Performance of Screening Breast MRI After Negative Full-Field Digital Mammography Versus After Negative Digital Breast Tomosynthesis in Women at Higher Than Average Risk for Breast Cancer

2019 ◽  
Vol 212 (2) ◽  
pp. 271-279 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ashley A. Roark ◽  
Pragya A. Dang ◽  
Bethany L. Niell ◽  
Elkan F. Halpern ◽  
Constance D. Lehman
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Digital Mammography ◽  
Digital Breast Tomosynthesis ◽  
Breast Mri ◽  
Average Risk ◽  
Breast Tomosynthesis ◽  
Full Field ◽  
Full Field Digital Mammography

Assessment of extent of breast cancer: Comparison between digital breast tomosynthesis and full-field digital mammography

2013 ◽  
Vol 68 (12) ◽  
pp. 1254-1259 ◽  
Author(s):  
H.S. Mun ◽  
H.H. Kim ◽  
H.J. Shin ◽  
J.H. Cha ◽  
P.L. Ruppel ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Digital Mammography ◽  
Digital Breast Tomosynthesis ◽  
Breast Tomosynthesis ◽  
Full Field ◽  
Full Field Digital Mammography

scholarly journals Comparing the diagnostic efficacy of digital breast tomosynthesis with full-field digital mammography using BI-RADS scoring

2021 ◽  
Vol 52 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Rana M. Naeim ◽  
Rania A. Marouf ◽  
Merhan A. Nasr ◽  
Marwa E. Abd El-Rahman
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Diagnostic Accuracy ◽  
Digital Mammography ◽  
Digital Breast Tomosynthesis ◽  
Breast Lesions ◽  
Breast Tomosynthesis ◽  
Full Field ◽  
Dense Breasts ◽  
Full Field Digital Mammography ◽  
Diagnostic Indices

Abstract Background Mammography has been the mainstay for the detection of breast cancer over decades. It has gradually advanced from screen film to full-field digital mammography. Tomosynthesis has evolved as advanced imaging for early diagnosis of breast lesions with a promising role in both diagnostic and screening settings, particularly in dense and treated breasts. Results This study included 90 female patients according to our inclusion criteria. All patients perform full-field digital mammography (FFDM) and digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) and were classified according to breast density and age groups. Breast imaging reporting and data system (BI-RADS) scoring was assigned for each case. This was correlated with the final diagnosis; the diagnostic indices of mammography were a sensitivity of 64.44%, a specificity of 77.78%, a positive predictive value (PPV) 74.63%, a negative predictive value (NPV) of 68.63%, and a diagnostic accuracy of 71.11%. Diagnostic indices of DBT were a sensitivity of 100%, a specificity of 97.77%, PPV 97.78%, NPV 100%, and diagnostic accuracy of 97.7%. In patients with dense breasts American College of Radiology (ACR) (c and d), 61% of cases had changed their BIRADS scoring with the addition of tomosynthesis. Yet, in non-dense breast ACR (a and b), 45% of cases had changed BIRADS scoring with the addition of DBT to FFDM. Conclusion DBT is a promising imaging modality offering better detection and characterization of different breast abnormalities, especially in young females, and those with dense breasts with an increase of sensitivity and specificity than FFDM. This leads to a reduction in the recalled cases, negative biopsies, and assessing the efficacy of therapy as it enables improving detection of breast cancer and different breast lesions not visualized by conventional mammography

scholarly journals DIGITAL BREAST TOMOSYNTHESIS AND FULL-FIELD DIGITAL MAMMOGRAPHY IN BREAST CANCER DETECTION ASSOCIATED WITH FOUR ASYMMETRY TYPES

2021 ◽  
Vol 74 (4) ◽  
pp. 842-848
Author(s):  
Andrii V. Gurando ◽  
Tetiana M. Babkina ◽  
Iryna M. Dykan ◽  
Tetiana M. Kozarenko ◽  
Viacheslav R. Gurando ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Cancer Detection ◽  
Digital Mammography ◽  
Digital Breast Tomosynthesis ◽  
Breast Cancer Detection ◽  
Breast Tomosynthesis ◽  
Full Field ◽  
Full Field Digital Mammography ◽  
Different Types ◽  
Sclerosing Adenosis

The aim: Comparing sensitivity and specificity of digital breast tomosynthesis and full-field digital mammography in breast cancer detection associated with four different types of asymmetries according to BI-RADS Atlas. Materials and methods: Study included 201 patients with four types of asymmetries according BI-RADS atlas (asymmetry – 81 (40,3%), focal asymmetry – 82 (40,8%), global asymmetry – 36 (17,9%) and developing asymmetry – 2 (1,0%)) who underwent full-field digital mammography, digital breast tomosynthesis and hand-held full breast ultrasound from January 2017 to June 2018. The general rate of breast cancer for the 201 patients with asymmetries was 8 cases (4,0%) (IBC, n=6 (3,0%); DCIS, n=2 (1,0%) other findings associated with asymmetries were non-malignant, n=10 (5,0%) (sclerosing adenosis, n=5 (2,5%); fibroadenomatosis, n=3 (1,5%); simple cyst, n=1 (0,5%); radial scar associated with papilloma, typical ductal hyperplasia and sclerosing adenosis, n=1 (0,5%). Results: Analysis of the results showed that sensitivity of digital breast tomosynthesis was 75.0% [95% CI, 34.91% to 96.81%] and specificity was 94.8% [95% CI, 90.68% to 97.49%] which was superior to full-field digital mammography sensitivity 50.0% [95% CI, 15.70% to 84.30%] and specificity 91.19% [95% CI, 86.27% to 94.78%] for breast cancer detection associated with different types of asymmetries. Conclusions: Using of digital breast tomosynthesis in assessment of breast asymmetries can improve sensitivity and specificity in breast cancer detection and reduce number of unnecessary biopsies and short-interval follow-up examinations.

scholarly journals Initial Experience with Combination Digital Breast Tomosynthesis Plus Full Field Digital Mammography or Full Field Digital Mammography Alone in the Screening Environment

2014 ◽  
Vol 4 ◽  
pp. 9 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stamatia Destounis ◽  
Andrea Arieno ◽  
Renee Morgan
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Digital Mammography ◽  
Digital Breast Tomosynthesis ◽  
Recall Rate ◽  
Screening Mammography ◽  
Breast Tomosynthesis ◽  
Full Field ◽  
Full Field Digital Mammography ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
History Of

Objectives: Initial review of patients undergoing screening mammography imaged with a combination of digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) plus full field digital mammography (FFDM) compared with FFDM alone. Materials and Methods: From June 2011 to December 2011, all patients presenting for routine screening mammography were offered a combination DBT plus FFDM exam. Under institutional review board approval, we reviewed 524 patients who opted for combination DBT plus FFDM and selected a sample group of 524 FFDM screening exams from the same time period for a comparative analysis. The χ2 (Chi-square) test was used to compare recall rates, breast density, personal history of breast cancer, and family history of breast cancer between the two groups. Results: Recall rate for FFDM, 11.45%, was significantly higher (P < 0001) than in the combination DBT plus FFDM group (4.20%). The biopsy rate in the FFDM group was 2.29% (12/524), with a cancer detection rate of 0.38% (2/524, or 3.8 per 1000) and positive predictive value (PPV) of 16.7% (2/12). The biopsy rate for the DBT plus FFDM group was 1.14% (n = 6/524), with a cancer detection rate 0.57% (n = 3/524, or 5.7 per 1000) and PPV of 50.0% (n = 3/6). Personal history of breast cancer in the FFDM group was significantly lower (P < 0.0001) than in the combination DBT plus FFDM group; 2.5% and 5.7%, respectively. A significant difference in family history of breast cancer (P < 0.0001) was found, with a higher rate in the combination DBT plus FFDM group (36.0% vs. 53.8%). There was a significant difference between the combination DBT plus FFDM group and FFDM alone group, when comparing breast density (P < 0.0147, 61.64% vs. 54.20% dense breasts, respectively) with a higher rate of dense breasts in the DBT plus FFDM group. In follow-up, one cancer was detected within one year of normal screening mammogram in the combination DBT plus FFDM group. Conclusion: Our initial experience found the recall rate in the combination DBT plus FFDM group was significantly lower than in the FFDM alone group, despite the fact that the combination DBT plus FFDM group had additional risk factors.

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

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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document