A comparison of full-field digital mammography (FFDM) with digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) in the detection of microcalcifications by correlating mammographic and pathologic findings

被引:0
|
作者
Farghadani, Maryam [1 ]
Ghadiri-faraz, Bahar [1 ]
Riahinezhad, Maryam [1 ]
Sarami, Sahar [1 ]
机构
[1] Isfahan Univ Med Sci, Dept Radiol & Imaging, Esfahan, Iran
来源
IMMUNOPATHOLOGIA PERSA | 2024年 / 10卷 / 02期
关键词
Breast cancer; Breast microcalcification; Digital breast tomosynthesis; Full-field digital mammography; Screening; DIAGNOSTIC PERFORMANCE; CANCER; CALCIFICATIONS; COMBINATION; CLUSTERS;
D O I
10.34172/ipp.2024.40613
中图分类号
R392 [医学免疫学]; Q939.91 [免疫学];
学科分类号
100102 ;
摘要
Introduction: Breast micro-calcifications primarily represent benign conditions; they might be regarded as the earliest presentations of malignancies. As a well-known procedure, full-field digital mammography (FFDM) is a 2-dimensional (2-D) imaging modality most frequently used in breast cancer screening. DBT, i.e., digital breast tomosynthesis, on the other hand, is a 3- 3-dimensional (3-D) modality increasingly attracting the attention of researchers in the field for clinical applications. Objectives: The present study compares FFDM values against DBT technique data- considered a valuable means of screening breast cancers. Patients and Methods: This is a cross-sectional study conducted on 92 suspected breast cancer patients who underwent screening assessments using both FFDM and DBT. The breast calcification and density categories were identified according to ACR BI-RADS (American College of Radiology Breast Imaging- Reporting and Data System). The calcifications were categorized as benign (BIRADS 2 and 3) or malignant (BIRADS 4 and 5). The histopathological findings from the biopsied lesions were considered the gold standard for breast cancer diagnosis. The outcomes of FFDM and DBT were compared. Results: The total sensitivity of DBT in identifying benign versus malignant lesions was 96.7%. In the case of FFMD, the sensitivity value was 90.2%. On the other hand, both modalities revealed similar specificity, accounting for 8.7%. The area under the curve (AUC) accounted for 0.527 for DBT and 0.505 for FFDM. The overall agreement coefficient for the two radiologists in the identification of micro-calcifications accounted for 0.613 (95% CI: 0.394-0.823). This agreement coefficient for FFDM was 0.676 (95% CI: 0.412, 0.940), and the value for the DBT procedure was 0.517 (95% CI: 0.147, 0.887). Conclusion: According to the current study, DBT can be considered a powerful tool in screening and diagnosing microcalcifications such as FFDM in breast tissue. Although the sensitivity of DBT is remarkably high, its specificity is not justifiable.
引用
收藏
页数:6
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Comparison of Digital Breast Tomosynthesis vs Full-Field Digital Mammography in Recall Rates and Cancer Detection Rates
    Procasco, Margaret
    RADIOLOGIC TECHNOLOGY, 2016, 87 (03) : 349 - 351
  • [22] Comparison of full-field digital mammography and digital breast tomosynthesis in ultrasonography-detected breast cancers
    Nam, Kyung Jin
    Han, Boo-Kyung
    Ko, Eun Sook
    Choi, Ji Soo
    Ko, Eun Young
    Jeong, Dong Wook
    Choo, Ki Seok
    BREAST, 2015, 24 (05): : 649 - 655
  • [23] Assessment of extent of breast cancer: Comparison between digital breast tomosynthesis and full-field digital mammography
    Mun, H. S.
    Kim, H. H.
    Shin, H. J.
    Cha, J. H.
    Ruppel, P. L.
    Oh, H. Y.
    Chae, E. Y.
    CLINICAL RADIOLOGY, 2013, 68 (12) : 1254 - 1259
  • [24] There Is No Way That the Cancer Detection Rate for Full-Field Digital Mammography Is the Same as for Digital Breast Tomosynthesis
    Kopans, Daniel B.
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ROENTGENOLOGY, 2019, 213 (01) : W46 - W46
  • [25] Comparison of Mean Glandular Dose between Full-Field Digital Mammography and Digital Breast Tomosynthesis
    Teoh, Kar Choon
    Manan, Hanani Abdul
    Norsuddin, Norhashimah Mohd
    Rizuana, Iqbal Hussain
    HEALTHCARE, 2021, 9 (12)
  • [26] Comparing Diagnostic Performance of Digital Breast Tomosynthesis and Full-Field Digital Mammography
    Cochon, Laila R.
    Giess, Catherine S.
    Khorasani, Ramin
    JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF RADIOLOGY, 2020, 17 (08) : 999 - 1003
  • [27] Automated Breast Density Assessment for Full-Field Digital Mammography and Digital Breast Tomosynthesis
    Jiang, Shu
    Bennett, Debbie L.
    Chen, Simin
    Toriola, Adetunji T.
    Colditz, Graham A.
    CANCER PREVENTION RESEARCH, 2025, 18 (01) : 23 - 29
  • [28] Invasive breast cancer: Digital breast tomosynthesis versus full-field digital mammography
    Hwang, Esther
    Szabo, Janet
    Mehta, Anita
    Margolies, Laurie
    APPLIED RADIOLOGY, 2016, 45 (12) : 32 - 34
  • [29] Implementation of telemanagement for full-field digital mammography (FFDM)
    Fan, Y
    Lou, SL
    Wong, A
    Zhang, H
    Sickles, EA
    MEDICAL IMAGING 2000: PACS DESIGN AND EVALUATION - ENGINEERING AND CLINICAL ISSUES, 2000, 3980 : 400 - 407
  • [30] Threshold in breast compression reduction for full-field digital mammography and digital breast tomosynthesis
    Afandy, A. N.
    Tori, M. B.
    Bintalib, S. O.
    Soh, B. L. P.
    RADIOGRAPHY, 2024, 30 (01) : 217 - 225