Contrast-Enhanced Mammography for Women with Palpable Breast Abnormalities

被引:0
作者
Amir, Tali [1 ]
Pinker, Katja [1 ]
Sevilimedu, Varadan [2 ]
Hughes, Mary [1 ]
Keating, Delia T. [1 ]
Sung, Janice S. [1 ]
Jochelson, Maxine S. [1 ]
机构
[1] Mem Sloan Kettering Canc Ctr, Dept Radiol, 1275 York Ave, New York, NY 10065 USA
[2] Mem Sloan Kettering Canc Ctr, Dept Epidemiol & Biostat, New York, NY 10017 USA
关键词
Mammography; Ultrasonography; Contrast-enhanced mammography; SPECTRAL MAMMOGRAPHY; DIAGNOSTIC PERFORMANCE; ULTRASOUND; ACCURACY; CANCER;
D O I
10.1016/j.acra.2023.10.027
中图分类号
R8 [特种医学]; R445 [影像诊断学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100207 ; 1009 ;
摘要
Rationale and Objectives: To examine the role of contrast -enhanced mammography (CEM) in the work -up of palpable breast abnormalities. Materials and Methods: In this single -center combination prospective -retrospective study, women with palpable breast abnormalities underwent CEM evaluation prospectively, comprising the acquisition of low energy (LE) images and recombined images (RI) which depict enhancement, followed by targeted ultrasound (US). Two independent readers retrospectively reviewed the imaging and assigned BI-RADS assessment based on LE alone, LE plus US, RI with LE plus US (CEM plus US), and RI alone. Pathology results or 1year follow-up imaging served as the reference standard. Results: 237 women with 262 palpable abnormalities were included (mean age, 51 years). Of the 262 palpable abnormalities, 116/262 (44%) had no imaging correlate and 242/262 (92%) were benign. RI alone had better specificity compared to LE plus US (Reader 1, 94% versus 89% (p = 0.009); Reader 2, 93% versus 88% (p = 0.03)), better positive predictive value (Reader 1, 52% versus 42% (p = 0.04); Reader 2, 53% versus 42% (p = 0.04)), and better accuracy (Reader 1, 93% versus 89% (p = 0.05); Reader 2, 93% versus 90% (p = 0.06)). CEM plus US was not significantly different in performance metrics versus LE plus US. Conclusion: RI had better specificity compared to LE in combination with US. There was no difference in performance between CEM plus US and LE plus US, likely reflecting the weight US carries in radiologist decision -making. However, the results indicate that the absence of enhancement on RI in the setting of palpable lesions may help avoid benign biopsies. (c) 2024 The Association of University Radiologists. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:1231 / 1238
页数:8
相关论文
共 19 条
[1]   Detection of Breast Cancer With Addition of Annual Screening Ultrasound or a Single Screening MRI to Mammography in Women With Elevated Breast Cancer Risk [J].
Berg, Wendie A. ;
Zhang, Zheng ;
Lehrer, Daniel ;
Jong, Roberta A. ;
Pisano, Etta D. ;
Barr, Richard G. ;
Boehm-Velez, Marcela ;
Mahoney, Mary C. ;
Evans, W. Phil, III ;
Larsen, Linda H. ;
Morton, Marilyn J. ;
Mendelson, Ellen B. ;
Farria, Dione M. ;
Cormack, Jean B. ;
Marques, Helga S. ;
Adams, Amanda ;
Yeh, Nolin M. ;
Gabrielli, Glenna .
JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 2012, 307 (13) :1394-1404
[2]   Clinical Value of Mammography in the Evaluation of Palpable Breast Lumps in Women 30 Years Old and Older [J].
Brown, Ann L. ;
Phillips, Jordana ;
Slanetz, Priscilla J. ;
Fein-Zachary, Valerie ;
Venkataraman, Shambhavi ;
Dialani, Vandana ;
Mehta, Tejas S. .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ROENTGENOLOGY, 2017, 209 (04) :935-942
[3]   Factors contributing to mammography failure in women aged 40-49 years [J].
Buist, DSM ;
Porter, PL ;
Lehman, C ;
Taplin, SH ;
White, E .
JNCI-JOURNAL OF THE NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE, 2004, 96 (19) :1432-1440
[4]  
Carney PA, 2003, ANN INTERN MED, V138, P168, DOI 10.7326/0003-4819-138-3-200302040-00008
[5]   False-negative rate of combined mammography and ultrasound for women with palpable breast masses [J].
Chan, Carlos H. F. ;
Coopey, Suzanne B. ;
Freer, Phoebe E. ;
Hughes, Kevin S. .
BREAST CANCER RESEARCH AND TREATMENT, 2015, 153 (03) :699-702
[6]   Diagnostic performance of dual-energy contrast-enhanced subtracted mammography in dense breasts compared to mammography alone: interobserver blind-reading analysis [J].
Cheung, Yun-Chung ;
Lin, Yu-Ching ;
Wan, Yung-Liang ;
Yeow, Kee-Min ;
Huang, Pei-Chin ;
Lo, Yung-Feng ;
Tsai, Hsiu-Pei ;
Ueng, Shir-Hwa ;
Chang, Chee-Jen .
EUROPEAN RADIOLOGY, 2014, 24 (10) :2394-2403
[7]   Dual-energy contrast-enhanced digital mammography: initial clinical results of a multireader, multicase study [J].
Dromain, Clarisse ;
Thibault, Fabienne ;
Diekmann, Felix ;
Fallenberg, Eva M. ;
Jong, Roberta A. ;
Koomen, Marcia ;
Hendrick, R. Edward ;
Tardivon, Anne ;
Toledano, Alicia .
BREAST CANCER RESEARCH, 2012, 14 (03)
[8]   Dual-energy contrast-enhanced digital mammography: initial clinical results [J].
Dromain, Clarisse ;
Thibault, Fabienne ;
Muller, Serge ;
Rimareix, Francoise ;
Delaloge, Suzette ;
Tardivon, Anne ;
Balleyguier, Corinne .
EUROPEAN RADIOLOGY, 2011, 21 (03) :565-574
[9]   Low energy mammogram obtained in contrast-enhanced digital mammography (CEDM) is comparable to routine full-field digital mammography (FFDM) [J].
Francescone, Mark A. ;
Jochelson, Maxine S. ;
Dershaw, D. David ;
Sung, Janice S. ;
Hughes, Mary C. ;
Zheng, Junting ;
Moskowitz, Chaya ;
Morris, Elizabeth A. .
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF RADIOLOGY, 2014, 83 (08) :1350-1355
[10]   Imaging Management of Palpable Breast Abnormalities [J].
Lehman, Constance D. ;
Lee, Amie Y. ;
Lee, Christoph I. .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ROENTGENOLOGY, 2014, 203 (05) :1142-1153