Staging of breast cancer and the advanced applications of digital mammogram: what the physician needs to know?

Helal, M. A.; Mansour, Sahar; Zaglol, Mai; Salaleldin, Lamia Adel; Nada, Omniya M; Haggag, Marwa A.

doi:10.1259/bjr.20160717

Cited by 10 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Of the 69 studies including a specification of the contrast injection modality, 59 (85%) utilised an automated power injector (10584/11725 patients, 90%) while manual contrast injection was carried out in the remaining 10 (15%) [7, 9, 17, 25, 28, 51, 57, 73, 95, 99] for a total of 1141/11725 patients (10%).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Technique, protocols and adverse reactions for contrast-enhanced spectral mammography (CESM): a systematic review

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We reviewed technical parameters, acquisition protocols and adverse reactions (ARs) for contrast-enhanced spectral mammography (CESM). A systematic search in databases, including MEDLINE/EMBASE, was performed to extract publication year, country of origin, study design; patients; mammography unit/vendor, radiation dose, low-/high-energy tube voltage; contrast molecule, concentration and dose; injection modality, ARs and acquisition delay; order of views; examination time. Of 120 retrieved articles, 84 were included from 22 countries (September 2003–January 2019), totalling 14012 patients. Design was prospective in 44/84 studies (52%); in 70/84 articles (83%), a General Electric unit with factory-set kVp was used. Per-view average glandular dose, reported in 12/84 studies (14%), ranged 0.43–2.65 mGy. Contrast type/concentration was reported in 79/84 studies (94%), with Iohexol 350 mgI/mL mostly used (25/79, 32%), dose and flow rate in 72/84 (86%), with 1.5 mL/kg dose at 3 mL/s in 62/72 studies (86%). Injection was described in 69/84 articles (82%), automated in 59/69 (85%), manual in 10/69 (15%) and flush in 35/84 (42%), with 10–30 mL dose in 19/35 (54%). An examination time < 10 min was reported in 65/84 studies (77%), 120 s acquisition delay in 65/84 (77%) and order of views in 42/84 (50%) studies, beginning with the craniocaudal view of the non-suspected breast in 7/42 (17%). Thirty ARs were reported by 14/84 (17%) studies (26 mild, 3 moderate, 1 severe non-fatal) with a pooled rate of 0.82% (fixed-effect model). Only half of CESM studies were prospective; factory-set kVp, contrast 1.5 mL/kg at 3 mL/s and 120 s acquisition delay were mostly used; only 1 severe AR was reported. CESM protocol standardisation is advisable.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Technique, protocols and adverse reactions for contrast-enhanced spectral mammography (CESM): a systematic review

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…8 Also, management options divert in concern of the tumor multiplicity which is a very important item in the choice of the appropriate type of surgery. 9 The microenvironment of the tissues changes dramatically during tumor formation, this take place in the form the increased number of fibroblast and myofibroblasts, the infiltration of the lymphocytes, angiogenesis, and remodeling of the extracellular matrix that is adjacent to the cancer cells. 10 Intraductal tumor extension is an important concern in patients whom are candidates for conservative breast surgeries.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The impact of contrast-enhanced spectral mammogram (CESM) and three-dimensional breast ultrasound (3DUS) on the characterization of the disease extend in cancer patients

Helal

Mansour

Salaleldin

et al. 2018

BJR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

CESM is a recommended investigation in breast cancer to increase the accuracy of size measurement and the detection of multiple tumors. The addition of 3D ultrasound can enhance the detection of intraductal extension. Advances in knowledge: Choice of conservative breast surgery vs mastectomy is still a debate. We used an advanced, contrast-based, application of the mammogram: CESM and a non-invasive 3D breast ultrasound in the assessment of the local extension of the breast cancer regarding size, perifocal stromal infiltration and multiplicity to guide the selection of proper management in proved cases of breast cancer.

show abstract

“…3c, d). However, in a study performed by Helal et al [55] that compared digital mammography, 3D digital breast tomosynthesis and CEM, the latter displayed the highest percentage regarding the underestimation of tumor sizes (10.2%) among these modalities. The underestimated lesions in their study were either spiculated masses or masses showing intra-ductal extension.…”

Section: *Cancer Staging Before Surgerymentioning

confidence: 94%

Contrast-enhanced mammography in comparison with dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI: which modality is appropriate for whom?

Kamal

Mansour

Farouk

et al. 2021

Egypt J Radiol Nucl Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI (DCE-MRI) is a revolution regarding screening and diagnosis of breast cancer. Yet, sometimes it is not the appropriate choice of imaging since the examination needs to be scheduled and may take place in another department. Contrast-enhanced mammography (CEM) is contrast-based digital mammogram, and consequently, it has emerged as a potential and promising replacer to DCE-MRI. Main body of the abstract There is a frequently asked question during the multidisciplinary breast cancer tumor boards is: which modality is more appropriate to be used in each clinical scenario? This article provided a detailed understanding of these two modalities in order to achieve a successful implementation of them into the clinical practice. Which modality to start with, in the context of the detection (screening) followed by characterization or diagnosis of the identified lesions? What is the appropriate application of both modalities in local staging and follow-up? All of these issues would be discussed in this article. Short conclusion MRI is a safe tool for breast imaging and has a superior diagnostic performance compared to CEM. However, CEM is getting close: this lies in its accessibility, short-time procedure, requirement of less training and feasibility to standardize.

show abstract

Staging of breast cancer and the advanced applications of digital mammogram: what the physician needs to know?

Cited by 10 publications

References 21 publications

Technique, protocols and adverse reactions for contrast-enhanced spectral mammography (CESM): a systematic review

Technique, protocols and adverse reactions for contrast-enhanced spectral mammography (CESM): a systematic review

The impact of contrast-enhanced spectral mammogram (CESM) and three-dimensional breast ultrasound (3DUS) on the characterization of the disease extend in cancer patients

Contrast-enhanced mammography in comparison with dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI: which modality is appropriate for whom?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About