US and Digital Breast Tomosynthesis in Women with Focal Breast Complaints: Results of the Breast US Trial (BUST)

被引:6
|
作者
Appelman, Linda [1 ]
Siebers, Carmen C. N. [1 ]
Appelman, Peter T. M. [4 ]
Go, H. L. Shirley [5 ]
Broeders, Mireille J. M. [2 ,6 ]
van Oirsouw, Marja C. J. [7 ]
Bult, Peter [3 ]
Mann, Ritse M. [1 ,8 ]
机构
[1] Radboud Univ Nijmegen, Dept Radiol & Nucl Med, Med Ctr, Geert Grootepl 10, NL-6525 GA Nijmegen, Netherlands
[2] Radboud Univ Nijmegen, Radboud Inst Hlth Sci, Med Ctr, Geert Grootepl 10, NL-6525 GA Nijmegen, Netherlands
[3] Radboud Univ Nijmegen, Dept Pathol, Med Ctr, Geert Grootepl 10, NL-6525 GA Nijmegen, Netherlands
[4] St Antonius Hosp, Dept Radiol, Utrecht, Netherlands
[5] Noordwest Ziekenhuisgroep, Dept Radiol, Alkmaar, Netherlands
[6] Dutch Expert Ctr Screening, Nijmegen, Netherlands
[7] Dutch Breast Canc Soc Borstkankervereniging, Utrecht, Netherlands
[8] Netherlands Canc Inst, Dept Radiol, Amsterdam, Netherlands
关键词
MAMMOGRAPHY; ULTRASOUND; ACCURACY; DIAGNOSIS; CANCER; ULTRASONOGRAPHY; PERFORMANCE; SONOGRAPHY; SYMPTOMS; BENIGN;
D O I
10.1148/radiol.220361
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
Background: Digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) followed by targeted US is commonly performed to evaluate women with localized breast complaints. However, the added value of DBT in addition to targeted US is unknown. Omitting DBT may be cost-effective and improve patient comfort but may miss potential breast cancer.Purpose: To assess whether an imaging protocol consisting of targeted US alone may be feasible for the diagnostic work-up of women with localized symptoms and to assess the supplemental value of DBT in this reversed setting.Materials and Methods: This prospective study enrolled consecutive women aged 30 years or older with focal breast complaints in three hospitals in the Netherlands between September 2017 and June 2019. In all participants, first, targeted US was evaluated, and if needed, biopsy was performed, followed by DBT. The primary outcome was the frequency of breast cancer detected with DBT when US was negative. Secondary outcomes were frequency of cancer detected with DBT elsewhere in the breast and combined overall sensitivity of US plus DBT. The reference standard was 1 year follow-up or histopathologic examination.Results: There were 1961 women (mean age & PLUSMN; SD, 47 years & PLUSMN; 12) enrolled. Based on initial US alone, 1587 participants (81%) had normal or benign findings and 1759 (90%) had a definitive accurate diagnosis. In total, 204 breast cancers were detected during initial work-up. The frequency of malignancy was 10% (192 of 1961 participants) with US (US sensitivity, 98.5% [95% CI: 96, 100]; US specificity, 90.8% [95% CI: 89, 92]). DBT depicted three unobserved malignant lesions at the complaint site and 0.41% (eight of 1961 participants) of incidental malignant findings in participants without symptomatic cancer.Conclusion: Compared with combined US and DBT, US was accurate as a stand-alone breast imaging modality in the assessment of focal breast complaints. The rate of cancer detection of cancers elsewhere in the breast with DBT is comparable to cancer detection rate of screening mammography.
引用
收藏
页数:9
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Comparison of Abbreviated Breast MRI vs Digital Breast Tomosynthesis for Breast Cancer Detection among Women with a History of Breast Cancer
    Kim, Mi Young
    Suh, Young Jin
    An, Yeong Yi
    ACADEMIC RADIOLOGY, 2022, 29 (10) : 1458 - 1465
  • [32] Digital breast tomosynthesis
    Hellerhoff, K.
    RADIOLOGE, 2010, 50 (11): : 991 - 998
  • [33] Breast cancer screening in women with and without implants: retrospective study comparing digital mammography to digital mammography combined with digital breast tomosynthesis
    Cohen, Ethan O.
    Perry, Rachel E.
    Tso, Hilda H.
    Phalak, Kanchan A.
    Lesslie, Michele D.
    Gerlach, Karen E.
    Sun, Jia
    Srinivasan, Ashmitha
    Leung, Jessica W. T.
    EUROPEAN RADIOLOGY, 2021, 31 (12) : 9499 - 9510
  • [34] Digital Breast Tomosynthesis Plus Ultrasound Versus Digital Mammography Plus Ultrasound for Screening Breast Cancer in Women With Dense Breasts
    Ha, Su Min
    Yi, Ann
    Yim, Dahae
    Jang, Myoung-jin
    Kwon, Bo Ra
    Shin, Sung Ui
    Lee, Eun Jae
    Lee, Soo Hyun
    Moon, Woo Kyung
    Chang, Jung Min
    KOREAN JOURNAL OF RADIOLOGY, 2023, 24 (04) : 274 - 283
  • [35] Breast compression parameters among women screened with standard digital mammography and digital breast tomosynthesis in a randomized controlled trial
    Waade, Gunvor Gipling
    Holen, Asne
    Sebuodegard, Sofie
    Aase, Hildegunn
    Pedersen, Kristin
    Hanestad, Berit
    Hofvind, Solveig
    ACTA RADIOLOGICA, 2020, 61 (03) : 321 - 330
  • [36] Comparison of the diagnostic performance of digital breast tomosynthesis and magnetic resonance imaging added to digital mammography in women with known breast cancers
    Kim, Won Hwa
    Chang, Jung Min
    Moon, Hyeong-Gon
    Yi, Ann
    Koo, Hye Ryoung
    Gweon, Hye Mi
    Moon, Woo Kyung
    EUROPEAN RADIOLOGY, 2016, 26 (06) : 1556 - 1564
  • [37] Digital Breast Tomosynthesis with Minimal Breast Compression
    Scaduto, David A.
    Yang, Min
    Ripton-Snyder, Jennifer
    Fisher, Paul R.
    Zhao, Wei
    MEDICAL IMAGING 2015: PHYSICS OF MEDICAL IMAGING, 2015, 9412
  • [38] Breast cancer screening with digital breast tomosynthesis
    Skaane, Per
    BREAST CANCER, 2017, 24 (01) : 32 - 41
  • [39] Assessing Improvement in Detection of Breast Cancer with Three-dimensional Automated Breast US in Women with Dense Breast Tissue: The Somoinsight Study
    Brem, Rachel F.
    Tabar, Laszlo
    Duffy, Stephen W.
    Inciardi, Marc F.
    Guingrich, Jessica A.
    Hashimoto, Beverly E.
    Lander, Marla R.
    Lapidus, Robert L.
    Peterson, Mary Kay
    Rapelyea, Jocelyn A.
    Roux, Susan
    Schilling, Kathy J.
    Shah, Biren A.
    Torrente, Jessica
    Wynn, Ralph T.
    Miller, Dave P.
    RADIOLOGY, 2015, 274 (03) : 663 - 673
  • [40] Digital tomosynthesis: A new future for breast imaging?
    Alakhras, M.
    Bourne, R.
    Rickard, M.
    Ng, K. H.
    Pietrzyk, M.
    Brennan, P. C.
    CLINICAL RADIOLOGY, 2013, 68 (05) : E225 - E236