ArticleSaudi medical journal2024
Magnetic resonance imaging of the breast: Could it be used as a screening test?
Article in Saudi medical journal, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo investigate whether magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) best detects early malignancy in high-risk women.
methodsA retrospective, cross-sectional study, carried out at King Abdulaziz University Hospital, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, included 419 female breast cancer patients aged 16-84 years (mean age of 49). Data were collected from the radiological department's database to compare the MRI, ultrasound (US), and mammography results, with or without tissue biopsy.
resultsIn diagnosing benign versus malignant lesions, MRI showed significant agreement with tissue biopsy, with high sensitivity (70%) and specificity (87%); its positive predictive value (PPV) was 92% and negative predictive value (NPV) was 56%. While US has a PPV of 84% and NPV of 63%; with a sensitivity (79%) and specificity (71%). In patients without tissue biopsy, there was little difference between mammography and US compared with MRI results.
conclusionMagnetic resonance imaging is more effective than US and mammography for early detection of BC. It showed high sensitivity in detecting breast lesions and high specificity in characterizing their nature when correlated with pathological results. Ultrasound screening followed by MRI is suggested for undetected or suspected lesions. This will increase the breast lesion detection rate, reduce unneeded tissue biopsies, and enhance the disease's survival rate.
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.