Is full-field digital mammography more accurate than screen-film mammography in overall population screening? A systematic review and meta-analysis

被引：29

作者：

Souza, Fabiano H. ^{[1
,2
,3
]}

Wendland, Eliana M. ^{[4
]}

Rosa, Maria I. ^{[5
,6
]}

Polanczyk, Carisi A. ^{[1
,2
]}

机构：

[1] Univ Fed Rio Grande do Sul, Sch Med, Grad Studies Program Epidemiol, Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil

[2] Inst Hlth Technol Assessment IATS, Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil

[3] Univ Sao Paulo, Sch Med, Radiol & Oncol Dept, State Sao Paulo Canc Inst, BR-05508 Sao Paulo, Brazil

[4] Fed Univ Hlth Sci Porto Alegre, Dept Publ Hlth, Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil

[5] Univ Extremo Sul Catarinense, Lab Epidemiol, Postgrad Program Hlth Sci, Criciuma, SC, Brazil

[6] Univ Extremo Sul Catarinense, Natl Inst Translat Med, Hlth Sci Unit, Criciuma, SC, Brazil

来源：

BREAST | 2013年 / 22卷 / 03期

关键词：

Meta-analysis; Diagnostic accuracy; Screen film mammography (SFM); Full-field digital mammography (FFDM); Population screening; COMPUTER-AIDED DETECTION; DIAGNOSTIC-TEST ACCURACY; RELATIVE ODDS RATIO; BREAST-CANCER; RANDOMIZED-TRIAL; FOLLOW-UP; PROGRAM; PERFORMANCE; DENSITY; TESTS;

D O I：

10.1016/j.breast.2013.02.013

中图分类号：

R73 [肿瘤学];

学科分类号：

100214 ;

摘要：

Objective: To compare the accuracy of screen-film mammography (SFM) and full-field digital mammography (FFDM) for population-based breast cancer screening. Study design and setting: A quantitative systematic review was performed including randomized controlled trials and cohort studies. Results: Ten studies (comprising 667,649 women, 82,573 of whom underwent SFM and FFDM) were included. The area under the summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curve was 0.92 (SE +/- 0.06) for SFM and 0.91 (SE +/- 0.11) for FFDM. The results in the random-effects model were 0.95 (95% CI, 0.72-1.24) and 0.52 (95% CI, 0.28-0.95) for SFM versus FFDM in all age and younger groups, respectively. Conclusion: FFDM is more accurate than SFM only in women less than 50 years old. (C) 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

引用

页码：217 / 224

页数：8

共 41 条

[1]

[Anonymous], 2002, IARC Working Group on the Evaluation of Carcinogenic Risks to Humans

[2]

[Anonymous], MAMM QUAL STAND ACT

[3] Bivariate random effects meta-analysis of ROC curves [J].

Arends, L. R. ;

Hamza, T. H. ;

van Houwelingen, J. C. ;

Heijenbrok-Kal, M. H. ;

Hunink, M. G. M. ;

Stijnen, T. .

MEDICAL DECISION MAKING, 2008, 28 (05) :621-638

[4] Consequences of digital mammography in population-based breast cancer screening: initial changes and long-term impact on referral rates [J].

Bluekens, Adriana M. J. ;

Karssemeijer, Nico ;

Beijerinck, David ;

Deurenberg, Jan J. M. ;

van Engen, Ruben E. ;

Broeders, Mireille J. M. ;

den Heeten, Gerard J. .

EUROPEAN RADIOLOGY, 2010, 20 (09) :2067-2073

[5]

Carney PA, 2003, ANN INTERN MED, V138, P168, DOI 10.7326/0003-4819-138-3-200302040-00008

[6] The performance of tests of publication bias and other sample size effects in systematic reviews of diagnostic test accuracy was assessed [J].

Deeks, JJ ;

Macaskill, P ;

Irwig, L .

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2005, 58 (09) :882-893

[7] Full-field digital versus screen-film mammography: Comparative accuracy in concurrent screening cohorts [J].

Del Turco, Marco Rosselli ;

Mantellini, Paola ;

Ciatto, Stefano ;

Bonardi, Rita ;

Martinelli, Francesca ;

Lazzari, Barbara ;

Houssami, Nehmat .

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ROENTGENOLOGY, 2007, 189 (04) :860-866

[8] Conducting systematic reviews of diagnostic studies: Didactic guidelines [J].

Devillé W.L. ;

Buntinx F. ;

Bouter L.M. ;

Montori V.M. ;

De Vet H.C.W. ;

Van Der Windt D.A.W.M. ;

Bezemer P.D. .

BMC Medical Research Methodology, 2 (1) :1-13

[9] Influence of computer-aided detection on performance of screening mammography [J].

Fenton, Joshua J. ;

Taplin, Stephen H. ;

Carney, Patricia A. ;

Abraham, Linn ;

Sickles, Edward A. ;

D'Orsi, Carl ;

Berns, Eric A. ;

Cutter, Gary ;

Hendrick, R. Edward ;

Barlow, William E. ;

Elmore, Joann G. .

NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, 2007, 356 (14) :1399-1409

[10]

Gotzsche Peter C, 2004, J Am Coll Radiol, V1, P8, DOI 10.1016/S1546-1440(03)00017-6

← 1 2 3 4 5 →