Mammographic determination of breast volume: comparing different methods.

Kalbhen, Carl L.; McGill, J J; Fendley, Paul M.; Corrigan, Kevin; Angelats, Juan

doi:10.2214/ajr.173.6.10584814

Cited by 108 publications

(87 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Mammographic density of ACR levels 1-2 were defined as low density, and levels 3-4 were defined as high density. We measured the volume of the breast using the following formula proposed by Kalbhen et al (1999), which had been demonstrated in previous studies (Kayar et al, 2011): breast volume =π/4 ×(W×H×C), where W=breast width, H=breast height, and C=compression thickness in craniocaudal mammography. Breast width, height and compression thickness were all measured on the craniocaudal mammogram by the computer.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of Age, Breast Density and Volume on Breast Cancer Diagnosis: A Retrospective Comparison of Sensitivity of Mammography and Ultrasonography in China's Rural Areas

Wang¹,

Chen²,

Yin³

et al. 2013

Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: Mammography has been confirmed as the only effective mode to improve the prognosis of patients with breast cancer in Western developed countries, but might not be a good choice in other areas of the world. One of the major challenges in China is to determine an optimal imaging modality for breast cancer screening. This study was designed to clarify the sensitivity of ultrasonography compared with that of mammography in rural China. Methods: We retrospectively studied the sensitivity of mammography and ultrasonography based on 306 breast cancer patients detected by the program of "screening for cervical cancer and breast cancer" performed in Chinese rural areas between January 2009 and December 2011, and analyzed the effects of age, breast density and volume on the sensitivity. Results: Stratified analysis showed that the sensitivity of breast ultrasonography was significantly higher than that of mammography in premenopausal patients (81.4% vs. 61.1%, p=0.02), in women ≤ 55 years of age (82.2% vs. 63.4%, p<0.01), in the high breast density group (American College of Radiology [ACR] levels 3-4) (85.9% vs. 60.6%, p<0.01) and in the small breast volume group (≤400 ml) (87.1% vs. 66.7%, p<0.01). Age had a significant effect on sensitivity of mammography (breast density and volume-adjusted odds ratio, 6.39; 95% confidence interval, 2.8-14.4 in age group > 55 compared to age group ≤ 45), but not that of ultrasonography. Neither breast density nor volume had significant effect on sensitivity of mammography or ultrasonography. Conclusions: Ultrasonography is more sensitive than mammography in detecting breast cancer in women under 55 year-old Chinese, especially in those with high-density and relatively small breasts.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of Age, Breast Density and Volume on Breast Cancer Diagnosis: A Retrospective Comparison of Sensitivity of Mammography and Ultrasonography in China's Rural Areas

Wang¹,

Chen²,

Yin³

et al. 2013

Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Roudner found breast volume measurements using GRD were direct and extremely accurate while Kalbhen found most accurate method of calculating breast volume was one that assumed breast as half elliptical cylinder shape on craniocaudal mammogram [8,9] .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Kalbhen et al [9] used to assess breast volume by mammography in which breast was considered as half ellipse shape on cranio-caudal mammogram and formula used for that was: Breast volume (V) in ml = (π/4) ×W×H×CT Where W is width, H is height and CT is compression thickness on mammography machine. Katariya et al considered breast as a cone and used the formula of calculation of the volume of a cone as shown in figure by following formula [10] :…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Breast Volume estimation by Anthropometry

Karwasra¹

2018

jmscr

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Although correct breast implant selection defines the aesthetically pleasing surgical result and a large variety of different prosthesis sizes and shapes are available on the market, surgeons still rely on visual assessment and other subjective approaches for operative planning because of lacking objective evaluation tools [3], [4]. Classical methods for breast augmentation planning and implant selection as ordinary 2D digital photography [5], anthropomorphic evaluations [6], water displacement [7], plaster casting [8], radiological assessments [9], [10], [11] volume measurement devices [12], [13] and the commonly performed method of placing varying implant sizes in the patients bras to select the proper prosthesis [14] are subjective, observer dependant, unreliable, cumbersome, time consuming, cost intensive and and mostly of limited help for the surgeon [4], [15], [16], [17], [18].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Computational Tool for Preoperative Breast Augmentation Planning in Aesthetic Plastic Surgery

Georgii

Eder

Burger

et al. 2014

IEEE J. Biomed. Health Inform.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract-Breast augmentation was the most commonly performed cosmetic surgery procedure in 2011 in the United States. Although aesthetically pleasing surgical results can only be achieved if the correct breast implant is selected from a large variety of different prosthesis sizes and shapes available on the market, surgeons still rely on visual assessment and other subjective approaches for operative planning because of lacking objective evaluation tools.In this paper we present the development of a software prototype for augmentation mammaplasty simulation solely based on 3D surface scans, from which patient-specific finite element models are generated in a semi-automatic process. The finite element model is used to pre-operatively simulate the expected breast shapes using physical soft tissue mechanics. Our approach uses a novel mechanism based on so-called displacement templates, which, for a specific implant shape and position, describe the respective internal body forces. Due to a highly efficient numerical solver we can provide immediate visual feedback of the simulation results, and thus the software prototype can be integrated smoothly into the medical workflow. The clinical value of the developed 3D computational tool for aesthetic breast augmentation surgery planning is demonstrated in patientspecific use cases.

show abstract

Mammographic determination of breast volume: comparing different methods.

Cited by 108 publications

References 2 publications

Effects of Age, Breast Density and Volume on Breast Cancer Diagnosis: A Retrospective Comparison of Sensitivity of Mammography and Ultrasonography in China's Rural Areas

Effects of Age, Breast Density and Volume on Breast Cancer Diagnosis: A Retrospective Comparison of Sensitivity of Mammography and Ultrasonography in China's Rural Areas

Breast Volume estimation by Anthropometry

A Computational Tool for Preoperative Breast Augmentation Planning in Aesthetic Plastic Surgery

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About