Browse

The Clinical Use of Low-Dose Multidetector Row Computed Tomography for Breast Cancer Patients in the Prone Position

DC Field Value Language
dc.contributor.authorLee, Woo Jin-
dc.contributor.authorSeo, Bo Kyoung-
dc.contributor.authorCho, Pyung Kon-
dc.contributor.authorYie, Ann-
dc.contributor.authorWoo, Ok Hee-
dc.contributor.authorSon, Gil Soo-
dc.contributor.authorLee, Guen Young-
dc.contributor.authorCha, Sang Hoon-
dc.contributor.authorCho, Kyu Ran-
dc.date.accessioned2012-07-02T01:43:47Z-
dc.date.available2012-07-02T01:43:47Z-
dc.date.issued2010-12-
dc.identifier.citationJOURNAL OF BREAST CANCER; Vol.13(4); 357-365ko_KR
dc.identifier.issn1738-6756-
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/10371/78043-
dc.description.abstractPurpose: To investigate the clinical use of low-dose multi-detector row computed tomography (MDCT) for staging of invasive breast cancers with patients in the prone position. Methods: Three hundred twenty-two patients with 334 pathologically-verified breast cancers had low-dose MDCT breast imaging in the prone position for tumor staging before treatment between May 2006 and June 2010. We designed an additional computed tomography table pad with a hole for prone positioning. Patients lay prone on the table pad and the breasts were positioned within the rectangular hole. We obtained dynamic breast imaging from the lower neck to the lung base with the following parameters: 120 kVp, 50 mAs, and 3-mm reconstruction intervals. We evaluated the extent of the primary tumor, lymph nodal status, and distant metastasis in lung or bone, then assessed tumor staging based on the TNM classification of breast cancer. The assessed staging compared to the pathologic results for diagnostic accuracy. Results: Among the 334 invasive breast cancers, the overall diagnostic accuracy of tumor staging was 88.3% and the accuracy values of each tumor stage were 89.6% in T1, 90.8% in T2, 81.0% in T3, and 89.3% in T4. The overall diagnostic accuracy of lymph nodal staging was 86.3% and the accuracy values in each nodal stage were 82.9% in NO, 88.0% in N1, 89.7% in N2, and 93.3% in N3. Based on breast computed tomography scans, we detected distant metastases in 30 cases (7 lungs, 10 bones, 7 lungs and bones, and 6 livers). Conclusion: Low-dose MDCT scanning for invasive breast cancer patients in the prone position is a feasible imaging technique for tumor staging before treatment to evaluate primary breast tumors, lymph nodes, lungs, or thoracic bones with reduced radiation doses.ko_KR
dc.language.isoenko_KR
dc.publisherKOREAN BREAST CANCER SOCko_KR
dc.subjectBreastko_KR
dc.subjectCarcinomako_KR
dc.subjectMulti-detector row computed tomographyko_KR
dc.titleThe Clinical Use of Low-Dose Multidetector Row Computed Tomography for Breast Cancer Patients in the Prone Positionko_KR
dc.typeArticleko_KR
dc.contributor.AlternativeAuthor이우진-
dc.contributor.AlternativeAuthor서보경-
dc.contributor.AlternativeAuthor조평곤-
dc.contributor.AlternativeAuthor조규란-
dc.contributor.AlternativeAuthor우옥희-
dc.contributor.AlternativeAuthor차상훈-
dc.contributor.AlternativeAuthor손길수-
dc.contributor.AlternativeAuthor이근영-
dc.identifier.doi10.4048/jbc.2010.13.4.357-
dc.citation.journaltitleJOURNAL OF BREAST CANCER-
dc.description.citedreferenceEDGE SB, 2010, AJCC CANC STAGING MA-
dc.description.citedreferenceLim HI, 2010, BREAST CANCER RES TR, V119, P163, DOI 10.1007/s10549-009-0525-8-
dc.description.citedreferenceMortellaro VE, 2009, J MAGN RESON IMAGING, V30, P309, DOI 10.1002/jmri.21802-
dc.description.citedreferenceHurwitz LM, 2009, AM J ROENTGENOL, V192, P244, DOI 10.2214/AJR.08.1066-
dc.description.citedreferenceKang DK, 2008, J COMPUT ASSIST TOMO, V32, P583-
dc.description.citedreferenceTaira N, 2008, JPN J CLIN ONCOL, V38, P419, DOI 10.1093/jjco/hyn040-
dc.description.citedreferenceLindfors KK, 2008, RADIOLOGY, V246, P725-
dc.description.citedreferenceKuhl C, 2007, BREAST, V16, pS34, DOI 10.1016/j.breast.2007.07.014-
dc.description.citedreferenceAlvarez S, 2006, AM J ROENTGENOL, V186, P1342, DOI 10.1021/2214/AJR.05.0936-
dc.description.citedreference*AM COLL RAD, 2006, ACR PRACT GUID PERF, P217-
dc.description.citedreferenceSeo BK, 2005, CLIN IMAG, V29, P172, DOI 10.1016/j.clinimag.2004.04.029-
dc.description.citedreferenceInoue T, 2005, BREAST CANCER RES TR, V89, P119, DOI 10.1007/s10549-004-1477-7-
dc.description.citedreferenceInoue M, 2003, AM J ROENTGENOL, V181, P679-
dc.description.citedreferenceNAKAHARA H, 2002, RADIAT MED, V20, P17-
dc.description.citedreferenceBoone JM, 2001, RADIOLOGY, V221, P657-
dc.description.citedreferenceUematsu T, 2001, BREAST CANCER RES TR, V65, P249-
dc.description.citedreferenceUEMATSU T, 2001, BREAST CANC, V8, P125-
dc.description.citedreferenceCheng JC, 1998, INT J RADIAT ONCOL, V41, P607-
dc.description.citedreferenceAkashi-Tanaka S, 1998, BREAST CANCER RES TR, V49, P79-
dc.description.citedreferenceBone B, 1997, ACTA RADIOL, V38, P489-
dc.description.citedreferenceHeywangKobrunner SH, 1997, EUR J RADIOL, V24, P94-
dc.description.citedreferenceObdeijn IMA, 1996, JMRI-J MAGN RESON IM, V6, P849-
dc.description.citedreferenceHagay C, 1996, RADIOLOGY, V200, P631-
dc.description.citedreference1991, ANN ICRP, V21, P1-
dc.description.citedreference*NAT COMPR CANC NE, NCCN GUID TREATM CAN-
dc.description.tc0-
Appears in Collections:
College of Medicine/School of Medicine (의과대학/대학원)Radiology (영상의학전공)Journal Papers (저널논문_영상의학전공)
Files in This Item:
  • mendeley

Items in S-Space are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

Browse