Benoît Mesurolle1, Mona El Khoury2, Armelle Travade3, Christine Bagard3, Agnès Pétrou3, Camille Monghal3. 1. Department of Radiology, Elsan, Centre République, 99 avenue de la République, BP 304, 63023, Clermont-Ferrand Cedex 2, France. bmesurolle@yahoo.fr. 2. Department of Radiology, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Montréal, 1051 Rue Sanguinet, Montréal, QC, H2X 3H4, Canada. 3. Department of Radiology, Elsan, Centre République, 99 avenue de la République, BP 304, 63023, Clermont-Ferrand Cedex 2, France.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Breast cancer screening consists of batch interpretation of two-view (cranio-caudal CC- and medio-lateral oblique MLO) digital mammography (DM) per breast. The DM-MLO view was substituted by an MLO-digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) and its synthetic (2D-synthetic mammography (SM)-MLO) view. The performance of this hybrid protocol was evaluated in a one-stop-shop screening visit, providing immediate reading and additional work up. METHODS: Retrospective, observational review, comparing the cancer detection rate (CDR), breast US rates, and biopsy rates in 13,048 women screened with DM from June 2015 to November 2016 and 8639 women screened with SM-DBT/DM from January 2017 to July 2018. Chi-square tests or Fisher's exact tests were used to compare proportions between the two screening imaging methods. RESULTS: SM + DBT/DM significantly increased the overall CDR (10.8‰) versus DM (7.5‰) (p = 0.0120) with more invasive lobular carcinoma (14% versus 4%) (p = 0.0357) detected and overall more invasive cancers among women with breast density type B (p = 0.0411) and those aged between 60 and 70 (p = 0.0306). This was achieved at the expense of additional sonographic examinations performed (33.5% in DBT group versus 26.7% in DM group) (p < 0.0001), more BI-RADS category III assigned (1.8% in SM-DBT/DM group versus 1.5% in DM group) (p = 0.0443) and more biopsy rates (3.0 % in SM-DBT/DM group versus 1.7% in DM group) (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Hybrid mammographic protocol replacing 2D-MLO by DBT-MLO and SM-MLO views in a one-stop-shop screening visit improved CDR, at the expense of more sonographic examinations, biopsies, and BI-RADS III lesions. Breast US alone detected 9.2% of all breast cancers in this cohort. KEY POINTS: • Hybrid protocol including MLO (DBT + SM) with 2D DM CC may improve CDR compared to standard 4 views 2D DM in a screening program providing immediate interpretation. • Adding screening breast US, when perceived necessary, in the same visit of a screening mammography, increases cancer detection rate of 9.2%. • Based on our results, hybrid protocol including DBT + SM in MLO plane and DM in CC plane could be safely implemented as a transition towards DBT and SM alone, without any compromise in the cancer detection ability. Our results may vary according to the properties of machines from different vendors.
OBJECTIVES: Breast cancer screening consists of batch interpretation of two-view (cranio-caudal CC- and medio-lateral oblique MLO) digital mammography (DM) per breast. The DM-MLO view was substituted by an MLO-digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) and its synthetic (2D-synthetic mammography (SM)-MLO) view. The performance of this hybrid protocol was evaluated in a one-stop-shop screening visit, providing immediate reading and additional work up. METHODS: Retrospective, observational review, comparing the cancer detection rate (CDR), breast US rates, and biopsy rates in 13,048 women screened with DM from June 2015 to November 2016 and 8639 women screened with SM-DBT/DM from January 2017 to July 2018. Chi-square tests or Fisher's exact tests were used to compare proportions between the two screening imaging methods. RESULTS: SM + DBT/DM significantly increased the overall CDR (10.8‰) versus DM (7.5‰) (p = 0.0120) with more invasive lobular carcinoma (14% versus 4%) (p = 0.0357) detected and overall more invasive cancers among women with breast density type B (p = 0.0411) and those aged between 60 and 70 (p = 0.0306). This was achieved at the expense of additional sonographic examinations performed (33.5% in DBT group versus 26.7% in DM group) (p < 0.0001), more BI-RADS category III assigned (1.8% in SM-DBT/DM group versus 1.5% in DM group) (p = 0.0443) and more biopsy rates (3.0 % in SM-DBT/DM group versus 1.7% in DM group) (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Hybrid mammographic protocol replacing 2D-MLO by DBT-MLO and SM-MLO views in a one-stop-shop screening visit improved CDR, at the expense of more sonographic examinations, biopsies, and BI-RADS III lesions. Breast US alone detected 9.2% of all breast cancers in this cohort. KEY POINTS: • Hybrid protocol including MLO (DBT + SM) with 2D DM CC may improve CDR compared to standard 4 views 2D DM in a screening program providing immediate interpretation. • Adding screening breast US, when perceived necessary, in the same visit of a screening mammography, increases cancer detection rate of 9.2%. • Based on our results, hybrid protocol including DBT + SM in MLO plane and DM in CC plane could be safely implemented as a transition towards DBT and SM alone, without any compromise in the cancer detection ability. Our results may vary according to the properties of machines from different vendors.