Diagnostic Performance of Contrast-enhanced Mammography: Comparison With MRI and Mammography.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the diagnostic performance of contrast-enhanced mammography (CEM) with MRI and mammography (MG) based on histopathological results. METHODS: In this IRB-approved study, written informed consent was obtained from all patients. Images from 40 patients (62 lesions) with suspicious findings on US between March 2018 and August 2018 were evaluated. Sensitivity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), and accuracy of CEM, MRI, and MG were evaluated and compared within a 95% confidence interval. Maximum dimensions of lesions were measured and correlations of results were evaluated with Spearman's Rho test. RESULTS: In the histopathological analysis, 66% (41/62) of lesions were malignant and 34% (21/62) of lesions were benign. Contrast-enhanced mammography, MRI, and MG had sensitivities of 100% (41/41), 100% (41/41), and 80% (33/41), respectively. The sensitivity of CEM and MRI was significantly better than that of MG (P = 0.03). The NPVs of CEM (100%, 7/7) and MRI (100%, 14/14) were statistically higher than the NPV of MG (60%, 12/20) (P = 0.03). The false-positive rates for CEM, MRI, and MG were 33% (7/21), 66% (14/21), and 42% (9/21), respectively. Contrast-enhanced mammography had a significantly lower false-positive rate than MRI (P < 0.001). Mammography had the highest false-negative rate, missing 19% (8/41) of malignant lesions. CONCLUSION: Contrast-enhanced mammography has similar performance characteristics to MRI and improved performance characteristics relative to MG. In particular, CEM and MRI have similar sensitivity and NPVs and both are superior in each of these metrics to MG.

Ventilator-associated pneumonia in critically ill patients with intensive antibiotic usage.

OBJECTIVE: Ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) is an infection with high mortality and morbidity that prolongs the length of stay in the intensive care unit (ICU) and hospitalisation. VAP is one of the most common infections in critically ill patients. This study aimed to prospectively determine the VAP rate and associated factors in critically ill patients with intensive antibiotic usage during a one-year period. METHODS: In total, 125 out of 360 patients admitted to the intensive care unit during the one-year study period (September 2010-2011) were included for follow-up for VAP diagnosis. Demographic data, APACHE II scores, diagnoses on admission, clinical pulmonary infection scores (CPIS), CRP, procalcitonin, risk factors for infection, time to VAP diagnosis, and bacteriological culture results were recorded. All data were assessed in terms of ICU, hospital and 28-day mortality. RESULTS: In total, 56 (45%) out of 125 patients were diagnosed with VAP. In addition, 91% of patients diagnosed with VAP were administered antibiotics before diagnosis. In the VAP patients, the mortality rates were 48, 68 and 71% for 28-day, ICU and hospital mortality, respectively. CONCLUSION: The coexistence of clinical and microbiological parameters should not be sought when diagnosing VAP in patients who use antibiotics intensively. VAP can be diagnosed when CPIS≤6 in cases with sufficient microbiological evidence. This strategy may decrease mortality by preventing a delay in therapy.