Radiation Exposure of Contrast-Enhanced Spectral Mammography Compared With Full-Field Digital Mammography

2014 ◽  
Vol 49 (10) ◽  
pp. 659-665 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cécile R.L.P.N. Jeukens ◽  
Ulrich C. Lalji ◽  
Eduard Meijer ◽  
Betina Bakija ◽  
Robin Theunissen ◽  
...  
2017 ◽  
Vol 46 ◽  
pp. 78-84 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bhavika K. Patel ◽  
Sandra Alheli Garza ◽  
Sarah Eversman ◽  
Yania Lopez-Alvarez ◽  
Heidi Kosiorek ◽  
...  

Breast Cancer ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 24 (1) ◽  
pp. 104-110 ◽  
Author(s):  
Miki Mori ◽  
Sadako Akashi-Tanaka ◽  
Satoko Suzuki ◽  
Murasaki Ikeda Daniels ◽  
Chie Watanabe ◽  
...  

2014 ◽  
Vol 83 (8) ◽  
pp. 1350-1355 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark A. Francescone ◽  
Maxine S. Jochelson ◽  
D. David Dershaw ◽  
Janice S. Sung ◽  
Mary C. Hughes ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 184 (3) ◽  
pp. 723-731
Author(s):  
Anna Bozzini ◽  
Luca Nicosia ◽  
Giancarlo Pruneri ◽  
Patrick Maisonneuve ◽  
Lorenza Meneghetti ◽  
...  

Abstract Purpose To compare the efficacy of contrast-enhanced spectral mammography, with ultrasound, full field digital mammography and magnetic resonance imaging in detection and size estimation of histologically proven breast tumors. Methods This open-label, single center, prospective study, included 160 dense breast women with at least one suspicious mammary lesion evaluated by ultrasound, full field digital mammography and magnetic resonance imaging in whom a mammary tumor was histologically proven after surgery performed at the European Institute of Oncology between January 2013 and December 2015. Following the complete diagnostic procedure, the patients were further investigated by contrast-enhanced spectral mammography prior to surgery. Results Overall, the detection rate of malignant breast lesions (in situ and invasive) was 93.8% (165/176) for contrast-enhanced spectral mammography, 94.4% (168/178) for ultrasound, 85.5 (147/172) for full field digital mammography and 97.7% (173/177) for magnetic resonance imaging. Radiological measurements were concordant with the post-surgical pathological measurements of the invasive tumor (i.e., within 5 mm) in: 64.6% for contrast-enhanced spectral mammography, 62.0% for ultrasound, 45.2% for full field digital mammography (p < 0.0001) and 69.9% for magnetic resonance imaging (p = 0.28); underestimated in: 17.4% for contrast-enhanced spectral mammography, 19.6% for ultrasound, 24.2% for full field digital mammography (p = 0.03) and 6.7% for magnetic resonance imaging (p = 0.0005); and overestimated in: 16.2% for contrast-enhanced spectral mammography, 16.6% for ultrasound, 16.6% for full field digital mammography and 22.7% for magnetic resonance imaging (p = 0.02). Conclusions Our data suggest that contrast-enhanced spectral mammography improves on full field digital mammography and is comparable to ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging in terms of detection sensitivity and size estimation of malignant lesions in dense breasts.


2015 ◽  
Vol 25 (10) ◽  
pp. 2813-2820 ◽  
Author(s):  
U. C. Lalji ◽  
C. R. L. P. N. Jeukens ◽  
I. Houben ◽  
P. J. Nelemans ◽  
R. E. van Engen ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Sara Ahmed Sadek Mohamed ◽  
Sherine George Moftah ◽  
Nivine Abd El Moneim Chalabi ◽  
Mona Ali Abdel-Wahed Salem

Abstract Background Breast cancer is the most common malignancy in females around the world representing 25.1% of all cancers. The high prevalence and need for early treatment of breast malignancy highlight the importance of early and accurate diagnosis. In order to achieve this target, it is necessary to select the most appropriate modality for investigation. Early detection of breast cancer by conventional mammography tends to reduce mortality; however, it has a low sensitivity and specificity in young females with dense breasts owing to reduced contrast between a possible tumor and the surrounding breast tissue with superimposition of the glandular tissue obscuring underlying lesions. Our study included 25 patients with dense breasts presented with different breast symptoms, yet the breast lump was the most common complaint. The aim of our study is to evaluate the supplementary value of contrast-enhanced spectral mammography in the assessment of symptomatic patients with dense breasts. Results In our study, the enrolled subjects underwent both contrast-enhanced spectral mammography (CESM) and conventional full-field digital mammography (FFDM). CESM was shown to be better than FFDM in terms of sensitivity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and accuracy, measuring 100%, 77.8%, 100%, and 84%, compared to 56%, 75%, 46%, and 60%, respectively, yet both modalities showed low specificity, measuring 63.6% and 66.6% for CESM and FFDM, respectively. The added value of CESM was assessed in terms of ability to detect and correctly characterize the lesions in correlation to histopathological results where CESM could detect 88% of the lesions included in our study and correctly characterized 84% of the lesions; on the other side, FFDM detected only 20% of the lesions and correctly characterized 60% of the lesions. CESM changed the treatment plan to a more extensive surgery +/− neoadjuvant chemotherapy in 57% out of fourteen cases diagnosed with breast cancer emphasizing the role of CESM in assessing the extent of the disease, multicentricity, and multifocality and consequently tailoring the most appropriate treatment plan suitable for each patient. Conclusion Contrast-enhanced spectral mammography is superior to full-field digital mammography in patients with dense breasts with a significant supplementary value in detection, characterization of lesions, and tailoring the appropriate treatment plan.


2015 ◽  
Vol 50 (10) ◽  
pp. 679-685 ◽  
Author(s):  
Leonie E. Paulis ◽  
Marc B.I. Lobbes ◽  
Ulrich C. Lalji ◽  
Nicky Gelissen ◽  
Ramona W. Bouwman ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document