English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Objective: If a focus of suspicion is classified as being B 3-5 by a punch biopsy as part of a mammography screening, a recommendation for further action to be taken will be given in the preoperative conference of the screening unit. As part of this investigation, these treatment recommendations were compared with the final therapeutic approach taken at a certified breast centre. Furthermore, it was investigated whether and which additional examinations were performed on patients, depending on compliance with the recommended treatment. Material and Method: The data from 272 breast cancer patients from the years 2007, 2008 and 2009 was analysed. The patients took part in the screening programmes of four screening units in the German mammography screening programme, in one federal state. In addition, the data from each patient from one screening unit was analysed in two further federal states. Results: In total, the most recently conducted intervention deviated from the treatment recommendation from the preoperative conference in the screening unit in 77 out of 272 patients (28.3 %). Of these, there were 50 recommendations for open biopsy which ultimately resulted in breast-conserving surgery, which is not to be evaluated as an error, as the bioptic result was supplemented by the open biopsy. Additional examinations were performed in patients with deviating treatment recommendation in 39 cases (50.6 %) and in patients without deviating treatment recommendation in 66 cases (34.0 %). The additional examinations carried out included additional punch biopsies (most frequent) and MRI scans, but also additional ultrasounds or a mammography. Conclusions: Additional examinations lead to a change in treatment in a higher percentage of patients in comparison with the initial screening including assessment. An exact reexamination of the findings obtained in the screening is therefore preoperatively necessary in order to guarantee optimum treatment.

Use of an Additional Diagnostic Work-up Following a Treatment Recommendation from the Preoperative Conference of the Mammography Screening Units