Digital Breast Tomosynthesis With Synthetic Mammography: Are We Missing Calcifications That Matter?

被引:0
作者
Nguyen, Adrien [1 ]
Mirchandani, Anicia [1 ]
Joseph, Sumita [1 ]
Mapkar, Zaiba [1 ]
Singh, Evita [1 ]
机构
[1] Michigan State Univ, Ascens Providence Southfield Hosp, Coll Human Med, Dept Radiol, Southfield, MI 48075 USA
关键词
calcifications; digital breast tomosynthesis; synthetic mammography; full-field digital mammography;
D O I
10.1093/jbi/wbad073
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
Objective: To determine whether there are differences in the biopsy outcomes for suspicious calcifications detected with screening mammography using the digital breast tomosynthesis and synthetic 2D (DBT/SM) technique compared to calcifications detected using the full-field digital (DM) technique.Methods: This retrospective study was IRB approved. The records for all stereotactic biopsies performed for suspicious calcifications detected on screening mammograms using DM in 2011-2014 and DBT/SM in 2017-2020 were reviewed. We collected patient, imaging, and pathology data from the breast imaging database and from retrospective review of a subset of mammograms. The biopsy outcome results were categorized as benign, benign with upgrade potential (BWUP), and malignant based on final pathology. Frequencies and proportions of outcomes were calculated and compared using Mann-Whitney U tests and Wilcoxson signed-rank tests with P-values and 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs).Results: From 2011 to 2014 (DM), 1274 stereotactic biopsies of calcifications yielded 74.2% (945/1274) benign, 11.5% (147/1274) BWUP, and 14.3% (182/1274) malignant outcomes. From 2017 to 2020 (DBT/SM), 1049 stereotactic biopsies yielded 65.2% (684/1049) benign, 15.6% (164/1049) BWUP, and 19.2% (201/1049) malignant outcomes. With DBT/SM, benign biopsy outcomes decreased (9.0%, 95% CI 0.87-11.53, P < 0.05), whereas malignant biopsy outcomes increased (4.9%, 95% CI 0.94-8.36, P < 0.05). There was no significant difference in BWUP biopsy outcomes and total biopsy rates between techniques (P > 0.05).Conclusion: Calcifications detected with screening DBT/SM technique were significantly more likely to be malignant than those found using DM. These results support using the DBT/SM technique without obtaining concurrent DM images.
引用
收藏
页码:666 / 674
页数:9
相关论文
共 16 条
  • [1] Comparison between two-dimensional synthetic mammography reconstructed from digital breast tomosynthesis and full-field digital mammography for the detection of T1 breast cancer
    Choi, Ji Soo
    Han, Boo-Kyung
    Ko, Eun Young
    Ko, Eun Sook
    Hahn, Soo Yeon
    Shin, Jung Hee
    Kim, Min Jung
    [J]. EUROPEAN RADIOLOGY, 2016, 26 (08) : 2538 - 2546
  • [2] Performance of 2D Synthetic Mammography Versus Digital Mammography in the Detection of Microcalcifications at Screening
    Dodelzon, Katerina
    Simon, Katherine
    Dou, Eda
    Levy, Allison D.
    Michaels, Aya Y.
    Askin, Gulce
    Katzen, Janine T.
    [J]. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ROENTGENOLOGY, 2020, 214 (06) : 1436 - 1444
  • [3] DOrsi CJ., 2013, ACR BI-RADS Atlas, Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System
  • [4] Can Digital Breast Tomosynthesis Solve the Challenge of Dense Breast Parenchyma?
    Fuchsjager, Michael H.
    Adelsmayr, Gabriel
    [J]. RADIOLOGY, 2019, 293 (01) : 69 - 71
  • [5] The TOMMY trial: a comparison of TOMosynthesis with digital MammographY in the UK NHS Breast Screening Programme a multicentre retrospective reading study comparing the diagnostic performance of digital breast tomosynthesis and digital mammography with digital mammography alone
    Gilbert, Fiona J.
    Tucker, Lorraine
    Gillan, Maureen G. C.
    Willsher, Paula
    Cooke, Julie
    Duncan, Karen A.
    Michell, Michael J.
    Dobson, Hilary M.
    Lim, Yit Yoong
    Purushothaman, Hema
    Strudley, Celia
    Astley, Susan M.
    Morrish, Oliver
    Young, Kenneth C.
    Duffy, Stephen W.
    [J]. HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT, 2015, 19 (04) : 1 - +
  • [6] Calcifications at Digital Breast To-mosynthesis: Imaging Features and Biopsy Techniques
    Horvat, Joao, V
    Keating, Delia M.
    Rodrigues-Duarte, Halio
    Morris, Elizabeth A.
    Mango, Victoria L.
    [J]. RADIOGRAPHICS, 2019, 39 (02) : 307 - 318
  • [7] Can digital breast tomosynthesis perform better than standard digital mammography work-up in breast cancer assessment clinic?
    Mall, S.
    Noakes, J.
    Kossoff, M.
    Lee, W.
    McKessar, M.
    Goy, A.
    Duncombe, J.
    Roberts, M.
    Giuffre, B.
    Miller, A.
    Bhola, N.
    Kapoor, C.
    Shearman, C.
    DaCosta, G.
    Choi, S.
    Sterba, J.
    Kay, M.
    Bruderlin, K.
    Winarta, N.
    Donohue, K.
    Macdonell-Scott, B.
    Klijnsma, F.
    Suzuki, K.
    Brennan, P.
    Mello-Thoms, C.
    [J]. EUROPEAN RADIOLOGY, 2018, 28 (12) : 5182 - 5194
  • [8] Comparison of synthetic mammography, reconstructed from digital breast tomosynthesis, and digital mammography: evaluation of lesion conspicuity and BI-RADS assessment categories
    Mariscotti, Giovanna
    Durando, Manuela
    Houssami, Nehmat
    Fasciano, Mirella
    Tagliafico, Alberto
    Bosco, Davide
    Casella, Cristina
    Bogetti, Camilla
    Bergamasco, Laura
    Fonio, Paolo
    Gandini, Giovanni
    [J]. BREAST CANCER RESEARCH AND TREATMENT, 2017, 166 (03) : 765 - 773
  • [9] Breast Cancer Screening Using Tomosynthesis and Digital Mammography in Dense and Nondense Breasts
    Rafferty, Elizabeth A.
    Durand, Melissa A.
    Conant, Emily F.
    Copit, Debra Somers
    Friedewald, Sarah M.
    Plecha, Donna M.
    Miller, Dave P.
    [J]. JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 2016, 315 (16): : 1784 - 1786
  • [10] Digital Breast Tomosynthesis: Lessons Learned from Early Clinical Implementation
    Roth, Robyn Gartner
    Maidment, Andrew D. A.
    Weinstein, Susan P.
    Roth, Susan Orel
    Conant, Emily F.
    [J]. RADIOGRAPHICS, 2014, 34 (04) : E89 - E102