Sonographic Features of Juvenile Fibroadenoma in Children-a Retrospective Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: Studies specifically examining the sonographic features of juvenile fibroadenoma in the pediatric population have not been documented. We aimed to analyze sonograms of juvenile fibroadenoma in children. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Patients aged ≤ 18 years who underwent breast ultrasound examinations at our department and had pathologically proven juvenile fibroadenoma from September 2002 to January 2022 were included in this study. Demographic data, clinical findings, and sonograms were retrospectively analyzed. Patients were further divided into the puberty and post-puberty subgroups, and their results were compared. RESULTS: A total of 24 girls aged 10-18 years with 27 masses diagnosed as juvenile fibroadenomas were identified. The diameter of the masses averaged 5.8 ± 3.3 cm, with a range of 1.5-13.6 cm. Twenty-one (87.5%) patients had a single mass and 3 had double lesions. Over 80% of the lesions were oval-shaped and encapsulated with circumscribed margins and parallel orientation. All masses showed internal hypoechogenicity, either uniform or heterogeneous. For masses that had a diameter > 5 cm, screening with high-frequency transducers revealed no posterior acoustic features or posterior shadowing. However, these features changed to posterior acoustic enhancement when the masses were re-evaluated using low-frequency transducers. Ultrasonic color Doppler showed blood flow in 24 (88.9%) masses. There were no significant differences in the incidence and sonographic features between the two subgroups. CONCLUSION: Most juvenile fibroadenomas in children are oval, circumscribed, encapsulated masses with detectable blood flow. All juvenile fibroadenomas presented in this study exhibit internal hypoechogenicity with no posterior acoustic shadowing detected in any cases. Our findings suggest that screening with low-frequency transducers should be performed for a mass that has a diameter > 5 cm.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".