Prevalence of breast dense in a population in Bucaramanga, Colombia

Revista Colombiana de Cancerología

View Publication Info
Field Value
Title Prevalence of breast dense in a population in Bucaramanga, Colombia
Prevalencia de tejido mamario denso en una población en la ciudad de Bucaramanga, Colombia
Creator Baquero Serrano , María Alejandra
López Martínez , Luis Andrés
Vera Campos, Silvia Nathalia
Rosales Rueda , Sergio Andrés
Jaramillo Botero, Natalia
Ochoa Vera , Miguel
Subject Mammography
Mass Screening
Tamizaje masivo
Description Introduction: The presence of dense breast tissue in women is a condition that makes it difficult to assess and adequately interpret mammography, possibly masking suspicious lesions of malignancy. Recent studies suggest the performance of complementary studies for the screening and diagnostic approach of these patients.
Objective: To establish the prevalence of women over 50 with dense breasts in Bucaramanga city studied by mammography and evaluate the performance of complementary studies
Materials and methods: A retrospective descriptive study was conducted during the period from January 1, 2014 to August 31, 2015, 10,110 mammograms were reviewed in patients over 50 years of age. Subsequently, a review of the literature in the main databases was made.
Results: 10110 mammograms were performed, 4448 were found to be positive for dense breast.  39.69% was heterogeneously dense breast tissue, and 4.29% extremely dense; The result was 43.9% patients with positive dense breasts
Discussion: Breast density is an independent risk factor for breast cancer, being of medium importance compared to other factors. As the breast density increases, the overlap of the radiopaque breast tissue that can hide and delay the diagnosis of an underlying cancer is generated
Conclusion: Given the high prevalence of dense breast tissue found in our population, current evidence suggests complementing screening with other imaging methods, individualizing each patient.
Introducción: La presencia de tejido mamario denso en las mujeres es una condición que dificulta la valoración y la adecuada interpretación de la mamografía, lo cual puede llegar a enmascarar lesiones sospechosas de malignidad. Estudios recientes sugieren la realización de estudios complementarios para el tamizaje y abordaje diagnóstico de estas pacientes.
Objetivo:  Establecer la prevalencia de mujeres mayores de 50 años con mamas densas en el área de Bucaramanga estudiadas por mamografía y determinar la necesidad de la realización de estudios complementarios
Materiales y métodos: Se realizó un estudio descriptivo retrospectivo durante el periodo comprendido entre 1 enero de 2014 hasta 31 agosto de 2015, se revisaron 10.110 mamografías en pacientes mayores de 50 años. Posteriormente, se hizo una revisión de la literatura en las principales bases de datos.
Resultados: De las 10110 mamografías realizadas, 4448 fueron encontradas como positivas para mama densa.  De estas un 39.69% correspondió con Tejido mamario heterogéneamente denso, y 4.29% extremadamente denso; para un total de 43.9% de los casos estudiados.
Discusión: La densidad mamaria es un factor de riesgo independiente de cáncer de mama, siendo   de mediana importancia frente a otros factores. A medida que incrementa la densidad mamaria se genera la superposición del tejido mamario radio-opaco que puede ocultar y llegar a retardar el diagnostico de un cáncer subyacente
Conclusión: Dada la alta prevalencia de tejido mamario denso encontrado en nuestra población la evidencia actual sugiere complementar el tamizaje con otros métodos de imágenes, individualizando cada paciente.
Publisher Instituto Nacional de Cancerología
Date 2020-07-03
Type info:eu-repo/semantics/article
Format application/pdf
Source Revista Colombiana de Cancerología; Vol. 24 No. 3 (2020); 119-124
Revista Colombiana de Cancerología; Vol. 24 Núm. 3 (2020); 119-124
Revista Colombiana de Cancerología; v. 24 n. 3 (2020); 119-124
Language spa
/*ref*/Winkler NS, Raza S, Mackesy M, Birdwell RL. Breast density: clinical implications and assessment methods. Radiographics. 2015; 35(2): 316-24. 2. Boyd NF, Martin LJ, Yaffe MJ, Minkin S. Mammographic density and breast cancer risk: current understanding and future prospects. Breast Cancer Res. 2011; 13(6):223. 3. Boyd NF, Guo H, Martin LJ, Sun L, Stone J, Fishell E, et al. Mammographic density and the risk and detection of breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2007;356(3):227-36. 4. Nazary S, Mukherjee P. An overview of mammographic density and its association with breast cancer. Breast cancer. 2018;25(3):259-67. 5. Hooley RJ. Breast density legislation and clinical evidence. Radiol Clin North Am. 2017;55(3):513-26. 6. Wolfe JN. Risk for breast cancer development determined by mammographic parenchymal pattern. Cancer. 1976;37(5):2486-92.<2486::AIDCNCR2820370542>3.0.CO;2-8 7. Wolfe JN. Breast patterns as an index of risk for developing breast cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1976;126(6):1130-7. 8. Freer P. Mammographic dreast density: impact on breast cancer risk and implications for screening. Radiographics. 2015; 35(2): 302-15. 9. Bae MS, Moon WK, Chang JM, Koo HR, Kim WH, Cho N, et al. Breast cancer detected with screening US: reasons for nondetection at mammography. Radiology. 2014;270(2):369-77. 10. Yi A, Chang JM, Shin SU, Chu AJ, Cho N, Noh DY, et al. Detection of noncalcified breast cancer in patients with extremely dense breasts using digital breast tomosynthesis compared with fullfield digital mammography. Br J Radiol. 2019;92(1093):20180101. 11. Dehkordy S, Carlos R. Dense breast legislation in the United States: state of the states. J Am Coll Radiol. 2013;10(12):899-902. 12. Horny M, Cohen AB, Duszak R Jr, Christiansen CL, Shwartz M, Burgess JF Jr. Dense breast notification laws: impact on downstream imaging after screening mammography. Med Care Res Rev. 2020;77(2):143-54. 13. McCormack VA, dos Santos Silva I. Breast density and paren¬chymal patterns as markers of breast cancer risk: a meta-analysis. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2006;15(6):1159-69. 14. Melnikow J, Fenton JJ, Whitlock EP, Miglioretti DL, Weyrich MS, Thompson JH, et al. Supplemental screening for breast cancer in women with dense breasts: a systematic review for the U.S. Preventive Service Task Force. Ann Intern Med. 2016;164(4):268-78. 15. Carney PA, Miglioretti DL, Yankaskas BC, Kerlikowske K, Rosenberg R, Rutter CM, et al. Individual and combined effects of age, breast density, and hormone replacement therapy use on the accuracy of screening mammography. Ann Intern Med. 2003;138(3):168-75. 16. Kerlikowske K, Hubbard RA, Miglioretti DL, Geller BM, Yankaskas BC, Lehman CD, et al. Comparative effectiveness of digital versus film-screen mammography in community practice in the United States: a cohort study. Ann Intern Med. 2011;155(8):493-502. 17. Carreira Gómez MC, Estrada Blan MC. Mama densa, ¿qué debemos saber? Implicaciones en el cribado. Radiología. 2016;58(6):421-6. 18. Noroozian M, Hadjiiski L, Rahnama-Moghadam S, Klein KA, Jeffries DO, Pinsky RW, et al. Digital breast tomosynthesis is comparable to mammographic spot views for mass characterization. Radiology. 2012; 262(1):61-8. Destounis S. Role of Digital breast tomosynthesis in screening and diagnostic breast imaging. Semin Ultrasound CT MRI. 2018;39(1):35-44. 20. Jo HM, Lee EH, Ko K, Kang BJ, Cha JH, Yi A, et al. Prevalence of women with dense breasts in Korea: results from a nationwide cross-sectional study. Cancer Res Treat. 2019;51(4):1295-301.
Rights Derechos de autor 2020 Revista Colombiana de Cancerología

Contact Us

The PKP Index is an initiative of the Public Knowledge Project.

For PKP Publishing Services please use the PKP|PS contact form.

For support with PKP software we encourage users to consult our wiki for documentation and search our support forums.

For any other correspondence feel free to contact us using the PKP contact form.

Find Us


Copyright © 2015-2018 Simon Fraser University Library