Jiménez VX, Rivera HM, García RFM, Rovelo LJE, Vargas HVM

Language: Spanish
References: 21
Page: 35-40
PDF size: 34.95 Kb.

ABSTRACT

Within the various breast gland pathologies, the breast nodule has a preponderant role in the wide set of clinical manifestations, in benign and malign or neoplastic entities, because of this, is one of the most frequent reason to search medical attention. It is essential to provide of an appropriate diagnostic approach to the breast lump to achieve a good therapeutic, with this, costs will be decreased in biopsies and imaging studies, avoiding wrong diagnosis and inadequate management, mainly, with breast cancer. This paper wants to suggest a systematized approach to evaluation and treatment of the breast nodule, optimizing the imaging studies, biopsies, to guarantee a quick and accurate diagnosis and management, without expensive costs.

REFERENCES

1. Kerlikowske K, Bindman RS, Ljung BM, Grady D. Evaluation of abnormal mammography results and palpable breast abnormalities. Ann Intern Med 2003; 139: 274-84.

2. Morris AM, Flowers CR, Morris KT, Schmidt WA, Pommier RF, Vetto JT. Comparing the cost-effectiveness of the Triple Test Score to traditional methods for evacuating palpable breast masses. Med Care 2003; 41: 962-71.

3. Postgraduate Medical Journal. Palpable breast mass in a lactating woman. BMJ 2001; 77(909): 482-3.

4. Pruthi S. Detection and evaluation of a palpable breast mass. May Clin Proc 2001; 76: 641-8.

5. Schiavon R, et al. Nódulos mamarios en la adolescencia. Act Pediatr Méx 2001; 22(5): 380-8.

6. Hindle W. Breast mass evaluation. Clin Obstet Gynecol 2002; 45(3): 750-57.

7. Guray M, Sahin AA. Benign breast diseases: Classification, diagnosis, and management. The Oncologist 2006; 11: 435- 49. Disponible en: www.TheOncologist.com [Consulta: 12 de junio 2008].

8. Tercera revisión del Consenso nacional sobre diagnóstico y tratamiento del cáncer mamario. Colima, Col. 25 de enero 2008. Gac Mex Oncol 2008; 7(6).

9. Pérez ME, Arteaga GA, Gorbea CV, Aranda FC. Abordaje quirúrgico de nódulos mamarios durante el embarazo. Ginecol Obstet Mex 2009; 77(4): 191-8.

10. De Vita, Hellman, Rosenberg. Cancer: principles & practice of oncology. 8th ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2008 (2), p. 1597.

11. Bleicher R. Management of the palpable Breast Mass. Harris Diseases of the Breast. 4a. ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins 2009, p. 32-40.

12. Reinikainen HT, Rissanen TJ, Piippo UK, Paivansalo MJ. Contribution of ultrasonography and fine-needle aspiration cytology to the differential diagnosis of palpable solid breast lesions. Act Radiol 1999; 40(4): 383-9.

13. Chaiwun B, Thorner P. Fine needle aspiration for evaluation of breast masses. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol 2007; 19: 48-55.

14. Ciatto S, Cariaggi P, Bulgaresi P. The value of routine cytologic examination of breast cyst fluids. Act Cytol 1987; 31: 301-4.

15. Hamed H, Coady A, Chaudary MA, Fentiman I. Follow-up of patients with aspirated breast cysts is necessary. Arch Surg 1989; 124: 253-5.

16. Hanley C, Kessaram R. Quality of diagnosis and surgical management of breast lesions in a community hospital: Room for improvement? Can J Surg 2006; 49(3): 185-92.

17. Bomalaski J, Tobano M, Hooper L, Fionco J. Mastography. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol 2001; 13: 15-23.

18. ACR. Practice guideline for the performance of screening and diagnostic mammography. 2008 (Res.24). Disponible en: http://www.acr.org/SecondaryMainMenuCategories/ quality_safety/guidelines/breast/Screening_Diagnostic.aspx

19. Haas, et al. Evaluation and outcomes of women with a breast lump and a normal mammogram results. J Gen Intern Med 2005; 20: 692-6.

20. Harris Diseases of the Breast. 4a. ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2009, p. 32-40.

21. NCCN. Breast cancer screening and diagnosis 2009. Disponible en: http://www.nccn.org/clinical_trials/clinicians.asp