María Del Mar Travieso-Aja1, Daniel Maldonado-Saluzzi1, Pedro Naranjo-Santana1, Claudia Fernández-Ruiz1, Wilsa Severino-Rondón1, Mario Rodríguez Rodríguez1, Víctor Vega Benítez2, Octavio Pérez-Luzardo3,4. 1. Breast Imaging Section, Department of Radiology, Grupo Hospitalario San Roque, C/Dolores de la Rocha, 35001, Las Palmas de Gran Canaria, Spain. 2. Breast Surgery Service, Insular and Maternal and Child Hospitals, Plaza Dr. Pasteur s/n, 35016, Las Palmas de Gran Canaria, Spain. 3. Research Institute of Biomedical and Health Sciences (IUIBS), University of Las Palmas de Gran Canaria, Paseo Blas Cabrera Felipe s/n, 35016, Las Palmas de Gran Canaria, Spain. octavio.perez@ulpgc.es. 4. Spanish Biomedical Research Centre, Physiopathology of Obesity and Nutrition (CIBERObn), Madrid, Spain. octavio.perez@ulpgc.es.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the diagnostic performance of contrast-enhanced dual-energy spectral mammography (CESM) in comparison with that of full-field digital mammography (FFDM), either alone or accompanied with breast ultrasound (BUS) in a large series of patients/breast lesions (n = 644). PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this retrospective study, five radiologists evaluated the lesions by three imaging modalities: FFDM, FFDM + BUS, and CESM and compared the imaging to the gold standard (histopathology or clinical follow-up). Diagnostic performance parameters and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves of CESM were calculated and compared to those of FFDM or FFDM + BUS (McNemar's test). Additionally, the reliability of tumor size measurement by CESM was compared with the histopathological measurement. RESULTS: The study included 218 benign and 426 malignant lesions. 85% of benign and 93% of malignant lesions were adequately identified using CESM. With respect to FFDM and FFDM + BUS, CESM significantly increased sensitivity to 93.2% (+ 10.7% and + 3.4%, respectively); specificity to 84.4% (+ 15.8% and + 1.7%, respectively); PPV to 92.3% (+ 26.8% and + 3.6%, respectively); NPV to 86.0% (+ 1.6% and + 1.8%, respectively); and accuracy to 90.2% (+ 15.8% and + 3.2%, respectively). In the ROC curves analyses, the comparison among the three AUC values was also statistically significant (p < 0.001). Good agreement between tumor diameters measured using CESM and histopathology was observed (Spearman's rank correlation, r = 0.891, p < 0.0001), although this technique tended to produce an overestimation of the size (+ 7 mm). CONCLUSIONS: CESM has high diagnostic accuracy and can be considered as a useful technique for the assessment of breast lesions.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the diagnostic performance of contrast-enhanced dual-energy spectral mammography (CESM) in comparison with that of full-field digital mammography (FFDM), either alone or accompanied with breast ultrasound (BUS) in a large series of patients/breast lesions (n = 644). PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this retrospective study, five radiologists evaluated the lesions by three imaging modalities: FFDM, FFDM + BUS, and CESM and compared the imaging to the gold standard (histopathology or clinical follow-up). Diagnostic performance parameters and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves of CESM were calculated and compared to those of FFDM or FFDM + BUS (McNemar's test). Additionally, the reliability of tumor size measurement by CESM was compared with the histopathological measurement. RESULTS: The study included 218 benign and 426 malignant lesions. 85% of benign and 93% of malignant lesions were adequately identified using CESM. With respect to FFDM and FFDM + BUS, CESM significantly increased sensitivity to 93.2% (+ 10.7% and + 3.4%, respectively); specificity to 84.4% (+ 15.8% and + 1.7%, respectively); PPV to 92.3% (+ 26.8% and + 3.6%, respectively); NPV to 86.0% (+ 1.6% and + 1.8%, respectively); and accuracy to 90.2% (+ 15.8% and + 3.2%, respectively). In the ROC curves analyses, the comparison among the three AUC values was also statistically significant (p < 0.001). Good agreement between tumor diameters measured using CESM and histopathology was observed (Spearman's rank correlation, r = 0.891, p < 0.0001), although this technique tended to produce an overestimation of the size (+ 7 mm). CONCLUSIONS: CESM has high diagnostic accuracy and can be considered as a useful technique for the assessment of breast lesions.
Entities:
Keywords:
Breast cancer; Breast ultrasound; Contrast-enhanced dual-energy spectral mammography (CESM); Digital mammography; Iodinated contrast medium
Authors: Andrew McGuire; Donal Peter O'Leary; Vicki Livingstone; Zeb Khan; Fionnula O'Connell; Henry Paul Redmond; Norma Relihan; Mark Corrigan; Max Ryan Journal: Breast J Date: 2017-01-31 Impact factor: 2.431
Authors: Rasha M Kamal; Maha H Helal; Sahar M Mansour; Marwa A Haggag; Omniya M Nada; Iman G Farahat; Nelly H Alieldin Journal: Br J Radiol Date: 2016-06-21 Impact factor: 3.039
Authors: I P L Houben; P Van de Voorde; C R L P N Jeukens; J E Wildberger; L F Kooreman; M L Smidt; M B I Lobbes Journal: Eur J Radiol Date: 2017-07-20 Impact factor: 3.528
Authors: Lidia Rosi Medeiros; Célia Scapin Duarte; Daniela Dornelles Rosa; Maria Isabel Edelweiss; Marcia Edelweiss; Fábio Rosa Silva; Erik Paul Winnnikow; Patrícia Duarte Simões Pires; Maria Inês Rosa Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2011-01-08 Impact factor: 4.872
Authors: E M Fallenberg; C Dromain; F Diekmann; F Engelken; M Krohn; J M Singh; B Ingold-Heppner; K J Winzer; U Bick; D M Renz Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2013-09-19 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Maria Del Mar Travieso Aja; Purificacion Munoz; Mario Rodriguez Rodriguez; Victor Vega Benitez; Octavio P Luzardo Journal: Iran J Radiol Date: 2016-04-25 Impact factor: 0.212