Performance comparison of single-view digital breast tomosynthesis plus single-view digital mammography with two-view digital mammography

被引:37
|
作者
Gennaro, Gisella [1 ]
Hendrick, R. Edward [2 ]
Ruppel, Patricia [3 ]
Chersevani, Roberta
di Maggio, Cosimo
La Grassa, Manuela [4 ]
Pescarini, Luigi [1 ]
Polico, Ilaria [1 ]
Proietti, Alessandro [1 ]
Baldan, Enrica [1 ]
Bezzon, Elisabetta [1 ]
Pomerri, Fabio [1 ]
Muzzio, Pier Carlo [1 ]
机构
[1] Veneto Inst Oncol IOV IRCCS, I-35128 Padua, Italy
[2] Univ Colorado Denver, Dept Radiol, Sch Med, Aurora, CO 80045 USA
[3] Innovat Analyt, Kalamazoo, MI 49007 USA
[4] Oncol Reference Ctr CRO IRCCS, Aviano, Pordenone, Italy
关键词
Breast tomosynthesis; Mammography; Tomography; Clinical performance; Receiver-operating characteristics; CLASSIFICATION; EQUIVALENCE;
D O I
10.1007/s00330-012-2649-1
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
To determine the performance of combined single-view mediolateral oblique (MLO) digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) plus single-view cranio-caudal (CC) mammography (MX) compared with that of standard two-view digital mammography. A multi-reader multi-case (MRMC) receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) study was conducted, involving six breast radiologists. Two hundred fifty patients underwent bilateral MX and DBT imaging. MX and DBT images with the adjunct of the CC-MX view from 469 breasts were evaluated and rated independently by six readers. Differences in mean areas under the ROC curves (AUCs), mean sensitivity and mean specificity were analysed by analysis of variance (ANOVA) to assess clinical performance. The combined technique was found to be non-inferior to standard two-view mammography (MX(CC+MLO)) in mean AUC (difference: +0.021;95 % LCL = -0.011), but was not statistically significant for superiority (P = 0.197). The combined technique had equivalent sensitivity to standard mammography (76.2 % vs. 72.8 %, P = 0.269) and equivalent specificity (84.9 % vs. 83.0 %, P = 0.130). Specificity for benign lesions was significantly higher with the combination of techniques versus mammography (45.6 % vs. 36.8 %, P = 0.002). In this enriched study population, the combination of single-view MLO tomosynthesis plus single-view CC mammography was non-inferior to that of standard two-view digital mammography in terms of ROC curve area, sensitivity and specificity.
引用
收藏
页码:664 / 672
页数:9
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Performance comparison of single-view digital breast tomosynthesis plus single-view digital mammography with two-view digital mammography
    Gisella Gennaro
    R. Edward Hendrick
    Patricia Ruppel
    Roberta Chersevani
    Cosimo di Maggio
    Manuela La Grassa
    Luigi Pescarini
    Ilaria Polico
    Alessandro Proietti
    Enrica Baldan
    Elisabetta Bezzon
    Fabio Pomerri
    Pier Carlo Muzzio
    European Radiology, 2013, 23 : 664 - 672
  • [2] Comparison of two-view versus single-view digital breast tomosynthesis and 2D-mammography in breast cancer surveillance imaging
    Hadjipanteli, Andria
    Polyviou, Petros
    Kyriakopoulos, Ilias
    Genagritis, Marios
    Kotziamani, Natasa
    Moniatis, Demetris
    Papoutsou, Anne
    Constantinidou, Anastasia
    PLOS ONE, 2021, 16 (09):
  • [3] Comparative evaluation of average glandular dose and breast cancer detection between single-view digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) plus single-view digital mammography (DM) and two-view DM: correlation with breast thickness and density
    Shin, Sung Ui
    Chang, Jung Min
    Bae, Min Sun
    Lee, Su Hyun
    Cho, Nariya
    Seo, Mirinae
    Kim, Won Hwa
    Moon, Woo Kyung
    EUROPEAN RADIOLOGY, 2015, 25 (01) : 1 - 8
  • [4] Comparative evaluation of average glandular dose and breast cancer detection between single-view digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) plus single-view digital mammography (DM) and two-view DM: correlation with breast thickness and density
    Sung Ui Shin
    Jung Min Chang
    Min Sun Bae
    Su Hyun Lee
    Nariya Cho
    Mirinae Seo
    Won Hwa Kim
    Woo Kyung Moon
    European Radiology, 2015, 25 : 1 - 8
  • [5] The diagnostic accuracy of dual-view digital mammography, single-view breast tomosynthesis and a dual-view combination of breast tomosynthesis and digital mammography in a free-response observer performance study
    Svahn, T.
    Andersson, I.
    Chakraborty, D.
    Svensson, S.
    Ikeda, D.
    Fornvik, D.
    Mattsson, S.
    Tingberg, A.
    Zackrisson, S.
    RADIATION PROTECTION DOSIMETRY, 2010, 139 (1-3) : 113 - 117
  • [6] Comparison of Single-View and Dual-View Digital Chest Tomosynthesis
    Zhong, Y.
    You, Z.
    Liu, X.
    Wang, T.
    Shen, Y.
    Lai, C.
    Shaw, C.
    MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2012, 39 (06) : 3608 - 3608
  • [7] SINGLE-VIEW MAMMOGRAPHY
    WEISHAAR, J
    PATEROK, EM
    MULLER, A
    WILLGEROTH, F
    DEUTSCHE MEDIZINISCHE WOCHENSCHRIFT, 1976, 101 (51) : 1865 - 1866
  • [8] Comparison of two-view digital breast tomosynthesis to three-view digital mammography in a simulated screening setting
    Kim, Yoon-Jin
    Sechopoulos, Ioannis
    Newell, Mary S.
    Ho, Christopher P.
    Holbrook, Anna, I
    Fleming, Margaret
    Hamlin, Marae B.
    Handa, Priyanka
    Braykov, Nikolay
    D'Orsi, Carl J.
    ACTA RADIOLOGICA, 2019, 60 (09) : 1094 - 1101
  • [9] Replacing single-view mediolateral oblique (MLO) digital mammography (DM) with synthesized mammography (SM) with digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) images: Comparison of the diagnostic performance and radiation dose with two-view DM with or without MLO-DBT
    Kang, Hyo-Jin
    Chang, Jung Min
    Lee, Joongyub
    Song, Sung Eun
    Shin, Sung Ui
    Kim, Won Hwa
    Bae, Min Sun
    Moon, Woo Kyung
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF RADIOLOGY, 2016, 85 (11) : 2042 - 2048
  • [10] Two-view 2D digital mammography versus one-view digital breast tomosynthesis
    Michell, M. J.
    Wasan, R. K.
    Iqbal, A.
    Peacock, C.
    Evans, D. R.
    Morel, J. C.
    BREAST CANCER RESEARCH, 2010, 12