Contrast-Enhanced Mammography versus Breast Magnetic Resonance Imaging: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

被引:34
作者
Gelardi, Fabrizia [1 ,2 ]
Ragaini, Elisa Maria [1 ]
Sollini, Martina [1 ,2 ]
Bernardi, Daniela [1 ,2 ]
Chiti, Arturo [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Humanitas Univ, Dept BioMed Sci, Via Rita Levi Montalcini 4, I-20072 Pieve Emanuele, Italy
[2] IRCCS Humanitas Res Hosp, Via Manzoni 56, I-20089 Rozzano, Italy
关键词
breast cancer; contrast-enhanced mammography; contrast-enhanced breast magnetic resonance imaging; screening; SPECTRAL MAMMOGRAPHY; DIGITAL MAMMOGRAPHY; MRI; CANCER; WOMEN; PERFORMANCE; CESM;
D O I
10.3390/diagnostics12081890
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Background: Contrast-enhanced mammography (CEM) and contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (CE-MRI) are commonly used in the screening of breast cancer. The present systematic review aimed to summarize, critically analyse, and meta-analyse the available evidence regarding the role of CE-MRI and CEM in the early detection, diagnosis, and preoperative assessment of breast cancer. Methods: The search was performed on PubMed, Google Scholar, and Web of Science on 28 July 2021 using the following terms "breast cancer", "preoperative staging", "contrast-enhanced mammography", "contrast-enhanced spectral mammography", "contrast enhanced digital mammography", "contrast-enhanced breast magnetic resonance imaging" "CEM", "CESM", "CEDM", and "CE-MRI". We selected only those papers comparing the clinical efficacy of CEM and CE-MRI. The study quality was assessed using the QUADAS-2 criteria. The pooled sensitivities and specificity of CEM and CE-MRI were computed using a random-effects model directly from the STATA "metaprop" command. The between-study statistical heterogeneity was tested (I-2-statistics). Results: Nineteen studies were selected for this systematic review. Fifteen studies (1315 patients) were included in the metanalysis. Both CEM and CE-MRI detect breast lesions with a high sensitivity, without a significant difference in performance (97% and 96%, respectively). Conclusions: Our findings confirm the potential of CEM as a supplemental screening imaging modality, even for intermediate-risk women, including females with dense breasts and a history of breast cancer.
引用
收藏
页数:14
相关论文
共 42 条
[1]   Diffusion-weighted MRI for Unenhanced Breast Cancer Screening [J].
Amornsiripanitch, Nita ;
Bickelhaupt, Sebastian ;
Shin, Hee Jung ;
Dang, Madeline ;
Rahbar, Habib ;
Pinker, Katja ;
Partridge, Savannah C. .
RADIOLOGY, 2019, 293 (03) :504-520
[2]   Supplemental MRI Screening for Women with Extremely Dense Breast Tissue [J].
Bakker, Marije F. ;
de Lange, Stephanie V. ;
Pijnappel, Ruud M. ;
Mann, Ritse M. ;
Peeters, Petra H. M. ;
Monninkhof, Evelyn M. ;
Emaus, Marleen J. ;
Loo, Claudette E. ;
Bisschops, Robertus H. C. ;
Lobbes, Marc B. I. ;
de Jong, Matthijn D. F. ;
Duvivier, Katya M. ;
Veltman, Jeroen ;
Karssemeijer, Nico ;
de Koning, Harry J. ;
van Diest, Paul J. ;
Mali, Willem P. T. M. ;
van den Bosch, Maurice A. A. J. ;
Veldhuis, Wouter B. ;
van Gils, Carla H. .
NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, 2019, 381 (22) :2091-2102
[3]   Breast Cancer Screening and Diagnosis, Version 3.2018 [J].
Bevers, Therese B. ;
Helvie, Mark ;
Bonaccio, Ermelinda ;
Calhoun, Kristine E. ;
Daly, Mary B. ;
Farrar, William B. ;
Garber, Judy E. ;
Gray, Richard ;
Greenberg, Caprice C. ;
Greenup, Rachel ;
Hansen, Nora M. ;
Harris, Randall E. ;
Heerdt, Alexandra S. ;
Helsten, Teresa ;
Hodgkiss, Linda ;
Hoyt, Tamarya L. ;
Huff, John G. ;
Jacobs, Lisa ;
Lehman, Constance Dobbins ;
Monsees, Barbara ;
Niell, Bethany L. ;
Parker, Catherine C. ;
Pearlman, Mark ;
Philpotts, Liane ;
Shepardson, Laura B. ;
Smith, Mary Lou ;
Stein, Matthew ;
Tumyan, Lusine ;
Williams, Cheryl ;
Bergman, Mary Anne ;
Kumar, Rashmi .
JOURNAL OF THE NATIONAL COMPREHENSIVE CANCER NETWORK, 2018, 16 (11) :1362-1389
[4]   Screening Breast Ultrasound: Past, Present, and Future [J].
Brem, Rachel F. ;
Lenihan, Megan J. ;
Lieberman, Jennifer ;
Torrente, Jessica .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ROENTGENOLOGY, 2015, 204 (02) :234-240
[5]   Preoperative assessment of contrast-enhanced spectral mammography of diagnosed breast cancers after sonographic biopsy: Correlation to contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging and 5-year postoperative follow-up [J].
Cheung, Yun-Chung ;
Juan, Yu-Hsiang ;
Lo, Yung-Feng ;
Lin, Yu-Ching ;
Yeh, Chih-Hua ;
Ueng, Shir-Hwa .
MEDICINE, 2020, 99 (05) :E19024
[6]   Clinical evaluation of contrast-enhanced digital mammography and contrast enhanced tomosynthesis-Comparison to contrast-enhanced breast MRI [J].
Chou, Chen-Pin ;
Lewin, John M. ;
Chiang, Chia-Ling ;
Hung, Bao-Hui ;
Yang, Tsung-Lung ;
Huang, Jer-Shyung ;
Liao, Jia-Bin ;
Pan, Huay-Ben .
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF RADIOLOGY, 2015, 84 (12) :2501-2508
[7]   Low-Dose, Contrast-Enhanced Mammography Compared to Contrast-Enhanced Breast MRI: A Feasibility Study [J].
Clauser, Paola ;
Baltzer, Pascal A. T. ;
Kapetas, Panagiotis ;
Hoernig, Mathias ;
Weber, Michael ;
Leone, Federica ;
Bernathova, Maria ;
Helbich, Thomas H. .
JOURNAL OF MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING, 2020, 52 (02) :589-595
[8]   EARLY DETECTION AND SCREENING FOR BREAST CANCER [J].
Coleman, Cathy .
SEMINARS IN ONCOLOGY NURSING, 2017, 33 (02) :141-155
[9]   Screening for breast cancer [J].
Elmore, JG ;
Armstrong, K ;
Lehman, CD ;
Fletcher, SW .
JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 2005, 293 (10) :1245-1256
[10]   Contrast-enhanced spectral mammography versus MRI: Initial results in the detection of breast cancer and assessment of tumour size [J].
Fallenberg, E. M. ;
Dromain, C. ;
Diekmann, F. ;
Engelken, F. ;
Krohn, M. ;
Singh, J. M. ;
Ingold-Heppner, B. ;
Winzer, K. J. ;
Bick, U. ;
Renz, D. M. .
EUROPEAN RADIOLOGY, 2014, 24 (01) :256-264