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
  • [21] Comparison of Tomosynthesis Plus Digital Mammography and Digital Mammography Alone for Breast Cancer Screening
    Haas, Brian M.
    Kalra, Vivek
    Geisel, Jaime
    Raghu, Madhavi
    Durand, Melissa
    Philpotts, Liane E.
    RADIOLOGY, 2013, 269 (03) : 694 - 700
  • [22] One-view breast tomosynthesis vs two-view mammography: a methodological issue
    Fang, Xiang
    Kong, Weili
    Qiu, Jianqing
    Yu, Zeping
    Duan, Hong
    LANCET ONCOLOGY, 2019, 20 (01): : E6 - E6
  • [23] Detection and characterization of breast lesions in a selective diagnostic population: diagnostic accuracy study for comparison between one-view digital breast tomosynthesis and two-view full-field digital mammography
    Chae, Eun Young
    Kim, Hak Hee
    Cha, Joo Hee
    Shin, Hee Jung
    Choi, Woo Jung
    BRITISH JOURNAL OF RADIOLOGY, 2016, 89 (1062):
  • [24] Radiation dose with digital breast tomosynthesis compared to digital mammography: per-view analysis
    Gisella Gennaro
    D. Bernardi
    N. Houssami
    European Radiology, 2018, 28 : 573 - 581
  • [25] Radiation dose with digital breast tomosynthesis compared to digital mammography: per-view analysis
    Gennaro, Gisella
    Bernardi, D.
    Houssami, N.
    EUROPEAN RADIOLOGY, 2018, 28 (02) : 573 - 581
  • [26] Two-view digital breast tomosynthesis versus digital mammography in a population-based breast cancer screening programme (To-Be): a randomised, controlled trial
    Hofvind, Solveig
    Holen, Asne S.
    Aase, Hildegunn S.
    Houssami, Nehmat
    Sebuodegard, Sofie
    Moger, Tron A.
    Haldorsen, Ingfrid S.
    Akslen, Lars A.
    LANCET ONCOLOGY, 2019, 20 (06): : 795 - 805
  • [28] Retrospective comparison between single reading plus an artificial intelligence algorithm and two-view digital tomosynthesis with double reading in breast screening
    Graewingholt, Axel
    Duffy, Stephen
    JOURNAL OF MEDICAL SCREENING, 2021, 28 (03) : 365 - 368
  • [29] One-view breast tomosynthesis vs two-view mammography: a methodological issue reply
    Zackrisson, Sophia
    Lang, Kristina
    Rosso, Aldana
    Johnson, Kristin
    Dustler, Magnus
    Fornvik, Daniel
    Fornvik, Hannie
    Sartor, Hanna
    Timberg, Pontus
    Tingberg, Anders
    Andersson, Ingvar
    LANCET ONCOLOGY, 2019, 20 (01): : E7 - E7
  • [30] Interval cancer in the Cordoba Breast Tomosynthesis Screening Trial (CBTST): comparison of digital breast tomosynthesis plus digital mammography to digital mammography alone
    Pulido-Carmona, Cristina
    Romero-Martin, Sara
    Raya-Povedano, Jose Luis
    Cara-Garcia, Maria
    Font-Ugalde, Pilar
    Elias-Cabot, Esperanza
    Pedrosa-Garriguet, Margarita
    Alvarez-Benito, Marina
    EUROPEAN RADIOLOGY, 2024, 34 (08) : 5427 - 5438