Christopher L Vaughan1. 1. Medical Imaging Research Unit, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Cape Town, Observatory, Western Cape 7925, South Africa; CapeRay Medical (Pty) Ltd, Suite 2, 51 Bell Crescent, Westlake Business Park, Cape Town, Western Cape 7945, South Africa. Electronic address: kit.vaughan@uct.ac.za.
Abstract
AIM OF THE STUDY: Over the past 50 years, the application of mammography - an X-ray of the breast - to screen healthy women has been a successful strategy to reduce breast cancer mortality. The aim of this study was to review the literature on novel imaging approaches that have the potential to replace mammography. METHODS: An online literature search was carried out using PubMed, Google Scholar, ScienceDirect and Google Patents. The search keywords included "breast cancer", "imaging" and "screening", with 51 journal articles and five United States patents being selected for review. Seventeen relevant online sources were also identified and referenced. RESULTS: In addition to full-field digital mammography (FFDM), a further nine imaging modalities were identified for review. These included: digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT); breast computed tomography (BCT); automated breast ultrasound (ABUS); fusion of FFDM and ABUS; fusion of DBT and ABUS; magnetic resonance imaging (MRI); optical imaging; radio-wave imaging; and tactile sensor imaging. Important parameters were considered: diagnostic success (sensitivity and specificity), especially in dense breasts; time to acquire the images; and capital cost of the equipment. CONCLUSIONS: DBT is rapidly replacing FFDM although it still misses invasive cancers in dense tissue. The fusion of ABUS, either with FFDM or DBT, will lead to sensitivity and specificity approaching 100%. The fusion of opto-acoustic imaging with ultrasound holds considerable promise for the future.
AIM OF THE STUDY: Over the past 50 years, the application of mammography - an X-ray of the breast - to screen healthy women has been a successful strategy to reduce breast cancer mortality. The aim of this study was to review the literature on novel imaging approaches that have the potential to replace mammography. METHODS: An online literature search was carried out using PubMed, Google Scholar, ScienceDirect and Google Patents. The search keywords included "breast cancer", "imaging" and "screening", with 51 journal articles and five United States patents being selected for review. Seventeen relevant online sources were also identified and referenced. RESULTS: In addition to full-field digital mammography (FFDM), a further nine imaging modalities were identified for review. These included: digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT); breast computed tomography (BCT); automated breast ultrasound (ABUS); fusion of FFDM and ABUS; fusion of DBT and ABUS; magnetic resonance imaging (MRI); optical imaging; radio-wave imaging; and tactile sensor imaging. Important parameters were considered: diagnostic success (sensitivity and specificity), especially in dense breasts; time to acquire the images; and capital cost of the equipment. CONCLUSIONS: DBT is rapidly replacing FFDM although it still misses invasive cancers in dense tissue. The fusion of ABUS, either with FFDM or DBT, will lead to sensitivity and specificity approaching 100%. The fusion of opto-acoustic imaging with ultrasound holds considerable promise for the future.
Authors: Christiane K Kuhl; Simone Schrading; Heribert B Bieling; Eva Wardelmann; Claudia C Leutner; Roy Koenig; Walther Kuhn; Hans H Schild Journal: Lancet Date: 2007-08-11 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Christiane K Kuhl; Simone Schrading; Kevin Strobel; Hans H Schild; Ralf-Dieter Hilgers; Heribert B Bieling Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2014-06-23 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: L T Niklason; B T Christian; L E Niklason; D B Kopans; D E Castleberry; B H Opsahl-Ong; C E Landberg; P J Slanetz; A A Giardino; R Moore; D Albagli; M C DeJule; P F Fitzgerald; D F Fobare; B W Giambattista; R F Kwasnick; J Liu; S J Lubowski; G E Possin; J F Richotte; C Y Wei; R F Wirth Journal: Radiology Date: 1997-11 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Rüdiger Schulz-Wendtland; Sebastian M Jud; Peter A Fasching; Arndt Hartmann; Marcus Radicke; Claudia Rauh; Michael Uder; Marius Wunderle; Paul Gass; Hanna Langemann; Matthias W Beckmann; Julius Emons Journal: Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd Date: 2017-04-27 Impact factor: 2.915
Authors: Mark Sak; Neb Duric; Peter Littrup; Lisa Bey-Knight; Haythem Ali; Patricia Vallieres; Mark E Sherman; Gretchen L Gierach Journal: Ultrasound Med Biol Date: 2016-09-29 Impact factor: 2.998
Authors: Veronica L Irvin; Zhenzhen Zhang; Michael S Simon; Rowan T Chlebowski; Shiuh-Wen Luoh; Aladdin H Shadyab; Jessica L Krok-Schoen; Fred K Tabung; Lihong Qi; Marcia L Stefanick; Pepper Schedin; Sonali Jindal Journal: JAMA Netw Open Date: 2020-06-01
Authors: Yichuan Tang; Ryosuke Tsumura; Jakub Tomasz Kaminski; Haichong K Zhang Journal: IEEE Trans Ultrason Ferroelectr Freq Control Date: 2022-07-29 Impact factor: 3.267