Factors affecting the precision of lesion sizing with contrast-enhanced spectral mammography

Travieso-Aja, María del Mar; Naranjo-Santana, P.; Fernandez-Ruiz, C; Severino-Rondón, W.; Maldonado-Saluzzi, D.; Rodríguez, Mario; Vega-Benítez, Víctor; Luzardo, Octavio P.

doi:10.1016/j.crad.2017.10.017

Cited by 24 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 40 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Overestimation of tumour size can be explained by the differences in vascularization of the tumour and the surrounding precancerous tissue. 19 Underestimation of OP max in the present study using CEDM and CEMRI would be not significant for the patients' T staging because it only measured the extent of the invasive component; thus, it would not be useful to determine the prognosis. Previous studies reported the concordance rate of 47.1-76.5% 20,22 and 53.0-68.3% 4,13 of CEDM and CEMRI, respectively; with tumour size including the in situ component.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 81%

“…19 Lobbes et al reported that CEMRI overestimated the size of tumours when compared to CEDM (2.12 vs 0.03 mm). 21 However, other studies reported that both CEDM and CEMRI tend to lead to a slight overestimation of tumour size, 19,20,22-26 similar to the results of the present study. Overestimation of tumour size can be explained by the differences in vascularization of the tumour and the surrounding precancerous tissue.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…19.8 ± 10. tumour, and the anthropological character of patients. 19,20 Scattered radiation may also be an influencing factor in the inaccurate results of CEDM. 19 Lobbes et al reported that CEMRI overestimated the size of tumours when compared to CEDM (2.12 vs 0.03 mm).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…19,20 Scattered radiation may also be an influencing factor in the inaccurate results of CEDM. 19 Lobbes et al reported that CEMRI overestimated the size of tumours when compared to CEDM (2.12 vs 0.03 mm). 21 However, other studies reported that both CEDM and CEMRI tend to lead to a slight overestimation of tumour size, 19,20,22-26 similar to the results of the present study.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Contrast enhanced digital mammography versus magnetic resonance imaging for accurate measurement of the size of breast cancer

Youn

Choi

et al. 2019

BJR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To compare the accuracy of contrast-enhanced digital mammography (CEDM) and MRI, including maximal intensity projection (MIP) images, for measuring the tumour size of breast cancer. Methods: We included 52 females (mean age, 50.9 years) with surgery due to breast cancer, and measured maximum diameter of main mass on mediolateral oblique (MLO) and craniocaudal (CC) views of mammography and CEDM; sagittal, axial MIP images, and early dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI (CEMRI) before surgery. Bland-Altman plot, intraclass correlation coefficient, and univariate linear regression analysis were used to evaluate the maximum size between imaging and pathology including only invasive component (OP invasive) or with carcinoma in situ (OP max). results: Mean OP invasive was 15.5 mm, and overestimation rate was similar or higher than underestimation rate on all images except CC view of mammography and axial MIP image of CEDM. Mean OP max was 21.7 mm, and underestimation rate was higher than the overestimation rate. All parameters of CEDM and CEMRI showed good agreement (k > 0.75) with OP invasive , with the most favourable result being the CC view of CEDM and axial MIP image of CEMRI. Conclusion: All views of CEDM and MRI provided accurate measurements of tumour size. Axial plane CEDM and MRI would be the first choice for image review and treatment planning, with the highest accuracy obtained by using CC view of CEDM. advances in knowledge: Previous studies have not compared the measurement of the tumour size using detailed sequences; in our study, we discovered that CEDM can be an alternative modality to CEMRI.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 81%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Contrast enhanced digital mammography versus magnetic resonance imaging for accurate measurement of the size of breast cancer

Youn

Choi

et al. 2019

BJR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The contrast medium allows highlighting the neoangiogenesis, typical expression of tumor proliferation. Moreover, the possibility of identifying microcalcifications, a typical capacity of traditional mammography, is preserved unchanged by the low energy acquisitions of the CEDM examination (as already validated by several studies in the literature).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%