scholarly journals Breast screening using 2D-mammography or integrating digital breast tomosynthesis (3D-mammography) for single-reading or double-reading – Evidence to guide future screening strategies

2014 ◽  
Vol 50 (10) ◽  
pp. 1799-1807 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nehmat Houssami ◽  
Petra Macaskill ◽  
Daniela Bernardi ◽  
Francesca Caumo ◽  
Marco Pellegrini ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Screening ◽  
Digital Breast Tomosynthesis ◽  
Breast Tomosynthesis ◽  
Double Reading ◽  
Single Reading ◽  
Screening Strategies

scholarly journals A Prospective Study of Automated Breast Ultrasound Screening of Women with Dense Breasts in a Digital Breast Tomosynthesis-based Practice

2020 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 125-133 ◽  
Author(s):  
Denise M Chough ◽  
Wendie A Berg ◽  
Andriy I Bandos ◽  
Grace Y Rathfon ◽  
Christiane M Hakim ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Digital Breast Tomosynthesis ◽  
Recall Rate ◽  
Breast Ultrasound ◽  
Ultrasound Screening ◽  
Breast Tomosynthesis ◽  
Double Reading ◽  
Significance Level ◽  
Dense Breast Tissue ◽  
Dense Breasts ◽  
Automated Breast Ultrasound

Abstract Objective To assess prospectively the interpretative performance of automated breast ultrasound (ABUS) as a supplemental screening after digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) or as a standalone screening of women with dense breast tissue. Methods Under an IRB-approved protocol (written consent required), women with dense breasts prospectively underwent concurrent baseline DBT and ABUS screening. Examinations were independently evaluated, in opposite order, by two of seven Mammography Quality Standards Act–qualified radiologists, with the primary radiologist arbitrating disagreements and making clinical management recommendations. We report results for 1111 screening examinations (598 first year and 513 second year) for which all diagnostic workups are complete. Imaging was also retrospectively reviewed for all cancers. Statistical assessments used a 0.05 significance level and accounted for correlation between participants’ examinations. Results Of 1111 women screened, primary radiologists initially “recalled” based on DBT alone (6.6%, 73/1111, CI: 5.2%–8.2%), of which 20 were biopsied, yielding 6/8 total cancers. Automated breast ultrasound increased recalls overall to 14.4% (160/1111, CI: 12.4%–16.6%), with 27 total biopsies, yielding 1 additional cancer. Double reading of DBT alone increased the recall rate to 10.7% (119/1111), with 21 biopsies, with no improvement in cancer detection. Double reading ABUS increased the recall rate to 15.2% (169/1111, CI: 13.2%–17.5%) of women, of whom 22 were biopsied, yielding the detection of 7 cancers, including one seen only on double reading ABUS. Inter-radiologist agreement was similar for recall recommendations from DBT (κ = 0.24, CI: 0.14–0.34) and ABUS (κ = 0.23, CI: 0.15–0.32). Integrated assessments from both readers resulted in a recall rate of 15.1% (168/1111, CI: 13.1%–17.4%). Conclusion Supplemental or standalone ABUS screening detected cancers not seen on DBT, but substantially increased noncancer recall rates.

Proposal of an algorithm to evaluate geometric distortion and artifact spreading in digital breast tomosynthesis

2021 ◽  
pp. 028418512110418
Author(s):  
Greiciane J Cesário ◽  
Lucas Paixão ◽  
Reneilson Santos ◽  
Margarita Chevalier ◽  
Márcia RP Attie ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Control ◽  
Breast Screening ◽  
Computational Algorithm ◽  
Digital Breast Tomosynthesis ◽  
Region Of Interest ◽  
Geometric Distortion ◽  
Spatial Accuracy ◽  
Breast Tomosynthesis ◽  
Control Procedures ◽  
Selection Of

Background According to the European Reference Organization for Quality Assurance Breast Screening and European Diagnostic Services, the spatial accuracy of reconstructed images and reconstruction artifacts must be evaluated in digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) quality control procedures. Purpose To propose a computational algorithm to evaluate the geometric distortion and artifact spreading (GDAS) in DBT images. Material and Methods The proposed algorithm analyzed tomosynthesis images of a phantom that contains aluminum spheres (1 mm in diameter) arranged in a rectangular matrix spaced 5 cm apart that was inserted in 5-mm-thick polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA). Results The obtained results were compared with the values provided by the algorithm developed by the National Coordinating Center for the Physics of Mammography (NCCPM). In the comparison, the results depended on the dimensions of the region of interest (ROI). This dependence proves the benefit of the proposed algorithm because it allows the user to select the ROI. Conclusion The computational algorithm proved to be useful for the evaluation of GDAS in DBT images, in the same way as the reference algorithm (NCCPM), as well as allowing the selection of the ROI dimensions that best suit the spreading of the artifact in the analyzed images.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document