Literature DB >> 21971901

Comparative evaluation of digital mammography and film mammography: systematic review and meta-analysis.

Wagner Iared1, David Carlos Shigueoka, Maria Regina Torloni, Fernanda Garozzo Velloni, Sérgio Aron Ajzen, Alvaro Nagib Atallah, Orsine Valente.   

Abstract

CONTEXT AND
OBJECTIVE: Mammography is the best method for breast-cancer screening and is capable of reducing mortality rates. Studies that have assessed the clinical impact of mammography have been carried out using film mammography. Digital mammography has been proposed as a substitute for film mammography given the benefits inherent to digital technology. The aim of this study was to compare the performance of digital and film mammography.
DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis.
METHOD: The Medline, Scopus, Embase and Lilacs databases were searched looking for paired studies, cohorts and randomized controlled trials published up to 2009 that compared the performance of digital and film mammography, with regard to cancer detection, recall rates and tumor characteristics. The reference lists of included studies were checked for any relevant citations.
RESULTS: A total of 11 studies involving 190,322 digital and 638,348 film mammography images were included. The cancer detection rates were significantly higher for digital mammography than for film mammography (risk relative, RR = 1.17; 95% confidence interval, CI = 1.06-1.29; I² = 19%). The advantage of digital mammography seemed greatest among patients between 50 and 60 years of age. There were no significant differences between the two methods regarding patient recall rates or the characteristics of the tumors detected.
CONCLUSION: The cancer detection rates using digital mammography are slightly higher than the rates using film mammography. There are no significant differences in recall rates between film and digital mammography. The characteristics of the tumors are similar in patients undergoing the two methods.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21971901     DOI: 10.1590/s1516-31802011000400009

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Sao Paulo Med J        ISSN: 1516-3180            Impact factor:   1.044


  6 in total

Review 1.  Breast cancer screening: an evidence-based update.

Authors:  Mackenzie S Fuller; Christoph I Lee; Joann G Elmore
Journal:  Med Clin North Am       Date:  2015-03-05       Impact factor: 5.456

2.  Comparison of Digital and Screen-Film Mammography for Breast-Cancer Screening: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Soo Yeon Song; Boyoung Park; Seri Hong; Min Jung Kim; Eun Hye Lee; Jae Kwan Jun
Journal:  J Breast Cancer       Date:  2019-05-13       Impact factor: 3.588

3.  Systematic reviews as a 'lens of evidence': Determinants of benefits and harms of breast cancer screening.

Authors:  Olena Mandrik; Nadine Zielonke; Filip Meheus; J L Hans Severens; Neela Guha; Rolando Herrero Acosta; Raul Murillo
Journal:  Int J Cancer       Date:  2019-03-14       Impact factor: 7.396

Review 4.  [Digital Mammography as a Screening Tool in Korea].

Authors:  Soo Yeon Song; Seri Hong; Jae Kwan Jun
Journal:  Taehan Yongsang Uihakhoe Chi       Date:  2021-01-31

5.  Methodological quality of systematic reviews and clinical trials on women's health published in a Brazilian evidence-based health journal.

Authors:  Cristiane Rufino Macedo; Rachel Riera; Maria Regina Torloni
Journal:  Clinics (Sao Paulo)       Date:  2013-04       Impact factor: 2.365

6.  Budget impact analysis of switching to digital mammography in a population-based breast cancer screening program: a discrete event simulation model.

Authors:  Mercè Comas; Arantzazu Arrospide; Javier Mar; Maria Sala; Ester Vilaprinyó; Cristina Hernández; Francesc Cots; Juan Martínez; Xavier Castells
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-05-15       Impact factor: 3.240

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.