The size and margin status of DCIS each were found to be independent predictors of residual disease.

respectively. Sampling error was the main reason for the low detection rate, and technical inadequacy was a major factor contributing to interpretive problems. In multivariate regression analysis, FS accuracy was significantly associated with the clinical presentation of a palpable mass (odds ratio [OR] Å 4.16, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.04-8.45), the macroscopic finding of a mass (OR Å 3.03, 95% CI: 1.45-6.67), and necrosis (OR Å 3.13, 95% CI: 1.4-6.67). CONCLUSIONS.The authors concluded that the accuracy of FS diagnosis of DCIS was low, mainly due to sampling error. In general, FS examination should not be performed when no lesion/mass is identified by macroscopic examination. Cancer

respectively. Sampling error was the main reason for the low detection rate, and technical inadequacy was a major factor contributing to interpretive problems. In multivariate regression analysis, FS accuracy was significantly associated with the clinical presentation of a palpable mass (odds ratio [OR] Å 4.16, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.04-8.45), the macroscopic finding of a mass (OR Å 3.03, 95% CI: 1.45-6.67), and necrosis (OR Å 3.13, 95% CI: 1.4-6.67). CONCLUSIONS.The authors concluded that the accuracy of FS diagnosis of DCIS was low, mainly due to sampling error. In general, FS examination should not be performed when no lesion/mass is identified by macroscopic examination. Cancer