Automated Breast Volume Assessment Derived From Digital Breast Tomosynthesis Images Compared to Mastectomy Specimen Weight and Its Applications in Cosmetic Optimisation

Abstract Objective To investigate whether having the nipple imaged in profile was associated with breast characteristics or compression parameters, and whether it affected selected outcomes in screening with standard digital mammography or digital breast tomosynthesis. Methods In this IRB-approved retrospective study, results from 87 450 examinations (174 900 breasts) performed as part of BreastScreen Norway, 2016–2019, were compared by nipple in profile status and screening technique using descriptive statistics and generalized estimating equations. Unadjusted and adjusted odds ratios with 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) were estimated for outcomes of interest, including age, breast volume, volumetric breast density, and compression force as covariates. Results Achieving the nipple in profile versus not in profile was associated with lower breast volume (845.1 cm3 versus 1059.9 cm3, P < 0.01) and higher mammographic density (5.6% versus 4.4%, P < 0.01). Lower compression force and higher compression pressure were applied to breasts with the nipple in profile (106.6 N and 11.5 kPa) compared to the nipple not in profile (110.8 N and 10.5 kPa, P < 0.01 for both). The adjusted odds ratio was 0.95 (95% CI: 0.88–1.02; P = 0.15) for recall and 0.92 (95% CI: 0.77–1.10; P = 0.36) for screen-detected cancer for nipple in profile versus not in profile. Conclusion Breast characteristics and compression parameters might hamper imaging of the nipple in profile. However, whether the nipple was in profile or not on the screening mammograms did not influence the odds of recall or screen-detected cancer, regardless of screening technique.

Download Full-text

Digital breast tomosynthesis: computerized detection of microcalcifications in reconstructed breast volume using a 3D approach

10.1117/12.844511 ◽

2010 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Heang-Ping Chan ◽

Berkman Sahiner ◽

Jun Wei ◽

Lubomir M. Hadjiiski ◽

Chuan Zhou ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Digital Breast Tomosynthesis ◽

Breast Volume ◽

Breast Tomosynthesis ◽

Reconstructed Breast

Download Full-text

The relationship between VolparaDensity™ breast volume measurements and mastectomy specimen weight– a new pre-operative tool to guide implant selection

European Journal of Surgical Oncology ◽

10.1016/j.ejso.2018.02.215 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 44 (6) ◽

pp. 911

Author(s):

M. Dunstan ◽

C. Kang ◽

T. O'Neill ◽

L. Wilkinson ◽

S. Tang

Keyword(s):

Breast Volume ◽

Specimen Weight ◽

Mastectomy Specimen ◽

Implant Selection ◽

Volume Measurements ◽

The Relationship

Download Full-text

Prediction of the Ideal Implant Size Using 3-Dimensional Healthy Breast Volume in Unilateral Direct-to-Implant Breast Reconstruction

Medicina ◽

10.3390/medicina56100498 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 56 (10) ◽

pp. 498

Author(s):

Jeong-Hoon Kim ◽

Jin-Woo Park ◽

Kyong-Je Woo

Keyword(s):

Breast Reconstruction ◽

Prediction Performance ◽

Surface Imaging ◽

Breast Volume ◽

Specimen Weight ◽

Mastectomy Specimen ◽

Implant Size ◽

3D Surface Imaging ◽

3D Volume ◽

The Ideal

Background and objectives: There is no consensus regarding accurate methods for assessing the size of the implant required for achieving symmetry in direct-to-implant (DTI) breast reconstruction. The purpose of this study was to determine whether the ideal implant size could be estimated using 3D breast volume or mastectomy specimen weight, and to compare prediction performances between the two variables. Materials and Methods: Patients who underwent immediate DTI breast reconstruction from August 2017 to April 2020 were included in this study. Breast volumes were measured using 3D surface imaging preoperatively and at postoperative three months. Ideal implant size was calculated by correcting the used implant volume by the observed postoperative asymmetry in 3D surface imaging. Prediction models using mastectomy weight or 3D volume were made to predict the ideal implant volume. The prediction performance was compared between the models. Results: A total of 56 patients were included in the analysis. In correlation analysis, the volume of the implant used was significantly correlated with the mastectomy specimen weight (R2 = 0.810) and the healthy breast volume (R2 = 0.880). The mean ideal implant volume was 278 ± 123 cc. The prediction model was developed using the healthy breast volume: Implant volume (cc) = healthy breast volume × 0.78 + 26 cc (R2 = 0.900). The prediction model for the ideal implant size using the 3D volume showed better prediction performance than that of using the mastectomy specimen weight (R2 = 0.900 vs 0.759, p < 0.001). Conclusions: The 3D volume of the healthy breast is a more reliable predictor than mastectomy specimen weight to estimate the ideal implant size. The estimation formula obtained in this study may assist in the selection of the ideal implant size in unilateral DTI breast reconstruction.

Download Full-text

A Prospective Investigation of Predictive Parameters for Preoperative Volume Assessment in Breast Reconstruction

Journal of Clinical Medicine ◽

10.3390/jcm10225216 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 10 (22) ◽

pp. 5216

Author(s):

Nicola Zingaretti ◽

Giovanni Miotti ◽

Carlo Alberto Maronese ◽

Miriam Isola ◽

Gianni Franco Guarneri ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Breast Reconstruction ◽

Strong Correlation ◽

Breast Implant ◽

Study Data ◽

Volume Estimation ◽

Breast Volume ◽

Volume Determination ◽

Areola Complex ◽

Mastectomy Specimen ◽

Volume Assessment

Preoperative breast volume estimation is very important for the success of the breast surgery. In this study four different breast volume determination methods were compared. The end-point of this prospective study was to evaluate the concordance between different modalities of breast volume assessment (MRI, BREAST-V, mastectomy specimen weight, conversion from weight to volume of mastectomy specimen) and the breast prosthetic volume implanted. The study enrolled 64 patients between 2017 and 2019, who had all been treated by the same surgeons for monolateral nipple–areola complex-sparing mastectomy and implant breast reconstruction. Only patients who had a breast reconstruction classified as “excellent” from an objective (BCCT.core software) and subjective (questionnaire) point of view at the 6-month interval after the operation were included in the study. Data analysis highlighted a strong correlation between the volumes of the chosen prostheses and the weights of mastectomy converted into volume, especially for patients with grades B and C parenchymal density. The values of the agreement between the volumes of the chosen prostheses and the assessments from MRI and BREAST -V proved to be lower than expected from the literature. None of the four studied methods presented any strong correlation with the initial breast width. Our results suggest that conversion from weight to volume of mastectomy specimen should be used to assist in determining the volume of the breast implant to be implanted. This method would help the reconstructive surgeon guide the choice of the most appropriate implant preoperatively.

Download Full-text