Value of BI-RADS 3 Audits.
Value of BI-RADS 3 Audits.
复制标题
DOI：
10.26717/bjstr.2022.41.006668
复制
发表时间：
2022-03
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Vedantham S
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Roychowdhury P;Vijayaraghavan GR;Roubil J;Williams IM;Siddiqui E;Vedantham S
BI-RADS 3是恶性肿瘤概率等于或小于2%的既定评估类别。然而，监测对成像标准的遵守可能是具有挑战性的，而且几乎没有用于审计BI-RADS 3任务的既定基准。在这项研究中，我们探索了一些可以作为质量控制和临床实践管理的有用工具的参数。这项回顾研究涵盖了四年的时间(2014年1月至2017年12月)，涵盖了所有40岁以上的女性，她们从筛查中被召回，并在诊断检查后被初步分配为BI-RADS 3(可能是良性的)类别。在分配BI-RADS 3之后的2年的随访期用于定量质量控制指标。在135,765项筛查检查中，13,453项被召回，1,037项BI-RADS 3例符合纳入标准。术后24个月随访率为86.7%。升级率为7.4%(77/1037)[CI：5.9~9.2%]，PPV3为33.8%(26/77)[CI：23.4~45.5%]。癌变率为2.51%(26/1037)[CI：1.64-3.65%]，差异无统计学意义(p=0。243)从2%的恶性概率。每次筛查和每次召回的BI-RADS3分别为0.76%(1,037/135,765)[CI：0.72-0.81%]和7.7%(1,037/13,453)[CI：7.26-8.17%]。对BIRADS 3指标的定期审计有可能为临床实践管理提供更多的见解。来自不同临床环境的数据，加上专家委员会的意见，可以帮助为这些指标建立基准。
BI-RADS 3 is an established assessment category in which the probability of malignancy is equal to or less than 2%. However, monitoring adherence to imaging criteria can be challenging and there are few established benchmarks for auditing BI-RADS 3 assignments. In this study, we explore some parameters that could serve as useful tools for quality control and clinical practice management. This retrospective study covered a 4-year period (Jan 2014-Dec 2017) and included all women over 40 years who were recalled from a screening exam and had an initial assignment of BI-RADS 3 (probably benign) category after diagnostic workup. A follow-up period of 2 years following the assignment of BI-RADS 3 was used for quantitative quality control metrics. Among 135,765 screening exams, 13,453 were recalled and 1,037 BI-RADS 3 cases met inclusion criteria. The follow-up rate at 24 months was 86.7%. The upgrade rate was 7.4% (77/1,037) [CI: 5.9–9.2%] and the PPV3 was 33.8% (26/77) [CI: 23.4–45.5%]. The cancer yield was 2.51% (26/1,037) [CI: 1.64–3.65%] and did not differ (p=0. 243) from the 2% probability of malignancy. The initial BI-RADS3 per screening exam and per recall from screening were 0.76% (1,037/135,765) [CI: 0.72–0.81%] and 7.7% (1,037/13,453) [CI: 7.26–8.17%], respectively. Regular audit of BIRADS 3 metrics has the potential to provide additional insights for clinical practice management. Data from varied clinical settings with input from an expert committee could help establish benchmarks for these metrics.