Breast imaging reports for malignant lesions: are we maintaining recommended BI-RADS lexicon standards?

reast imaging reports for malignant lesions: are we maintaining recommended BI-RADS lexicon standards? Original Research (896) Total Article Views Authors: Masroor I, Azeemuddin M, Sakhawat S, Beg M, Sohail S, Ahmed R, Ul-Haq I, Mehboob J Published Date November 2012 Volume 2012:4 Pages 379 - 382 DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/CMAR.S36879 Received: 09 August 2012 Accepted: 27 September 2012 Published: 07 November 2012 Imrana Masroor,1 Muhammad Azeemuddin,1 Saima Sakhawat,1 Madiha Beg,1 Saba Sohail,2 Rashid Ahmed,3 Irfan-Ul-Haq,4 Javed Mehboob5 1Radiology Department, Aga Khan University Hospital, 2Radiology Department, Civil Hospital, 3Advanced Radiology Clinic, 4Radiology Department, Pakistan Naval Station Shifa Hospital, 5Karachi Institute of Radiotherapy and Nuclear Medicine, Karachi, Pakistan Background: The purpose of this study was to evaluate mammography reports for diagnosed breast cancer cases in major government and private centers in Karachi, Pakistan, with respect to concordance with the Breast Imaging Reports And Data System (BI-RADS ) lexicon. Methods: A prospective, descriptive, multicenter study was conducted in the radiology sections of the Aga Khan University Hospital, Pakistan Naval Station Shifa Hospital, Advanced Radiology Clinic, Karachi Institute of Radiotherapy and Nuclear Medicine, and Civil Hospital Karachi between May and October 2010 after approval from the ethical review committee of Aga Khan University. Mammograms reported as BI-RADS category 4 and 5 were included in the study. Mammograms reported as BI-RADS category 0, 1, 2 and 3 were excluded. Fifty reports were collected from each center. Data were collected about the clinical indication, breast density, location and description of the lesion, calcification, and comments on axillary lymph nodes. This description was compared with the BI-RADS lexicon. Results: The mean age of the patients was 50 ± 12 years. The clinical indication, breast parenchymal density, lesion location, and presence of calcification were better described by the private centers, while description of lymph node status was better stated by the government centers. This difference was statistically significant, except for lesion description. The description of masses by the two reporting groups was comparable. Conclusion: Mammographic reporting of malignant breast lesions in the private sector is more in line with the BI-RADS lexicon, as compared with government sector hospitals in Karachi, Pakistan. Lymph node documentation was better in government sector reports.