Low energy mammogram obtained in contrast-enhanced digital mammography (CEDM) is comparable to routine full-field digital mammography (FFDM)

被引:116
作者
Francescone, Mark A. [1 ]
Jochelson, Maxine S. [2 ]
Dershaw, D. David [2 ]
Sung, Janice S. [2 ]
Hughes, Mary C. [2 ]
Zheng, Junting [2 ]
Moskowitz, Chaya [2 ]
Morris, Elizabeth A. [2 ]
机构
[1] Columbia Univ, Med Ctr, New York, NY 10019 USA
[2] Mem Sloan Kettering Canc Ctr, New York, NY 10065 USA
关键词
Mammography/methods; Contrast media; Breast neoplasms/diagnosis; Radiography; Dual-energy scanned projection/methods; AGREEMENT;
D O I
10.1016/j.ejrad.2014.05.015
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
Purpose: Contrast enhanced digital mammography (CEDM) uses low energy and high energy exposures to produce a subtracted contrast image. It is currently performed with a standard full-field digital mammogram (FFDM). The purpose is to determine if the low energy image performed after intravenous iodine injection can replace the standard FFDM. Methods: And Materials: In an IRB approved HIPAA compatible study, low-energy CEDM images of 170 breasts in 88 women (ages 26-75; mean 50.3) undergoing evaluation for elevated risk or newly diagnosed breast cancer were compared to standard digital mammograms performed within 6 months. Technical parameters including posterior nipple line (PNL) distance, compression thickness, and compression force on the MLO projection were compared. Mammographic findings were compared qualitatively and quantitatively. Mixed linear regression using generalized estimating equation (GEE) method was performed. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) with 95% confidence interval (95%CI) were estimated to assess agreement. Results: No statistical difference was found in the technical parameters compression thickness, PNL distance, compression force (p-values: 0.767, 0.947, 0.089). No difference was found in the measured size of mammographic findings (p-values 0.982-0.988). Grouped calcifications had a mean size/extent of 2.1 cm (SD 0.6) in the low-energy contrast images, and a mean size/extent of 2.2 cm (SD 0.6) in the standard digital mammogram images. Masses had a mean size of 1.8 cm (SD 0.2) in both groups. Calcifications were equally visible on both CEDM and FFDM. Conclusion: Low energy CEDM images are equivalent to standard FFDM despite the presence of intravenous iodinated contrast. Low energy CEDM images may be used for interpretation in place of the FFDM, thereby reducing patient dose. (C) 2014 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:1350 / 1355
页数:6
相关论文
共 9 条
  • [1] Badr S, 2013, DIAGN INTERV IMA NOV
  • [2] Bland JM, 1999, STAT METHODS MED RES, V8, P135, DOI 10.1177/096228029900800204
  • [3] Bushberg J.T., 2012, The Essential Physics of Medical Imaging, V3rd, P33
  • [4] Evaluation of contrast-enhanced digital mammography
    Diekmann, Felix
    Freyer, Martin
    Diekmann, Susanne
    Fallenberg, Eva M.
    Fischer, Thomas
    Bick, Ulrich
    Poellinger, Alexander
    [J]. EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF RADIOLOGY, 2011, 78 (01) : 112 - 121
  • [5] Dual-energy contrast-enhanced digital mammography: initial clinical results of a multireader, multicase study
    Dromain, Clarisse
    Thibault, Fabienne
    Diekmann, Felix
    Fallenberg, Eva M.
    Jong, Roberta A.
    Koomen, Marcia
    Hendrick, R. Edward
    Tardivon, Anne
    Toledano, Alicia
    [J]. BREAST CANCER RESEARCH, 2012, 14 (03):
  • [6] Contrast-enhanced spectral mammography versus MRI: Initial results in the detection of breast cancer and assessment of tumour size
    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.
    [J]. EUROPEAN RADIOLOGY, 2014, 24 (01) : 256 - 264
  • [7] Bilateral Contrast-enhanced Dual-Energy Digital Mammography: Feasibility and Comparison with Conventional Digital Mammography and MR Imaging in Women with Known Breast Carcinoma
    Jochelson, Maxine S.
    Dershaw, D. David
    Sung, Janice S.
    Heerdt, Alexandra S.
    Thornton, Cynthia
    Moskowitz, Chaya S.
    Ferrara, Jessica
    Morris, Elizabeth A.
    [J]. RADIOLOGY, 2013, 266 (03) : 743 - 751
  • [8] MEASUREMENT OF OBSERVER AGREEMENT FOR CATEGORICAL DATA
    LANDIS, JR
    KOCH, GG
    [J]. BIOMETRICS, 1977, 33 (01) : 159 - 174
  • [9] Sleeba Teena, 2013, Indian J Radiol Imaging, V23, P219, DOI 10.4103/0971-3026.120269