ArticleAmerican journal of translational research2025
Ultrasonography in granulomatous mastitis: diagnostic differentiation, treatment response, and prognostic value.
Article in American journal of translational research, 2025. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic value of ultrasonography in distinguishing granulomatous mastitis (GM) from ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), and to assess its prognostic relevance in monitoring treatment response and predicting recurrence.
methodsIn this retrospective study, we analyzed conventional B-mode ultrasound and contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) features in 146 patients with histologically confirmed GM and 140 with DCIS. Key comparisons included: (1) B-mode characteristics (lesion morphology, posterior acoustic features, microcalcifications, vascular patterns, etc.); (2) CEUS quantitative parameters [mean transit time (mTTI), time to peak, rise time, etc.]. Clinical treatment responses and recurrence data were also collected for GM patients.
resultsGM exhibited distinct ultrasound characteristics compared to DCIS, including more frequent posterior acoustic enhancement (58.90% vs. 12.14%), absence of microcalcifications (82.19% vs. 49.29%), and a higher prevalence of marginal or mixed vascular patterns (83.02% vs. 73.34%) (all P < 0.001). On CEUS, GM demonstrated shorter mTTI but higher peak enhancement, wash-in, and wash-out rates than DCIS (all P < 0.001). Among the GM cohort, 121 of 146 patients achieved clinical cure. These cured patients had significantly lower pretreatment mTTI values (P < 0.001), and mTTI demonstrated predictive value for treatment response (area under the ROC curve = 0.765; sensitivity: 68.0%, specificity: 86.0%). During one-year follow-up, 15 of the 121 cured patients experienced recurrence (12.40%). The presence of ductal dilatation on ultrasound was associated with a higher recurrence rate.
conclusionUltrasound, particularly when combined with CEUS parameters, not only facilitates the differentiation of GM from DCIS but also serves as a valuable tool for evaluating treatment response and predicting recurrence in GM patients.
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.