Literature DB >> 12540430

Optimal reference mammography: a comparison of mammograms obtained 1 and 2 years before the present examination.

Jules H Sumkin1, Brenda L Holbert, Jennifer S Herrmann, Christiane A Hakim, Marie A Ganott, William R Poller, Ratan Shah, Lara A Hardesty, David Gur.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: We assessed and compared the benefit of using images acquired 1 year or 2 years previously during mammography interpretations.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Eleven radiologists and one resident reviewed 128 cases three times: once without prior mammograms for comparison, once with mammograms from the most recent (1 year) examination, and once with mammograms acquired 2 years previously. They were asked to determine whether the patient should be recalled for additional procedures. Performances under the three conditions were compared.
RESULTS: Radiologists were significantly more accurate (p < 0.001) when comparison mammograms (obtained 1 or 2 years previously) were available. Although sensitivity was not significantly affected between the availability of mammograms from 1 or 2 years earlier (p > 0.10), the specificity was. Specificity using mammograms from the latest examination (obtained 1 year previously) as a reference was significantly better (p = 0.03) than specificity using mammograms obtained 2 years previously.
CONCLUSION: Comparison mammograms are important for accurate diagnosis-in particular, for increasing specificity. The latest prior examination seems to be the optimal one for this purpose.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12540430     DOI: 10.2214/ajr.180.2.1800343

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol        ISSN: 0361-803X            Impact factor:   3.959


  9 in total

1.  Measures of angular spread and entropy for the detection of architectural distortion in prior mammograms.

Authors:  Shantanu Banik; Rangaraj M Rangayyan; J E Leo Desautels
Journal:  Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg       Date:  2012-03-30       Impact factor: 2.924

2.  Development and validation of queries using structured query language (SQL) to determine the utilization of comparison imaging in radiology reports stored on PACS.

Authors:  Paras Lakhani; Elliot D Menschik; Alberto F Goldszal; Joseph P Murray; Mark G Weiner; Curtis P Langlotz
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2006-03       Impact factor: 4.056

3.  Should previous mammograms be digitised in the transition to digital mammography?

Authors:  S Taylor-Phillips; M G Wallis; A G Gale
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2009-03-18       Impact factor: 5.315

4.  Effect of the Availability of Prior Full-Field Digital Mammography and Digital Breast Tomosynthesis Images on the Interpretation of Mammograms.

Authors:  Christiane M Hakim; Victor J Catullo; Denise M Chough; Marie A Ganott; Amy E Kelly; Dilip D Shinde; Jules H Sumkin; Luisa P Wallace; Andriy I Bandos; David Gur
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2015-03-13       Impact factor: 11.105

5.  Effect of observing change from comparison mammograms on performance of screening mammography in a large community-based population.

Authors:  Bonnie C Yankaskas; Ryan C May; Jeanine Matuszewski; J Michael Bowling; Molly P Jarman; Bruce F Schroeder
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2011-10-26       Impact factor: 11.105

6.  Impact of and interaction between the availability of prior examinations and DBT on the interpretation of negative and benign mammograms.

Authors:  Christiane M Hakim; Marie I Anello; Cathy S Cohen; Marie A Ganott; Amy H Lu; Ronald L Perrin; Ratan Shah; Marion Lee Spangler; Andriy I Bandos; David Gur
Journal:  Acad Radiol       Date:  2013-12-05       Impact factor: 3.173

7.  Improving Screening Mammography Outcomes Through Comparison With Multiple Prior Mammograms.

Authors:  Jessica H Hayward; Kimberly M Ray; Dorota J Wisner; John Kornak; Weiwen Lin; Bonnie N Joe; Edward A Sickles
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2016-07-06       Impact factor: 3.959

8.  Computer-aided detection of architectural distortion in prior mammograms of interval cancer.

Authors:  Rangaraj M Rangayyan; Shantanu Banik; J E Leo Desautels
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2010-02-02       Impact factor: 4.056

9.  Repeat Breast Ultrasound Demonstrates Utility with Added Cancer Detection in Patients following Breast Imaging Second Opinion Recommendations.

Authors:  R Jared Weinfurtner; Melissa Anne Mallory; Dayana Bermudez
Journal:  Breast J       Date:  2022-01-31       Impact factor: 2.269

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.