Performance evaluation of digital mammography, digital breast tomosynthesis and ultrasound in the detection of breast cancer using pathology as gold standard: an institutional experience

被引:4
|
作者
Joshi, Pranjali [1 ]
Singh, Neha [1 ]
Raj, Gaurav [1 ]
Singh, Ragini [1 ]
Malhotra, Kiran Preet [2 ]
Awasthi, Namrata Punit [2 ]
机构
[1] Dr Ram Manohar Lohia Inst Med Sci, Dept Radiodiag, Lucknow 226010, Uttar Pradesh, India
[2] Dr Ram Manohar Lohia Inst Med Sci, Dept Pathol, Lucknow 226010, Uttar Pradesh, India
来源
EGYPTIAN JOURNAL OF RADIOLOGY AND NUCLEAR MEDICINE | 2022年 / 53卷 / 01期
关键词
Breast cancer; Mammography; Tomosynthesis; US; PREOPERATIVE ASSESSMENT; SCREENING MAMMOGRAPHY; DIAGNOSTIC-ACCURACY; BENIGN; WOMEN; US; CALCIFICATIONS; MASSES; RATES; DBT;
D O I
10.1186/s43055-021-00675-y
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
Background: Mammography is the primary imaging modality for diagnosing breast cancer in women more than 40 years of age. Digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT), when supplemented with digital mammography (DM), is useful for increasing the sensitivity and improving BIRADS characterization by removing the overlapping effect. Ultrasonography (US), when combined with the above combination, further increases the sensitivity and diagnostic confidence. Since most of the research regarding tomosynthesis has been in screening settings, we wanted to quantify its role in diagnostic mammography. The purpose of this study was to assess the performance of DM alone vs. DM combined with DBT vs. DM plus DBT and ultrasound in diagnosing malignant breast neoplasms with the gold standard being histopathology or cytology. Results: A prospective study of 1228 breasts undergoing diagnostic or screening mammograms was undertaken at our institute. Patients underwent 2 views DM, single view DBT and US. BIRADS category was updated after each step. Final categorization was made with all three modalities combined and pathological correlation was done for those cases in which suspicious findings were detected, i.e. 256 cases. Diagnosis based on pathology was done for 256 cases out of which 193 (75.4%) were malignant and the rest 63 (24.6%) were benign. The diagnostic accuracy of DM alone was 81.1%. Sensitivity, Specificity, PPV and NPV were 87.8%, 60%, 81.3% and 61.1%, respectively. With DM + DBT the diagnostic accuracy was 84.8%. Sensitivity, Specificity, PPV and NPV were 92%, 56.5%, 89% and 65%, respectively. The diagnostic accuracy of DM + DBT+ US was found to be 85.1% and Sensitivity, Specificity, PPV and NPV were 96.3%, 50.7%, 85.7% and 82%, respectively. Conclusion: The combination of DBT to DM led to higher diagnostic accuracy, sensitivity and PPV. The addition of US to DM and DBT further increased the sensitivity and diagnostic accuracy and significantly increased the NPV even in diagnostic mammograms and should be introduced in routine practice for characterizing breast neoplasms.
引用
收藏
页数:11
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Performance evaluation of digital mammography, digital breast tomosynthesis and ultrasound in the detection of breast cancer using pathology as gold standard: an institutional experience
    Pranjali Joshi
    Neha Singh
    Gaurav Raj
    Ragini Singh
    Kiran Preet Malhotra
    Namrata Punit Awasthi
    Egyptian Journal of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, 53
  • [2] Breast Cancer Detection: Digital Breast Tomosynthesis with Synthesized Mammography versus Digital Mammography
    Ha, Su Min
    Chang, Jung Min
    RADIOLOGY, 2023, 309 (03)
  • [3] Performance of dedicated breast PET in breast cancer screening: comparison with digital mammography plus digital breast tomosynthesis and ultrasound
    Yuge, Shunsuke
    Miyake, Kanae K.
    Ishimori, Takayoshi
    Kataoka, Masako
    Matsumoto, Yoshiaki
    Torii, Masae
    Yakami, Masahiro
    Isoda, Hiroyoshi
    Takakura, Kyoko
    Morita, Satoshi
    Takada, Masahiro
    Toi, Masakazu
    Nakamoto, Yuji
    ANNALS OF NUCLEAR MEDICINE, 2023, 37 (09) : 479 - 493
  • [4] Performance of dedicated breast PET in breast cancer screening: comparison with digital mammography plus digital breast tomosynthesis and ultrasound
    Shunsuke Yuge
    Kanae K. Miyake
    Takayoshi Ishimori
    Masako Kataoka
    Yoshiaki Matsumoto
    Masae Torii
    Masahiro Yakami
    Hiroyoshi Isoda
    Kyoko Takakura
    Satoshi Morita
    Masahiro Takada
    Masakazu Toi
    Yuji Nakamoto
    Annals of Nuclear Medicine, 2023, 37 : 479 - 493
  • [5] Double reading of automated breast ultrasound with digital mammography or digital breast tomosynthesis for breast cancer screening
    Lee, Janie M.
    Partridge, Savannah C.
    Liao, Geraldine J.
    Hippe, Daniel S.
    Kim, Adrienne E.
    Lee, Christoph, I
    Rahbar, Habib
    Scheel, John R.
    Lehman, Constance D.
    CLINICAL IMAGING, 2019, 55 : 119 - 125
  • [6] A COMPARISON OF DIGITAL BREAST TOMOSYNTHESIS AND FULL FIELD DIGITAL MAMMOGRAPHY IN THE DETECTION OF BREAST CANCER
    Moradzadeh, A.
    Bassett, L. W.
    JOURNAL OF INVESTIGATIVE MEDICINE, 2013, 61 (01) : 128 - 128
  • [7] Comparison of Digital Breast Tomosynthesis and Digital Mammography for Detection of Breast Cancer in Kuwaiti Women
    Asbeutah, Akram M.
    Karmani, Nouralhuda
    Asbeutah, AbdulAziz A.
    Echreshzadeh, Yasmin A.
    AlMajran, Abdullah A.
    Al-Khalifah, Khalid H.
    MEDICAL PRINCIPLES AND PRACTICE, 2019, 28 (01) : 10 - 15
  • [8] Assessment of Radiologist Performance in Breast Cancer Screening Using Digital Breast Tomosynthesis vs Digital Mammography
    Sprague, Brian L.
    Coley, R. Yates
    Kerlikowske, Karla
    Rauscher, Garth H.
    Henderson, Louise M.
    Onega, Tracy
    Lee, Christoph, I
    Herschorn, Sally D.
    Tosteson, Anna N. A.
    Miglioretti, Diana L.
    JAMA NETWORK OPEN, 2020, 3 (03) : E201759
  • [9] Digital breast tomosynthesis versus mammography and breast ultrasound: a multireader performance study
    Thibault, Fabienne
    Dromain, Clarisse
    Breucq, Catherine
    Balleyguier, Corinne S.
    Malhaire, Caroline
    Steyaert, Luc
    Tardivon, Anne
    Baldan, Enrica
    Drevon, Harir
    EUROPEAN RADIOLOGY, 2013, 23 (09) : 2441 - 2449
  • [10] Digital breast tomosynthesis versus mammography and breast ultrasound: a multireader performance study
    Fabienne Thibault
    Clarisse Dromain
    Catherine Breucq
    Corinne S. Balleyguier
    Caroline Malhaire
    Luc Steyaert
    Anne Tardivon
    Enrica Baldan
    Harir Drevon
    European Radiology, 2013, 23 : 2441 - 2449