Literature DB >> 28713173

A Standard Mammography Unit - Standard 3D Ultrasound Probe Fusion Prototype: First Results.

Rüdiger Schulz-Wendtland1, Sebastian M Jud2, Peter A Fasching2, Arndt Hartmann3, Marcus Radicke4, Claudia Rauh2, Michael Uder1, Marius Wunderle2, Paul Gass2, Hanna Langemann2, Matthias W Beckmann2, Julius Emons2.   

Abstract

AIM: The combination of different imaging modalities through the use of fusion devices promises significant diagnostic improvement for breast pathology. The aim of this study was to evaluate image quality and clinical feasibility of a prototype fusion device (fusion prototype) constructed from a standard tomosynthesis mammography unit and a standard 3D ultrasound probe using a new method of breast compression.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Imaging was performed on 5 mastectomy specimens from patients with confirmed DCIS or invasive carcinoma (BI-RADS ™ 6). For the preclinical fusion prototype an ABVS system ultrasound probe from an Acuson S2000 was integrated into a MAMMOMAT Inspiration (both Siemens Healthcare Ltd) and, with the aid of a newly developed compression plate, digital mammogram and automated 3D ultrasound images were obtained.
RESULTS: The quality of digital mammogram images produced by the fusion prototype was comparable to those produced using conventional compression. The newly developed compression plate did not influence the applied x-ray dose. The method was not more labour intensive or time-consuming than conventional mammography. From the technical perspective, fusion of the two modalities was achievable.
CONCLUSION: In this study, using only a few mastectomy specimens, the fusion of an automated 3D ultrasound machine with a standard mammography unit delivered images of comparable quality to conventional mammography. The device allows simultaneous ultrasound - the second important imaging modality in complementary breast diagnostics - without increasing examination time or requiring additional staff.

Entities:  

Keywords:  breast ultrasound; complementary breast diagnostics; mammography

Year:  2017        PMID: 28713173      PMCID: PMC5507113          DOI: 10.1055/s-0043-107034

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd        ISSN: 0016-5751            Impact factor:   2.915


  18 in total

1.  Combination of digital mammography with semi-automated 3D breast ultrasound.

Authors:  Ajay Kapur; Paul L Carson; Jeffrey Eberhard; Mitchell M Goodsitt; Kai Thomenius; Murtuza Lokhandwalla; Donald Buckley; Marilyn A Roubidoux; Mark A Helvie; Rebecca C Booi; Gerald L LeCarpentier; Ramon Q Erkamp; Heang-Ping Chan; J Brian Fowlkes; Jerry A Thomas; Cynthia E Landberg
Journal:  Technol Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2004-08

2.  Screening mammography--a long run for a short slide?

Authors:  H Gilbert Welch
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2010-09-23       Impact factor: 91.245

3.  Evaluating thin compression paddles for mammographically compatible ultrasound.

Authors:  Rebecca C Booi; Jochen F Krücker; Mitchell M Goodsitt; Matthew O'Donnell; Ajay Kapur; Gerald L LeCarpentier; Marilyn A Roubidoux; J Brian Fowlkes; Paul L Carson
Journal:  Ultrasound Med Biol       Date:  2007-03       Impact factor: 2.998

4.  Diagnostic evaluation of sonographically visualized breast lesions by using a new clinical amplitude/velocity reference imaging technique (CARI sonography).

Authors:  B Schütze; C Marx; M Fleck; J Reichenbach; W A Kaiser
Journal:  Invest Radiol       Date:  1998-06       Impact factor: 6.016

5.  Is mammographic screening justifiable considering its substantial overdiagnosis rate and minor effect on mortality?

Authors:  Karsten Juhl Jørgensen; John D Keen; Peter C Gøtzsche
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2011-09       Impact factor: 11.105

6.  Digital mammography: an update.

Authors:  R Schulz-Wendtland; M Fuchsjäger; T Wacker; K-P Hermann
Journal:  Eur J Radiol       Date:  2009-07-09       Impact factor: 3.528

7.  [Future of mammography-based imaging].

Authors:  R Schulz-Wendtland; T Wittenberg; T Michel; A Hartmann; M W Beckmann; C Rauh; S M Jud; B Brehm; M Meier-Meitinger; G Anton; M Uder; P A Fasching
Journal:  Radiologe       Date:  2014-03       Impact factor: 0.635

8.  2D/3D image fusion of X-ray mammograms with breast MRI: visualizing dynamic contrast enhancement in mammograms.

Authors:  Torsten Hopp; Pascal Baltzer; Matthias Dietzel; Werner A Kaiser; Nicole V Ruiter
Journal:  Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg       Date:  2011-06-05       Impact factor: 2.924

Review 9.  Overdiagnosis in mammographic screening for breast cancer in Europe: a literature review.

Authors:  Donella Puliti; Stephen W Duffy; Guido Miccinesi; Harry de Koning; Elsebeth Lynge; Marco Zappa; Eugenio Paci
Journal:  J Med Screen       Date:  2012       Impact factor: 2.136

Review 10.  Microcalcifications associated with breast cancer: an epiphenomenon or biologically significant feature of selected tumors?

Authors:  Maria P Morgan; Michelle M Cooke; Geraldine M McCarthy
Journal:  J Mammary Gland Biol Neoplasia       Date:  2005-04       Impact factor: 2.673

View more
  3 in total

Review 1.  Novel imaging approaches to screen for breast cancer: Recent advances and future prospects.

Authors:  Christopher L Vaughan
Journal:  Med Eng Phys       Date:  2019-10       Impact factor: 2.242

2.  First proof-of-concept evaluation of the FUSION-X-US-II prototype for the performance of automated breast ultrasound in healthy volunteers.

Authors:  Benedikt Schaefgen; Marija Juskic; Madeleine Hertel; Richard G Barr; Marcus Radicke; Anne Stieber; André Hennigs; Fabian Riedel; Christof Sohn; Joerg Heil; Michael Golatta
Journal:  Arch Gynecol Obstet       Date:  2021-05-10       Impact factor: 2.344

3.  Risk, Prediction and Prevention of Hereditary Breast Cancer - Large-Scale Genomic Studies in Times of Big and Smart Data.

Authors:  Marius Wunderle; Gregor Olmes; Naiba Nabieva; Lothar Häberle; Sebastian M Jud; Alexander Hein; Claudia Rauh; Carolin C Hack; Ramona Erber; Arif B Ekici; Juliane Hoyer; Georgia Vasileiou; Cornelia Kraus; André Reis; Arndt Hartmann; Rüdiger Schulz-Wendtland; Michael P Lux; Matthias W Beckmann; Peter A Fasching
Journal:  Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd       Date:  2018-06-04       Impact factor: 2.915

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.