OBJECTIVE: To compare the capacity of mammography, sonoelastography, B-mode ultrasonography and histological analysis to differentiate benign from malignant breast lesions. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 12 histopathologically confirmed breast lesions were documented. The lesions were assessed by means of mammography, B-mode ultrasonography and sonoelastography, and histopathological analysis was utilized as a gold standard. Sensitivity and specificity were calculated. A receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was constructed to evaluate the diagnostic performance of the mentioned techniques. RESULTS: Sensitivity and specificity in the differentiation between benign and malignant lesions were respectively 100% and 50% for mammography, 100% and 71% for B-mode ultrasonography, and 67% and 83% for sonoelastography. The area under the ROC curve was calculated for the three imaging modalities and corresponded to 0.792 for mammography, 0.847 for B-mode ultrasonography, and 0.806 for sonoelastography. CONCLUSION: Sonoelastography demonstrated higher specificity and lower sensitivity as compared with mammography and B-mode ultrasonography. On the other hand, B-mode ultrasonography had the largest area under the ROC curve. Sonoelastography has demonstrated to be a promising technique to detect and evaluate breast lesions, and could potentially reduce the number of unnecessary biopsies.

Keywords: Breast B-mode ultrasonography; Breast lesions; Mammography; Sensitivity; Specificity; Sonoelastography.

OBJECTIVE: To measure the scattered radiation dose at different positions simulating hip surgery. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We simulated fluoroscopy-assisted hip surgery in order to study the distribution of scattered radiation in the operating room. To simulate the patient, we used a anthropomorphic whole-body phantom, and we used an X-ray-specific detector to quantify the radiation. Radiographs were obtained with a mobile C-arm X-ray system in continuous scan mode, with the tube at 0° (configuration 1) or 90° (configuration 2). The operating parameters employed (voltage, current, and exposure time) were determined by a statistical analysis based on the observation of orthopedic surgical procedures involving the hip. RESULTS: For all measurements, higher exposures were observed in configuration 2. In the measurements obtained as a function of height, the maximum dose rates observed were 1.167 (± 0.023) µSv/s and 2.278 (± 0.023) µSv/s in configurations 1 and 2, respectively, corresponding to the chest level of health care professionals within the operating room. Proximal to the patient, the maximum values were recorded in the position occupied by the surgeon. CONCLUSION: We can conclude that, in the scenario under study, health care professionals workers are exposed to low levels of radiation, and that those levels can be reduced through the use of personal protective equipment.

Keywords: Radiation, ionizing; Operating rooms; Scattering, radiation; Radiation protection; Radiology, interventional.