Literature DB >> 23239242

The current status of positron emission mammography in breast cancer diagnosis.

Vasileios Kalles1, George C Zografos, Xeni Provatopoulou, Dimitra Koulocheri, Antonia Gounaris.   

Abstract

Mammography is currently the standard breast cancer screening procedure, even though it is constrained by low specificity in the detection of malignancy and low sensitivity in women with dense breast tissue. Modern imaging modalities, such as magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), have been developed in an effort to replace or complement mammography, because the early detection of breast cancer is critical for efficient treatment and long-term survival of patients. Nuclear medicine imaging technology has been introduced in the field of oncology with the development of positron emission tomography (PET), positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) and, ultimately, positron emission mammography (PEM). PET offers the advantage of precise diagnosis, by measuring metabolism with the use of a radiotracer and identifying changes at the cellular level. PET/CT imaging allows for a more accurate assessment by merging the anatomic localization to the functional image. However, both techniques have not yet been established as diagnostic tools in early breast cancer detection, primarily because of low sensitivity, especially for sub-centimeter and low-grade tumors. PEM, a breast-specific device with increased spatial resolution, has been developed in order to overcome these limitations. It has demonstrated higher detectability than PET/CT and comparable or better sensitivity than MRI. The ability to target the lesions visible in PEM with PEM-guided breast biopsy systems adds to its usability in the early diagnosis of breast cancer. The results from recent studies summarized in this review indicate that PEM may prove to be a useful first-line diagnostic tool, although further evaluation and improvement are required.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2012        PMID: 23239242     DOI: 10.1007/s12282-012-0433-3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Breast Cancer        ISSN: 1340-6868            Impact factor:   4.239


  15 in total

Review 1.  Use of Breast-Specific PET Scanners and Comparison with MR Imaging.

Authors:  Deepa Narayanan; Wendie A Berg
Journal:  Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am       Date:  2018-05       Impact factor: 2.266

2.  Multimodal breast cancer imaging using coregistered dynamic diffuse optical tomography and digital breast tomosynthesis.

Authors:  Bernhard B Zimmermann; Bin Deng; Bhawana Singh; Mark Martino; Juliette Selb; Qianqian Fang; Amir Y Sajjadi; Jayne Cormier; Richard H Moore; Daniel B Kopans; David A Boas; Mansi A Saksena; Stefan A Carp
Journal:  J Biomed Opt       Date:  2017-04-01       Impact factor: 3.170

3.  [Molecular breast imaging. An update].

Authors:  K Pinker; T H Helbich; H Magometschnigg; B Fueger; P Baltzer
Journal:  Radiologe       Date:  2014-03       Impact factor: 0.635

4.  Can positron emission mammography help to identify clinically significant breast cancer in women with suspicious calcifications on mammography?

Authors:  Almir G V Bitencourt; Eduardo N P Lima; Bruna R C Macedo; Jorge L F A Conrado; Elvira F Marques; Rubens Chojniak
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2016-09-02       Impact factor: 5.315

Review 5.  The Evolving Role of FDG-PET/CT in the Diagnosis, Staging, and Treatment of Breast Cancer.

Authors:  Koosha Paydary; Siavash Mehdizadeh Seraj; Mahdi Zirakchian Zadeh; Sahra Emamzadehfard; Sara Pourhassan Shamchi; Saeid Gholami; Thomas J Werner; Abass Alavi
Journal:  Mol Imaging Biol       Date:  2019-02       Impact factor: 3.488

Review 6.  Ultrasound Imaging Technologies for Breast Cancer Detection and Management: A Review.

Authors:  Rongrong Guo; Guolan Lu; Binjie Qin; Baowei Fei
Journal:  Ultrasound Med Biol       Date:  2017-10-26       Impact factor: 2.998

7.  Is imaging the extremities with PEM feasible? A novel application for a high-resolution positron emission scanner.

Authors:  Sania Rahim; Osama Mawlawi; Shree Taylor; Richelle Millican; Nancy M Swanston; J Elliott Brown; Eric M Rohren
Journal:  Clin Imaging       Date:  2013-11-27       Impact factor: 1.605

8.  Correlation of PUV and SUV in the extremities while using PEM as a high-resolution positron emission scanner.

Authors:  Sania Rahim; Osama Mawlawi; Patricia Fox; Shree Taylor; Richelle Millican; Nancy M Swanston; J Elliott Brown; Eric M Rohren
Journal:  Skeletal Radiol       Date:  2014-01-16       Impact factor: 2.199

9.  Comparison between fine needle aspiration cytology (FNAC) and core needle biopsy (CNB) in the diagnosis of breast lesions.

Authors:  M Moschetta; M Telegrafo; D A Carluccio; J P Jablonska; L Rella; Gabriella Serio; M Carrozzo; A A Stabile Ianora; G Angelelli
Journal:  G Chir       Date:  2014 Jul-Aug

Review 10.  The role of general nuclear medicine in breast cancer.

Authors:  Lacey R Greene; Deborah Wilkinson
Journal:  J Med Radiat Sci       Date:  2015-02-12
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.