LH for all variables.
conclusionBreast US is a useful predictive tool for diagnosis of precocious puberty in girls. Higher US stages and higher breast volume on US increased the likelihood of eventual diagnosis of precocious puberty.
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.