Impact of prior mammograms on combined reading of digital mammography and digital breast tomosynthesis

Kim, Won Hwa; Chang, Jung Min; Koo, Hye Ryoung; Seo, Minji; Bae, Min Sun; Lee, Joongyub; Moon, Woo Kyung

doi:10.1177/0284185116647211

Cited by 8 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…1 ). Finally, 20 articles with 44513 patients and 58388 lesions fulfilled the eligibility criteria [ 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 ]. Table 1 presents the characteristics of the included studies.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Of these studies, 50% were conducted in Asian countries [ 18 19 20 23 25 27 29 31 32 33 ], and there were four prospective studies [ 18 19 32 33 ]. Five studies had patients with breast density ≥ 2 or b according to American College of Radiology (ACR) [ 28 29 30 31 34 ], nine studies consecutively sampled participants [ 18 21 22 24 25 26 32 34 35 ], and 13 studies performed a per-lesion analysis [ 18 19 20 21 22 23 25 26 28 29 31 32 33 34 ].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Accuracy of Digital Breast Tomosynthesis for Detecting Breast Cancer in the Diagnostic Setting: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Park

Kim

et al. 2021

Korean J Radiol

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective To compare the accuracy for detecting breast cancer in the diagnostic setting between the use of digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT), defined as DBT alone or combined DBT and digital mammography (DM), and the use of DM alone through a systematic review and meta-analysis. Materials and Methods Ovid-MEDLINE, Ovid-Embase, Cochrane Library and five Korean local databases were searched for articles published until March 25, 2020. We selected studies that reported diagnostic accuracy in women who were recalled after screening or symptomatic. Study quality was assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 tool. A bivariate random effects model was used to estimate pooled sensitivity and specificity. We compared the diagnostic accuracy between DBT and DM alone using meta-regression and subgroup analyses by modality of intervention, country, existence of calcifications, breast density, Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System category threshold, study design, protocol for participant sampling, sample size, reason for diagnostic examination, and number of readers who interpreted the studies. Results Twenty studies (n = 44513) that compared DBT and DM alone were included. The pooled sensitivity and specificity were 0.90 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.86–0.93) and 0.90 (95% CI 0.84–0.94), respectively, for DBT, which were higher than 0.76 (95% CI 0.68–0.83) and 0.83 (95% CI 0.73–0.89), respectively, for DM alone ( p < 0.001). The area under the summary receiver operating characteristics curve was 0.95 (95% CI 0.93–0.97) for DBT and 0.86 (95% CI 0.82–0.88) for DM alone. The higher sensitivity and specificity of DBT than DM alone were consistently noted in most subgroup and meta-regression analyses. Conclusion Use of DBT was more accurate than DM alone for the diagnosis of breast cancer. Women with clinical symptoms or abnormal screening findings could be more effectively evaluated for breast cancer using DBT, which has a superior diagnostic performance compared to DM alone.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Accuracy of Digital Breast Tomosynthesis for Detecting Breast Cancer in the Diagnostic Setting: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Park

Kim

et al. 2021

Korean J Radiol

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Some studies show a significantly higher specificity with the addition of DBT to DM in screening 7,36,37,42,46,48,50,51. Other studies, however, concluded that there was a non-statistically significant increase 16,39,41. It should be noted that the three latter studies have in common a relatively small number of participants (100–200 women).…”

Section: Results: Studies On the Optimal Use Of Digital Breast Tomosymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Similarly, the usage of prior mammograms might have an impact on the screening capabilities of a system. As shown by Kim et al,41 prior mammograms can affect the specificity of the imaging systems. In addition, as discussed above, patient specific background might affect the optimum usage of an imaging system and this has been recently assessed in a few studies 25,35.…”

Section: Considerations For Dbt Implementationmentioning

confidence: 99%

<p>The role of digital breast tomosynthesis in breast cancer screening: a manufacturer- and metrics-specific analysis</p>

Hadjipanteli

Kontos

Constantinidou

2019

CMAR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim: Digital Breast Tomosynthesis (DBT), with or without Digital Mammography (DM) or Synthetic Mammography (SM), has been introduced or is under consideration for its introduction in breast cancer screening in several countries, as it has been shown that it has advantages over DM. Despite this there is no agreement on how to implement DBT in screening, and in many cases there is a lack of official guidance on the optimum usage of each commercially available system. The aim of this review is to carry out a manufacturerspecific summary of studies on the implementation of DBT in breast cancer screening. Methods: An exhaustive literature review was undertaken to identify clinical observer studies that evaluated at least one of five common metrics: sensitivity, specificity, area under the curve (AUC) of the receiver-operating characteristics (ROC) analysis, recall rate and cancer detection rate. Four common DBT implementation methods were discussed in this review: (1) DBT, (2) DM with DBT, (3) 1-view DBT with or without 1-view DM or 2-view DM and (4) DBT with SM. Results: A summary of 89 studies, selected from a database of 677 studies, on the assessment of the implementation of DBT in breast cancer screening is presented in tables and discussed in a manufacturer-and metric-specific approach. Much more studies were carried out using some DBT systems than others. For one implementation method of DBT by one manufacturer there is a shortage of studies, for another implementation there are conflicting results. In some cases, there is a strong agreement between studies, making the advantages and disadvantages of each system clear. Conclusion: The optimum implementation method of DBT in breast screening, in terms of diagnostic benefit and patient radiation dose, for one manufacturer does not necessarily apply to other manufacturers.

show abstract

“…Recent studies have shown that tomosynthesis is better than mammography in cancer detection and lesion characterization . It can be predicted that these advantages would also contribute to specimen imaging.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The role of tomosynthesis in intraoperative specimen evaluation

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To investigate the contribution of breast tomosynthesis to intraoperative specimen evaluation in subjects with breast cancer. Approval was obtained from the hospital ethics committee. Specimen mammography, tomosynthesis, and, if available, ultrasonography images were retrospectively assessed for 208 women who had undergone conservative surgery at our hospital between January 2013 and April 2016 after being diagnosed with breast cancer. The success of mammography, tomosynthesis, and ultrasonography in lesion detection and characterization was evaluated. Of 208 lesions, 142 (68.3%) and 198 (95.2%) were detected by mammography and tomosynthesis, respectively. All lesions were detected in 150 subjects undergoing ultrasonography (124 dense breasts, 26 fatty breasts). In 84 women who had fatty breasts, all lesions were detected both by mammography and by tomosynthesis. In 124 women with dense breasts, lesions were detected by mammography in 59 (48%) and in 114 (92%) by tomosynthesis. The success of tomosynthesis in lesion detection was found to be markedly higher than mammography (P = .00). In conclusion, tomosynthesis contributed to mammography in specimen evaluation in a total of 101 subjects. The success of tomosynthesis in lesion detection and characterization during intraoperative specimen evaluation is higher than mammography. In daily practice, ultrasonography is performed for lesions which cannot be evaluated by specimen mammography due to dense parenchymal pattern. Tomosynthesis may reduce the need for and the time and workforce allocated to specimen ultrasonography in an important group of subjects.

show abstract

Impact of prior mammograms on combined reading of digital mammography and digital breast tomosynthesis

Cited by 8 publications

References 19 publications

Accuracy of Digital Breast Tomosynthesis for Detecting Breast Cancer in the Diagnostic Setting: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Accuracy of Digital Breast Tomosynthesis for Detecting Breast Cancer in the Diagnostic Setting: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

<p>The role of digital breast tomosynthesis in breast cancer screening: a manufacturer- and metrics-specific analysis</p>

The role of tomosynthesis in intraoperative specimen evaluation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About