ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: To develop a diagnostic tool, the Breast Edema Questionnaire (BrEQ) and to determine its clinimetric properties. METHODS: The BrEQ was developed based on information from literature, experts and breast edema patients. Content validity, construct validity, test-retest reliability, internal consistency and cut-off point were investigated in a group of breast cancer patients. Construct validity made up two parts; convergent and known-groups validity. Convergent validity was tested by correlating the BrEQ with skin thickness measured with ultrasound (US). RESULTS: In part 1 of the BrEQ, symptoms of breast edema were scored from 0 to 10: pain, heaviness, swelling, tensed skin, redness, pitting sign, enlarged skin pores and hardness. Taking into account the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health, several activity limitations and participation restrictions were scored from 0 to 10 in part 2. Clinimetric properties of part 1 were examined in 55 patients. US showed that 35 women had breast edema. Content validity was good. Regarding convergent validity, all breast symptoms correlated moderately with skin thickness. The total symptom score had a strong correlation with skin thickness. Concerning known-groups validity, patients with breast edema had a higher total symptom score. Test-retest reliability ranged between moderate and strong. The internal consistency was good for all items and the total symptom score. We identified that a score cut-off point of ≥ 8.5 discriminates between patients with breast edema and those without. CONCLUSION: Part 1 of the BrEQ-Dutch version is a valid and reliable tool for assessing clinical indicators of breast edema.
Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms/pathology , Disability Evaluation , Edema/diagnosis , Adult , Disabled Persons , Edema/pathology , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Quality of Life/psychology , Reproducibility of Results , Surveys and QuestionnairesSubject(s)
Breast Neoplasms/diagnosis , Breast Neoplasms/epidemiology , Breast/pathology , Magnetic Resonance Imaging/statistics & numerical data , Mammography/statistics & numerical data , Belgium/epidemiology , Comorbidity , Female , Fibrosis , Humans , Incidence , Reproducibility of Results , Risk Assessment , Sensitivity and SpecificitySubject(s)
Abdominal Neoplasms/pathology , Bone Neoplasms/pathology , Breast Neoplasms/pathology , Incidental Findings , Magnetic Resonance Imaging/statistics & numerical data , Thoracic Neoplasms/pathology , Abdominal Neoplasms/epidemiology , Belgium/epidemiology , Bone Neoplasms/epidemiology , Breast Neoplasms/epidemiology , Comorbidity , Female , Humans , Incidence , Reproducibility of Results , Risk Factors , Sensitivity and Specificity , Thoracic Neoplasms/epidemiologyABSTRACT
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The role of MRI in breast pathology is still controversial. The technique has a high sensitivity for detection of breast carcinoma, but specificity is low. Therefore, it is only useful for right indications. RECENT FINDINGS: Studies are still performed to define the role of MRI. For diagnosis of a breast lesion, image-guided percutaneous core biopsy is the method of choice, and MRI is not indicated. It has a place in the detection of carcinoma in patients with nipple discharge. MRI has a role in the search of an occult primary breast carcinoma in patients with metastasis and primary unknown cancer. MRI is the best technique for locoregional staging of breast carcinoma. Its role in detection of recurrence is controversial, as image-guided biopsy has to be done if a suspicious lesion is seen. In dense breasts or difficult scar formation, MRI is able to detect recurrence. MRI is sensitive in detection of implant rupture in symptomatic augmented patients. SUMMARY: MRI has a role in well defined indications, but its role is still controversial even in some of these indications. MRI is not indicated in diagnosis in which image-guided percutaneous biopsy is the method of choice. Further studies must be performed.
