Comparison of Call-Back Rates between Digital Mammography and Digital Breast Tomosynthesis

The effect of mammographic screening on the natural history and evolution of breast cancer treatment cannot be overstated; however, despite intensive and resource consuming screening, advanced breast cancer is still diagnosed frequently. The development of three-dimensional mammography or digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) has already demonstrated greater sensitivity in the diagnosis of breast pathology and effectiveness in identifying early breast cancers. In addition to being a more sensitive screening tool, other studies indicate DBT has a lower call-back rate when compared with traditional DM. This study compares call-back rates between these two screening tools. A single institution, retrospective review was conducted of almost 20,000 patient records who underwent digital mammography or DBTin the years 2016 to 2018. These charts were analyzed for documentation of imaging type, Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System 0 status, call-back status, and type of further imaging that was required. Charts for 19,863 patients were reviewed, 17,899 digital mammography examinations were conducted compared with 11,331 DBT examinations resulting in 1,066 and 689 Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System 0 studies, respectively. Of the DM call-backs, 82.08 per cent were recommended for additional radiographic imaging and 17.82 per cent for ultrasound imaging. In the DBT group, only 39.77 per cent of callbacks were recommended for additional radiographic imaging and 60.09 per cent for ultrasound imaging. Our data suggest that DBT results in less call-back for additional mammographic images as compared with digital mammography. DBT may offer benefits over DM, including less imaging before biopsy, less time before biopsy, quicker diagnosis, and improved patient satisfaction.

Download Full-text

Lobular Breast Cancer Conspicuity on Digital Breast Tomosynthesis Compared to Synthesized 2D Mammography: A Multireader Study

Journal of Imaging ◽

10.3390/jimaging7090185 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 7 (9) ◽

pp. 185

Author(s):

Giovanna Romanucci ◽

Lisa Zantedeschi ◽

Anna Ventriglia ◽

Sara Mercogliano ◽

Maria Vittoria Bisighin ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Breast Cancer ◽

Breast Imaging ◽

Digital Breast Tomosynthesis ◽

Matched Pairs ◽

Breast Cancers ◽

Test Results ◽

Lobular Breast Cancer ◽

Point Scale ◽

Breast Tomosynthesis ◽

Invasive Lobular Breast Cancer

Objectives: To compare the conspicuity of lobular breast cancers at digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) versus synthesized 2D mammography (synt2D). Materials and methods: Seventy-six women (mean age 61.2 years, range 50–74 years) submitted to biopsy in our institution, from 2019 to 2021, with proven invasive lobular breast cancer (ILC) were enrolled in this retrospective study. The participants underwent DBT and synt2D. Five breast radiologists, with different years of experience in breast imaging, independently assigned a conspicuity score (ordinal 6-point scale) to DBT and synt2D. Lesion conspicuity was compared, for each reader, between the synt2D overall conspicuity interpretation and DBT overall conspicuity interpretation using a Wilcoxon matched pairs test. Results: A total of 50/78 (64%) cancers were detected on both synt2D and DBT by all the readers, while 28/78 (26%) cancers where not recognized by at least one reader on synt2D. For each reader, in comparison with synt2D, DBT increased significantly the conspicuity of ILC (p < 0.0001). The raw proportion of high versus low conspicuity by modality confirmed that cancers were more likely to have high conspicuity at DBT than synt2D. Conclusions: ILCs were more likely to have high conspicuity at DBT than at synt2D, increasing the chances of the detection of ILC breast cancer.

Download Full-text

Antecedents: A Half-Century of Imaging the Breast

Journal of Breast Imaging ◽

10.1093/jbi/wby016 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 1 (1) ◽

pp. 2-8

Author(s):

Daniel B Kopans

Keyword(s):

Breast Cancer ◽

Magnetic Resonance ◽

Breast Imaging ◽

Death Rate ◽

Digital Breast Tomosynthesis ◽

Breast Cancers ◽

Breast Tomosynthesis ◽

Half Century ◽

X Ray ◽

Detect Breast Cancer

Abstract The field of Breast Imaging evolved because a fairly small number of dedicated individuals realized the lifesaving potential of detecting breast cancer earlier. They persevered despite persistent efforts to curtail screening. From the first attempts to produce X-ray images of the breast to magnetic resonance and digital breast tomosynthesis, investigators have worked continuously to develop better ways to detect breast cancer at a time when cure is possible, while working continuously to preserve access for women to screening. Consequently, the death rate from breast cancer has declined by more than 40%. Therapy has improved, but therapy saves lives when breast cancers are treated early.

Download Full-text

Comparison of Digital Breast Tomosynthesis and Digital Mammography for Detection of Breast Cancer in Kuwaiti Women

Medical Principles and Practice ◽

10.1159/000495753 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 28 (1) ◽

pp. 10-15 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Akram M. Asbeutah ◽

Nouralhuda Karmani ◽

AbdulAziz A. Asbeutah ◽

Yasmin A. Echreshzadeh ◽

Abdullah A. AlMajran ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Breast Cancer ◽

Sensitivity And Specificity ◽

Digital Mammography ◽

Breast Imaging ◽

Characteristic Curve ◽

Digital Breast Tomosynthesis ◽

Breast Lesions ◽

Breast Tomosynthesis ◽

Kappa Test ◽

Significant Difference

Objective: To investigate the sensitivity and specificity of digital mammography (DM) and digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) for the detection of breast cancer in comparison to histopathology findings. Subjects and Methods: We included 65 breast lesions in 58 women, each detected by two diagnostic mammography techniques – DM and DBT using Senographe Essential (GE Healthcare, Buc, France) – and subsequently confirmed by histopathology. The Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System was used for characterizing the lesions. Results: The average age of women was 48.3 years (range 26–81 years). There were 34 malignant and 31 benign breast lesions. The sensitivity of DM and DBT was 73.5 and 100%, respectively, while the specificity was 67.7 and 94%, respectively. Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis showed an overall diagnostic advantage of DBT over DM, with a significant difference between DBT and DM (p < 0.001). By performing Cohen’s kappa test, we found that there was a strong level of agreement according to Altman guidelines between DBT and histopathology findings (0.97), but a weak agreement between DM and histopathology findings (0.47). Conclusion: DBT improves the clinical accuracy of mammography by increasing both sensitivity and specificity. We believe that this improvement is due to improved image visibility and quality. These results could be of interest to health care institutions as they may impact their decision on whether to upgrade to DBT not only for diagnosis, but also for screening.

Download Full-text

DETECTION OF BREAST CANCERS REPRESENTED AS ARCHITECTURAL DISTORTION: A COMPARISON OF FULL-FIELD DIGITAL MAMMOGRAPHY AND DIGITAL BREAST TOMOSYNTHESIS

Wiadomości Lekarskie ◽

10.36740/wlek202107121 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 74 (7) ◽

pp. 1674-1679

Author(s):

Tetiana M. Babkina ◽

Andrii V. Gurando ◽

Tetiana M. Kozarenko ◽

Viacheslav R. Gurando ◽

Vadim V. Telniy ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Breast Cancer ◽

Digital Mammography ◽

Digital Breast Tomosynthesis ◽

Architectural Distortion ◽

Breast Cancers ◽

Breast Tomosynthesis ◽

Full Field ◽

Full Field Digital Mammography ◽

Ductal Hyperplasia ◽

History Of

The aim: The aim of our study was to determine if digital breast tomosynthesis improves breast cancer detection associated with architectural distortion in comparison with full-field digital mammography in the absence of appropriate history of trauma or surgery. Materials and methods: The overall rate of breast cancer involvement for the 34 patients with architectural distortion was 15 cases (44,1%) (invasive breast cancers, n=12 (36,4%); ductal cancer in situ, n= 3 (8,8%)) other findings associated with architectural distortion were high-risk lesions and benign findings (radial scar, n=5 (14,7%); sclerosing adenosis, n=9 (26,5%); typical lobular hyperplasia, n=3 (8,8%); typical ductal hyperplasia, n=2 cases (5,9%)). Results: Overall of 17/34 (50.0%) architectural distortions were identified at digital breast tomosynthesis that were missed at full-field digital mammography what was statistically significant difference ([95% CI, 2.56–7.45]; p=0.00001). Analysis of the results showed that sensitivity of full-field digital mammography for digital breast tomosynthesis detected breast cancers associated with architectural distortion was 53.3% [95% CI, 26.59% to 78.73%] and specificity was 52.63% [95% CI, 28.86% to 75.55%]. Conclusions: Our study suggests that digital breast tomosynthesis detects more breast cancers represented as architectural distortion which are occult on full-field digital mammography. Presence of microcalcifications within architectural distortion, in the absence of appropriate history of trauma or surgery, has a high likelihood of malignancy and obligatorily requires biopsy.

Download Full-text