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
  • [31] Dense Breast Ultrasound Screening After Digital Mammography Versus After Digital Breast Tomosynthesis
    Dibble, Elizabeth H.
    Singer, Tisha M.
    Jimoh, Nneka
    Baird, Grayson L.
    Lourenco, Ana P.
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ROENTGENOLOGY, 2019, 213 (06) : 1397 - 1402
  • [32] Comparison of digital mammography and digital breast tomosynthesis in the detection of architectural distortion
    Elizabeth H. Dibble
    Ana P. Lourenco
    Grayson L. Baird
    Robert C. Ward
    A. Stanley Maynard
    Martha B. Mainiero
    European Radiology, 2018, 28 : 3 - 10
  • [33] Synthesized Mammography: The New Standard of Care When Screening for Breast Cancer with Digital Breast Tomosynthesis?
    Ambinder, Emily B.
    Harvey, Susan C.
    Panigrahi, Babita
    Li, Ximin
    Woods, Ryan W.
    ACADEMIC RADIOLOGY, 2018, 25 (08) : 973 - 976
  • [34] Breast cancer screening using digital breast tomosynthesis compared to digital mammography alone for Japanese women
    Kanako Ban
    Hiroko Tsunoda
    Seiko Togashi
    Yuko Kawaguchi
    Takanobu Sato
    Yoko Takahashi
    Yoshitaka Nagatsuka
    Breast Cancer, 2021, 28 : 459 - 464
  • [35] Comparison of digital mammography and digital breast tomosynthesis in the detection of architectural distortion
    Dibble, Elizabeth H.
    Lourenco, Ana P.
    Baird, Grayson L.
    Ward, Robert C.
    Maynard, A. Stanley
    Mainiero, Martha B.
    EUROPEAN RADIOLOGY, 2018, 28 (01) : 3 - 10
  • [36] Breast cancer screening using digital breast tomosynthesis compared to digital mammography alone for Japanese women
    Ban, Kanako
    Tsunoda, Hiroko
    Togashi, Seiko
    Kawaguchi, Yuko
    Sato, Takanobu
    Takahashi, Yoko
    Nagatsuka, Yoshitaka
    BREAST CANCER, 2021, 28 (02) : 459 - 464
  • [37] Imaging Surveillance of Breast Cancer Survivors with Digital Mammography versus Digital Breast Tomosynthesis
    Bahl, Manisha
    Mercaldo, Sarah
    McCarthy, Anne Marie
    Lehman, Constance D.
    RADIOLOGY, 2021, 298 (02) : 308 - 316
  • [38] Accuracy of Mammography, Digital Breast Tomosynthesis, Ultrasound and MR Imaging in Preoperative Assessment of Breast Cancer
    Mariscotti, Giovanna
    Houssami, Nehmat
    Durando, Manuela
    Bergamasco, Laura
    Campanino, Pier Paolo
    Ruggieri, Chiara
    Regini, Elisa
    Luparia, Andrea
    Bussone, Riccardo
    Sapino, Anna
    Fonio, Paolo
    Gandini, Giovanni
    ANTICANCER RESEARCH, 2014, 34 (03) : 1219 - 1225
  • [39] Outcomes by Race in Breast Cancer Screening With Digital Breast Tomosynthesis Versus Digital Mammography
    Alsheik, Nila
    Blount, Linda
    Qiong, Qiu
    Talley, Melinda
    Pohlman, Scott
    Troeger, Kathleen
    Abbey, Genevieve
    Mango, Victoria L.
    Pollack, Erica
    Chong, Alice
    Donadio, Greg
    Behling, Michael
    Mortimer, Kathleen
    Conant, Emily
    JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF RADIOLOGY, 2021, 18 (07) : 906 - 918
  • [40] Performance of Digital Breast Tomosynthesis, Synthetic Mammography, and Digital Mammography in Breast Cancer Screening: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
    Alabousi, Mostafa
    Wadera, Akshay
    Al-Ghita, Mohammed Kashif
    Al-Ghetaa, Rayeh Kashef
    Salameh, Jean-Paul
    Pozdnyakov, Alex
    Zha, Nanxi
    Samoilov, Lucy
    Sharifabadi, Anahita Dehmoobad
    Sadeghirad, Behnam
    Freitas, Vivianne
    McInnes, Matthew D. F.
    Alabousi, Abdullah
    JNCI-JOURNAL OF THE NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE, 2021, 113 (06): : 680 - 690