Rates and causes of disagreement in interpretation of full-field digital mammography and film-screen mammography in a diagnostic setting

被引:52
|
作者
Venta, LA
Hendrick, RE
Adler, YT
DeLeon, P
Mengoni, PM
Scharl, AM
Comstock, CE
Hansen, L
Kay, N
Coveler, A
Cutter, G
机构
[1] Northwestern Univ, Sch Med, Lynn Sage Comprehens Breast Ctr, Dept Radiol, Chicago, IL 60611 USA
[2] AMC Canc Res Ctr, Denver, CO 80214 USA
关键词
D O I
10.2214/ajr.176.5.1761241
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
OBJECTIVE. This study was performed to determine the rates and causes of disageements in interpretation between full-field digital mammography and film-screen mammography in a diagnostic setting. SUBJECTS AND METHODS. Patients undergoing diagnostic mammography were invited to participate in the digital mammography study. Three views, selected by the radiologist interpreting the film-screen-mammography, were obtained in both film-screen mammography and digital mammography Radiologists independently assigned a Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) category to the film-screen mammography and the digital mammography images. The BI-RADS categories were grouped into the general categories of agreement, partial agreement or disagreement. A third and different radiologist reviewed all cases of disagreement, reached a decision as to management, and determined the primary: cause of disagreement. RESULTS. Six radiologists reviewed digital mammography and film-screen mammography diagnostic images in a total of 1147 breasts in 692 patients. Agreement between digital mammography and final film-screen mammography assessment was present in 937 breasts (82%), partial agreement in 159 (14%), and disagreement in 51 (4%), for a kappa value of 0.29. The primary causes of disagreement were differences in management approach of the radiologists (52%), inflammation derived from sonogaphy or additional film-screen mammograms (34%), and technical differences between the two mammographic techniques (10%). CONCLUSION. Significant disagreement between film-screen mammography and digital mammography affecting follow-up management was present in only 4% of breasts. The most frequent cause of disagreement in interpretation was a difference in management approach between radiologists (interobserver variability). This source of variability was larger than that due to differences in lesion visibility; between film-screen mammography and digital mammography.
引用
收藏
页码:1241 / 1248
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Comparison of full-field digital mammography with CR mammography
    Uchiyama, N
    Kobayashi, H
    Tajima, H
    Machida, M
    Kumazaki, T
    Moriyama, N
    [J]. RADIOLOGY, 2002, 225 : 119 - 119
  • [42] The Impact of the Transition to Full Field Digital Mammography from Film Screen Mammography
    Woldenberg, Nina
    Plecha, Donna
    Panneerselvam, Ashok
    Schluchter, Mark
    Pham, Ramya
    [J]. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY-CANCER CLINICAL TRIALS, 2009, 32 (05): : 554 - 555
  • [43] Comparison of interpretation times for screening exams between soft copy full-field digital mammography and hard copy screen-film mammography
    Solari, M
    Berns, EA
    Hendrick, RE
    Wolfman, JA
    Willis, W
    Segal, L
    DeLeon, P
    Benjamin, S
    Reddy, D
    Mendelson, E
    [J]. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ROENTGENOLOGY, 2004, 182 (04) : 11 - 11
  • [44] Two-modality mammography may confer an advantage over either full-field digital mammography or screen-film mammography
    Glueck, D. H.
    Lamb, M. M.
    Lewin, J. M.
    Pisano, E. D.
    [J]. CANCER EPIDEMIOLOGY BIOMARKERS & PREVENTION, 2007, 16 (02) : 359 - 359
  • [45] Two-modality mammography may confer an advantage over either full-field digital mammography or screen-film mammography
    Glueck, Deborah H.
    Lamb, Molly M.
    Lewin, John M.
    Pisano, Etta D.
    [J]. ACADEMIC RADIOLOGY, 2007, 14 (06) : 670 - 676
  • [46] Comparison of full-field digital mammography to screen-film mammography with respect to diagnostic accuracy of lesion characterization in breast tissue biopsy specimens
    Kuzmiak, CM
    Millnamow, GA
    Qaqish, B
    Pisano, ED
    Cole, EB
    Brown, ME
    [J]. ACADEMIC RADIOLOGY, 2002, 9 (12) : 1378 - 1382
  • [47] Comparison of reading time between screen-film mammography and soft-copied, full-field digital mammography
    Mitsutomi Ishiyama
    Hiroko Tsunoda-Shimizu
    Mari Kikuchi
    Yukihisa Saida
    Sonoe Hiramatsu
    [J]. Breast Cancer, 2009, 16 : 58 - 61
  • [48] Comparison of reading time between screen-film mammography and soft-copied, full-field digital mammography
    Ishiyama, Mitsutomi
    Tsunoda-Shimizu, Hiroko
    Kikuchi, Mari
    Saida, Yukihisa
    Hiramatsu, Sonoe
    [J]. BREAST CANCER, 2009, 16 (01) : 58 - 61
  • [49] Studies Comparing Screen-Film Mammography and Full-Field Digital Mammography in Breast Cancer Screening: Updated Review
    Skaane, P.
    [J]. ACTA RADIOLOGICA, 2009, 50 (01) : 3 - 14
  • [50] Observer variability in screen-film mammography versus full-field digital mammography with soft-copy reading
    Per Skaane
    Felix Diekmann
    Corinne Balleyguier
    Susanne Diekmann
    Jean-Charles Piguet
    Kari Young
    Michael Abdelnoor
    Loren Niklason
    [J]. European Radiology, 2008, 18