One view or two views for wide-angle tomosynthesis with synthetic mammography in the assessment setting?

被引:3
作者
Clauser, Paola [1 ]
Baltzer, Pascal A. T. [1 ]
Kapetas, Panagiotis [1 ]
Woitek, Ramona [1 ]
Weber, Michael [2 ]
Leone, Federica [3 ]
Bernathova, Maria [1 ]
Helbich, Thomas H. [1 ]
机构
[1] Med Univ Vienna, Gen Hosp Vienna, Dept Biomed Imaging & Image Guided Therapy, Waehringer Guertel 18-20, Vienna, Austria
[2] Med Univ Vienna, Div Gen & Pediat Radiol, Dept Biomed Imaging & Image Guided Therapy, Waehringer Guertel 18 20, A-1090 Vienna, Austria
[3] Polo Univ, Osped Luigi Sacco, Via GB Grassi 74, I-20157 Milan, Italy
关键词
Breast cancer; Mammography; Digital breast tomosynthesis; 3D mammography; DIGITAL BREAST TOMOSYNTHESIS; VARIABILITY; PERFORMANCE;
D O I
10.1007/s00330-021-08079-2
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
Objectives To evaluate the diagnostic performance in the assessment setting of three protocols: one-view wide-angle digital breast tomosynthesis (WA-DBT) with synthetic mammography (SM), two-view WA-DBT/SM, and two-view digital mammography (DM). Methods Included in this retrospective study were patients who underwent bilateral two-view DM and WA-DBT. SM were reconstructed from the WA-DBT data. The standard of reference was histology and/or 2 years follow-up. Included were 205 women with 179 lesions (89 malignant, 90 benign). Four blinded readers randomly evaluated images to assess density, lesion type, and level of suspicion according to BI-RADS. Three protocols were evaluated: two-view DM, one-view (mediolateral oblique) WA-DBT/SM, and two-view WA-DBT/SM. Detection rate, sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy were calculated and compared using multivariate analysis. Reading time was assessed. Results The detection rate was higher with two-view WA-DBT/SM (p = 0.063). Sensitivity was higher for two-view WA-DBT/SM compared to two-view DM (p = 0.001) and one-view WA-DBT/SM (p = 0.058). No significant differences in specificity were found. Accuracy was higher with both one-view WA-DBT/SM and two-view WA-DBT/SM compared to DM (p = 0.003 and > 0.001, respectively). Accuracy did not differ between one- and two-view WA-DBT/SM. Two-view WA-DBT/SM performed better for masses and asymmetries. Reading times were significantly longer when WA-DBT was evaluated. Conclusions One-view and two-view WA-DBT/SM can achieve a higher diagnostic performance compared to two-view DM. The detection rate and sensitivity were highest with two-view WA-DBT/SM. Two-view WA-DBT/SM appears to be the most appropriate tool for the assessment of breast lesions.
引用
收藏
页码:661 / 670
页数:10
相关论文
共 40 条
[1]   Comparison of performance metrics with digital 2D versus tomosynthesis mammography in the diagnostic setting [J].
Bahl, Manisha ;
Mercaldo, Sarah ;
Vijapura, Charmi A. ;
McCarthy, Anne Marie ;
Lehman, Constance D. .
EUROPEAN RADIOLOGY, 2019, 29 (02) :477-484
[2]   Breast imaging reporting and data system: Inter- and intraobserver variability in feature analysis and final assessment [J].
Berg, WA ;
Campassi, C ;
Langenberg, P ;
Sexton, MJ .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ROENTGENOLOGY, 2000, 174 (06) :1769-1777
[3]   Application of breast tomosynthesis in screening: incremental effect on mammography acquisition and reading time [J].
Bernardi, D. ;
Ciatto, S. ;
Pellegrini, M. ;
Anesi, V. ;
Burlon, S. ;
Cauli, E. ;
Depaoli, M. ;
Larentis, L. ;
Malesani, V. ;
Targa, L. ;
Baldo, P. ;
Houssami, N. .
BRITISH JOURNAL OF RADIOLOGY, 2012, 85 (1020) :E1174-E1178
[4]  
Carl J. DOrsi, 2013, ACR BI RADS ATLAS BR, V5th
[5]   Digital Breast Tomosynthesis with Synthesized Two-Dimensional Images versus Full-Field Digital Mammography for Population Screening: Outcomes from the Verona Screening Program [J].
Caumo, Francesca ;
Zorzi, Manuel ;
Brunelli, Silvia ;
Romanucci, Giovanna ;
Rella, Rossella ;
Cugola, Loredana ;
Bricolo, Paola ;
Fedato, Chiara ;
Montemezzi, Stefania ;
Houssami, Nehmat .
RADIOLOGY, 2018, 287 (01) :37-46
[6]   Comparison of synthetic and digital mammography with digital breast tomosynthesis or alone for the detection and classification of microcalcifications [J].
Choi, Ji Soo ;
Han, Boo-Kyung ;
Ko, Eun Young ;
Kim, Ga Ram ;
Ko, Eun Sook ;
Park, Ko Woon .
EUROPEAN RADIOLOGY, 2019, 29 (01) :319-329
[7]   Integration of 3D digital mammography with tomosynthesis for population breast-cancer screening (STORM): a prospective comparison study [J].
Ciatto, Stefano ;
Houssami, Nehmat ;
Bernardi, Daniela ;
Caumo, Francesca ;
Pellegrini, Marco ;
Brunelli, Silvia ;
Tuttobene, Paola ;
Bricolo, Paola ;
Fanto, Carmine ;
Valentini, Marvi ;
Montemezzi, Stefania ;
Macaskill, Petra .
LANCET ONCOLOGY, 2013, 14 (07) :583-589
[8]   Synthetic 2-Dimensional Mammography Can Replace Digital Mammography as an Adjunct to Wide-Angle Digital Breast Tomosynthesis [J].
Clausen, Paola ;
Baltzei, Pascal A. T. ;
Kapetas, Panagiotis ;
Woitek, Ramona ;
Weber, Michael ;
Leone, Federica ;
Bernathova, Maria ;
Helbich, Thomas H. .
INVESTIGATIVE RADIOLOGY, 2019, 54 (02) :83-88
[9]   Diagnostic performance of digital breast tomosynthesis with a wide scan angle compared to full-field digital mammography for the detection and characterization of microcalcifications [J].
Clauser, Paola ;
Nagl, Georg ;
Helbich, Thomas H. ;
Pinker-Domenig, Katja ;
Weber, Michael ;
Kapetas, Panagiotis ;
Bernathova, Maria ;
Baltzer, Pascal A. T. .
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF RADIOLOGY, 2016, 85 (12) :2161-2168
[10]   Five Consecutive Years of Screening with Digital Breast Tomosynthesis: Outcomes by Screening Year and Round [J].
Conant, Emily F. ;
Zuckerman, Samantha P. ;
Mcdonald, Elizabeth S. ;
Weinstein, Susan P. ;
Korhonen, Katrina E. ;
Birnbaum, Julia A. ;
Tobey, Jennifer D. ;
Schnall, Mitchell D. ;
Hubbard, Rebecca A. .
RADIOLOGY, 2020, 295 (02) :285-293