OBJECTIVE: The present study was aimed at evaluating the BI-RADS® classification accuracy in mammography. Additionally, the frequency of different findings was described and the interobserver agreement was evaluated. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Mammographic images of 115 patients were independently and blindly reviewed by two specialists in compliance with BI-RADS recommendations, and later compared with histological data. The BI-RADS accuracy in mammography was evaluated. The interobserver agreement was analyzed with the Cohen's kappa (κ) test, and the differences between groups were evaluated with the chi-squared test. RESULTS: The present study demonstrated that the mammographic accuracy ranged from 75% to 62% in the differentiation between benign and malignant lesions with the utilization of the BI-RADS classification. Statistically significant interobserver agreement was observed in the description of masses margins (κ= 0.66). A low agreement rate was identified in the description of masses borders (shape) (κ= 0.40) and calcifications, both in relation to their distribution (κ= 0.24) and morphology (κ= 0.36). CONCLUSION: The present study demonstrated the BI-RADS accuracy in the differentiation between benign and malignant lesions. The interobserver agreement was poor in the analysis of calcifications morphology and distribution, but a progressive increase in the positive predictive values was observed in the subcategory 4.

Keywords: Breast cancer, Mammography, Histopathology, Accuracy, BI-RADS, Ultrasonography

OBJECTIVE: The main purpose of the present study is to evaluate the accuracy of ultrasonography (BI-RADS) in the diagnosis of breast cancer whereas the additional specific objectives are to describe the frequency of different sonographic findings and evaluating interobserver agreement. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Images of 110 patients who had been referred for biopsy with previous diagnosis of breast nodules were independently reviewed by two specialists according to the BI-RADS classification. Histological findings were utilized as a gold-standard. The accuracy of findings was determined. The chi-squared test for categorical variables was utilized in the analysis of the differences resulting from the groups comparison, and the interobserver agreement was calculated with kappa () statistics. RESULTS: Among 110 breast masses evaluated by ultrasonography, 76 (69%) were benign and 34 (30.9%) were malignant. According to the radiologists, the sensitivity ranged from 70.5% to 82.3%, negative predictive value, from 81.1% to 87.5%, positive predictive value, from 42.1% to 45.1%, specificity from 56.58% to 55.2%, and accuracy from 60.9% to 63.6%. The global interobserver agreement was considered as moderate ( = 0.50). CONCLUSION: The fourth edition of BI-RADS provides radiologists with an accurate clinical decision support system for the diagnosis and management of breast disease.

Keywords: Breast cancer, Ultrasonography, BI-RADS, Anatomopathological, Accuracy

Objective: To validate the proposal for development of a virtual collaborative environment for training of nuclear medicine personnel. Materials and Methods: Organizational assumptions, constraints and functionalities that should be offered to the professionals in this field were raised early in the development of the environment. The prototype was developed in the Moodle environment, including data storage and interaction functionalities. A pilot interaction study was developed with a sample of specialists in nuclear medicine. Users’ opinions collected by means of semi-structured questionnaire were submitted to quantitative and content analysis. Results: The proposal of a collaborative environment was validated by a community of nuclear medicine professionals and considered as an aid in the training in this field. Suggestions for improvements and new functionalities were made. There is a need to establish a program for education of moderators specifically for this environment, considering the different interaction characteristics as the online and conventional teaching methods are compared. Conclusion: The collaborative environment will allow the exchange of experiences and case discussions among professionals from institutions located in different regions all over the country, enhancing the collaboration among them. Thus, the environment can contribute in the early and continued education of nuclear medicine professionals.

Keywords: Collaborative environment; Nuclear medicine; Medical education; Distance education.