Skip to main content Skip to main navigation menu Skip to site footer

Ketepatan ultrasonografi dan mammografi dalam mendiagnosis wanita dengan kanker payudara di RSUP Sanglah Denpasar


Introduction: The high incidence of breast cancer in women, accompanied by delays in making contact with medical personnel and the absence of good early detection contribute to the very high mortality caused by breast cancer. Early detection using ultrasound and mammographic modalities plays an important role in the early diagnosis of breast cancer which will have an impact on the survival of patients. This study aims to compare the diagnostic values of ultrasonography and mammography compared with histopathological features in patients with breast cancer.

Methods: This study used a diagnostic test design with a retrospective approach that compared sensitivity values, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), likelihood ratio from mammography and ultrasonography to histopathological morphology in patients with breast cancer at Sanglah General Hospital Denpasar .

Results: It can be seen that in the total sample, ultrasonography in the toal condition of the sample has a diagnostic value that is very similar to mammography in establishing a diagnosis of breast cancer. Whereas at the age of> 40 years mammography has a diagnostic test value that is far better than ultrasonography (sensitivity: 85.71; specificity: 83.33; PPV: 92.30; NPV: 76.92; LLR (+): 5, 14; LLR (-): 0.17).

Conclusion: ultrasonography and mammography have almost the same precision in the whole sample, but mammography has a better diagnostic value compared to ultrasonography in people aged> 40 years.


  1. Merry GM, Mendelson EB. Update on screening breast ultrasonography. Radiol Clin N Am. 2014;52:527-537.
  2. O’Connel AM, Irshad A. Breast Ultrasonography. Ultrasound Clin. 2013;8:109-116.
  3. Beyer T, Moonka R. Normal mammography and ultrasonography in the setting of palpable breast cancer. The American Journal of Surgery. 2003;185:416-419.
  4. Niel BL, Freer PE, Weinfurther RJ, Arleo EK, Drukteinis JS. Screening for breast cancer. Radiol Clin N Am. 2017;55:1145-1162.
  5. Feig S. Cost-effectiveness of mammography, MRI, and ultrasound for breast cancer screening. RRadiol Clin N Am. 2010;48:879-891.
  6. Durand MA, Hooley RJ. Implementation of whole breast screening ultrasonography. Radiol Clin N Am. 2015;23:1-13.
  7. Rella R, Belli P, Giuliani M, Bufi E, Carlino G, Rinaldi P, Manfredi R. Automated breast ultrasonography (ABUS) in the screening and diagnostic setting indication and practical use. Academic Radiology. 2016;18:1-14.
  8. Alnaimy NM, Khoumais N. Role of ultrasonography in breast cancer imaging. PET Clin. 2009;4:227-240.
  9. Haghighi F, Naseh G, Mohammadifard M, Abdollahi N. Comparison of mammography and ultrasonography findings with pathology result in patient with breast cancer in Birjand, Iran. Electronic Physician. 2017;9(10):5494-5498.
  10. Boonlikit S. Comparison of mammography in combination with breast ultrasonography versus mammography alone for breast cancer screening in asymptomatic women. Asia Pac J Cancer Prev. 2014;14(12):7731-7736.
  11. Wihandani D, Adiputra P, Supadmanaba I. Low prevalence of Caveolin-1 oncogenic polymorphism G14713A and T29107A among breast cancer patient in Sanglah General Hospital. Bali Medical Journal. 2017;6(3): S109-S112. DOI:10.15562/bmj.v6i3.743

How to Cite

Baruna, C. A. A., & Manuaba, I. B. T. W. (2019). Ketepatan ultrasonografi dan mammografi dalam mendiagnosis wanita dengan kanker payudara di RSUP Sanglah Denpasar. Intisari Sains Medis, 10(3).




Search Panel

Cokorda Agung Abi Baruna
Google Scholar
ISM Journal

I. B Tjakra Wibawa Manuaba
Google Scholar
ISM Journal