RESUMO
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to compare the diagnostic efficacy of mammography, Ultrasonography(US) and T-scan in pathologically confirmed breast diseases. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty-eight patients withpathologically confirmed breast diseases who had undergone T-scan and mammography and/or US were retrospectivelyreviewed. Cases were categorized as normal, benign, or malignant, and on the basis of disease entity and masssize, the results were compared with pathologic diagnosis. For the of t scans, the conductance ratio was alsoused. RESULTS: Twenty cases were benign and 18 were malignant. The sensitivity, specificity and positivepredictive value of mammography were 100%, 70%, 74%;respectively. For US, the corresponding figures were 100%,82%, 88%, and for T-scan, 33%, 85%, 67%. Between masses with a diameter of less than 2cm and more than 2cm, thesensitivity, specificity, and positive predictive value of mammography and US demonstrated no significantdifference, except in some cases ; for T-scan however, the respective results were 10%, 80%, 33% when lesion sizewas less than 2cm, and 56%, 90%, 83% when lesions were larger than 2cm. The diagnostic efficacy of T-scan was thusgreater for larger lesions than for smaller ones. With regard to the conductance ratio of T-scan no pathologicallymalignant lesions showed high suspicion of malignancy but 33% showed moderate suspicion. CONCLUSION: Mammographyand US were useful in diagnosing breast malignancy. T-scan was less efficient for the diagnosis of breastmalignancies smaller than 2cm, and of infiltrating ductal carcinoma and ductal carcinoma in situ. They may thus beconsidered a complementary to mammography and ultrasound examination.