Literature DB >> 25439008

Cone beam breast CT with multiplanar and three dimensional visualization in differentiating breast masses compared with mammography.

Binghui Zhao1, Xiaohua Zhang2, Weixing Cai3, David Conover4, Ruola Ning5.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: This pilot study was to evaluate cone beam breast computed tomography (CBBCT) with multiplanar and three dimensional (3D) visualization in differentiating breast masses in comparison with two-view mammograms.
METHODS: Sixty-five consecutive female patients (67 breasts) were scanned by CBBCT after conventional two-view mammography (Hologic, Motarget, compression factor 0.8). For CBBCT imaging, three hundred (1024 × 768 × 16b) two-dimensional (2D) projection images were acquired by rotating the x-ray tube and a flat panel detector (FPD) 360 degree around one breast. Three-dimensional CBBCT images were reconstructed from the 2D projections. Visage CS 3.0 and Amira 5.2.2 were used to visualize reconstructed CBBCT images.
RESULTS: Eighty-five breast masses in this study were evaluated and categorized under the breast imaging reporting and data system (BI-RADS) according to plain CBBCT images and two-view mammograms, respectively, prior to biopsy. BI-RADS category of each breast was compared with biopsy histopathology. The results showed that CBBCT with multiplanar and 3D visualization would be helpful to identify the margin and characteristics of breast masses. The category variance ratios for CBBCT under the BI-RADS were 23.5% for malignant tumors (MTs) and 27.3% for benign lesions in comparison with pathology, which were evidently closer to the histopathology results than those of two-view mammograms, p value <0.01. With the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis, the area under the curve (AUC) of CBBCT was 0.911, larger than that (AUC 0.827) of two-view mammograms, p value <0.01.
CONCLUSION: CBBCT will be a distinctive noninvasive technology in differentiating and categorizing breast masses under BI-RADS. CBBCT may be considerably more effective to identify breast masses, especially some small, uncertain or multifocal masses than conventional two-view mammography.
Copyright © 2014. Published by Elsevier Ireland Ltd.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Breast neoplasm; Cone beam computed tomography; Malignant; Pathologic calcification

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25439008     DOI: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2014.05.032

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Radiol        ISSN: 0720-048X            Impact factor:   3.528


  16 in total

1.  Clinical application of low-dose phase contrast breast CT: methods for the optimization of the reconstruction workflow.

Authors:  S Pacilè; F Brun; C Dullin; Y I Nesterest; D Dreossi; S Mohammadi; M Tonutti; F Stacul; D Lockie; F Zanconati; A Accardo; G Tromba; T E Gureyev
Journal:  Biomed Opt Express       Date:  2015-07-29       Impact factor: 3.732

2.  Monochromatic breast computed tomography with synchrotron radiation: phase-contrast and phase-retrieved image comparison and full-volume reconstruction.

Authors:  Luca Brombal; Bruno Golosio; Fulvia Arfelli; Deborah Bonazza; Adriano Contillo; Pasquale Delogu; Sandro Donato; Giovanni Mettivier; Piernicola Oliva; Luigi Rigon; Angelo Taibi; Giuliana Tromba; Fabrizio Zanconati; Renata Longo
Journal:  J Med Imaging (Bellingham)       Date:  2018-11-27

3.  Pre- and post-contrast versus post-contrast cone-beam breast CT: can we reduce radiation exposure while maintaining diagnostic accuracy?

Authors:  Johannes Uhlig; Uwe Fischer; Lorenz Biggemann; Joachim Lotz; Susanne Wienbeck
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2018-11-28       Impact factor: 5.315

4.  The role of cone-beam breast-CT for breast cancer detection relative to breast density.

Authors:  Susanne Wienbeck; Johannes Uhlig; Susanne Luftner-Nagel; Antonia Zapf; Alexey Surov; Eva von Fintel; Vera Stahnke; Joachim Lotz; Uwe Fischer
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2017-07-04       Impact factor: 5.315

5.  Contrast-enhanced cone-beam breast-CT (CBBCT): clinical performance compared to mammography and MRI.

Authors:  Susanne Wienbeck; Uwe Fischer; Susanne Luftner-Nagel; Joachim Lotz; Johannes Uhlig
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2018-03-28       Impact factor: 5.315

6.  Optimization of the energy for Breast monochromatic absorption X-ray Computed Tomography.

Authors:  Pasquale Delogu; Vittorio Di Trapani; Luca Brombal; Giovanni Mettivier; Angelo Taibi; Piernicola Oliva
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2019-09-11       Impact factor: 4.379

7.  Noise Power Characteristics of a Micro-Computed Tomography System.

Authors:  Muhammad U Ghani; Liqiang Ren; Molly Wong; Yuhua Li; Bin Zheng; Xiujiang John Rong; Kai Yang; Hong Liu
Journal:  J Comput Assist Tomogr       Date:  2017-01       Impact factor: 1.826

8.  Diagnostic accuracy of cone-beam breast computed tomography: a systematic review and diagnostic meta-analysis.

Authors:  Johannes Uhlig; Annemarie Uhlig; Lorenz Biggemann; Uwe Fischer; Joachim Lotz; Susanne Wienbeck
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2018-09-25       Impact factor: 5.315

Review 9.  Dedicated breast CT: state of the art-Part II. Clinical application and future outlook.

Authors:  Yueqiang Zhu; Avice M O'Connell; Yue Ma; Aidi Liu; Haijie Li; Yuwei Zhang; Xiaohua Zhang; Zhaoxiang Ye
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2021-09-03       Impact factor: 5.315

10.  Effect of x-ray energy on the radiological image quality in propagation-based phase-contrast computed tomography of the breast.

Authors:  Sarina Wan; Benedicta D Arhatari; Yakov I Nesterets; Sheridan C Mayo; Darren Thompson; Jane Fox; Beena Kumar; Zdenka Prodanovic; Daniel Hausermann; Anton Maksimenko; Christopher Hall; Matthew Dimmock; Konstantin M Pavlov; Darren Lockie; Mary Rickard; Ziba Gadomkar; Alaleh Aminzadeh; Elham Vafa; Andrew Peele; Harry M Quiney; Sarah Lewis; Timur E Gureyev; Patrick C Brennan; Seyedamir Tavakoli Taba
Journal:  J Med Imaging (Bellingham)       Date:  2021-07-12
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.