Matthias Wetzl1, Evelyn Wenkel2, Matthias Dietzel3, Lisa Siegler4, Julius Emons5, Ebba Dethlefsen6, Felix Heindl7, Christiane Kuhl8, Michael Uder9, Sabine Ohlmeyer10. 1. Department of Radiology, University Hospital Erlangen, Maximiliansplatz 3, 91054 Erlangen, Germany. Electronic address: Matthias.wetzl@uk-erlangen.de. 2. Department of Radiology, University Hospital Erlangen, Maximiliansplatz 3, 91054 Erlangen, Germany. Electronic address: evelyn.wenkel@uk-erlangen.de. 3. Department of Radiology, University Hospital Erlangen, Maximiliansplatz 3, 91054 Erlangen, Germany. Electronic address: Matthias.dietzel@uk-erlangen.de. 4. Department of Radiology, University Hospital Erlangen, Maximiliansplatz 3, 91054 Erlangen, Germany. Electronic address: lisa.siegler@uk-erlangen.de. 5. Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital Erlangen, Universitätsstraße 21/23, 91054 Erlangen, Germany. Electronic address: julius.emons@uk-erlangen.de. 6. Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Aachen, Pauwelsstraße 30, 52074 Aachen, Germany. Electronic address: edethlefsen@ukaachen.de. 7. Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital Erlangen, Universitätsstraße 21/23, 91054 Erlangen, Germany. Electronic address: felix.heindl@uk-erlangen.de. 8. Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Aachen, Pauwelsstraße 30, 52074 Aachen, Germany. Electronic address: ckuhl@ukaachen.de. 9. Department of Radiology, University Hospital Erlangen, Maximiliansplatz 3, 91054 Erlangen, Germany. Electronic address: michael.uder@uk-erlangen.de. 10. Department of Radiology, University Hospital Erlangen, Maximiliansplatz 3, 91054 Erlangen, Germany. Electronic address: sabine.ohlmeyer@uk-erlangen.de.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To intra-individually compare patient comfort of spiral breast computed tomography (SBCT) versus digital mammography (DM). METHOD: This prospective IRB approved study included 79 patients undergoing both SBCT and DM for the assessment of BI-RADS 4 - 6 lesions. Following SBCT and DM patients answered a standardized questionnaire regarding "Overall patient comfort" and "Pain" on a 5-point Likert Scale. On the same Likert Scale, experienced radiologic technicians rated the workflow of the SBCT regarding patients' "Mobility", ease of patient "Positioning", patients' adherence to the examination ("Compliance") and expected image quality. Visibility of fibroglandular tissue in SBCT was independently rated by two breast radiologists on a 10-point Likert Scale. Subgroups stratified by menopausal status and body mass index (BMI) were analyzed. RESULTS: Patients reported significantly lower pain during SBCT (4.73 ± 0.57) compared to DM (4.09 ± 0.90; P < 0.01). This effect was independent from BMI. However, pain reduction by SBCT was most pronounced in premenopausal (SBCT vs. DM: 4.79 ± 0.50 vs. 3.89 ± 0.99) compared to postmenopausal patients (4.71 ± 0.77 vs. 4.20 ± 0.89). Overall patient comfort in premenopausal patients tended to be higher in SBCT compared to DM (P = 0.08). Radiologic technicians rated the SBCT procedure generally as positive (average: 4.62 ± 0.56). Coverage of fibroglandular tissue in SBCT was generally high (9.82 ± 0.43) and interrater agreement was good (κ = 0.77). CONCLUSIONS: Patients experience less pain during spiral breast computed tomography compared to DM, especially in premenopausal women. Imaging is feasible at a high level of anatomical breast coverage and without problems with the clinical workflow.
PURPOSE: To intra-individually compare patient comfort of spiral breast computed tomography (SBCT) versus digital mammography (DM). METHOD: This prospective IRB approved study included 79 patients undergoing both SBCT and DM for the assessment of BI-RADS 4 - 6 lesions. Following SBCT and DM patients answered a standardized questionnaire regarding "Overall patient comfort" and "Pain" on a 5-point Likert Scale. On the same Likert Scale, experienced radiologic technicians rated the workflow of the SBCT regarding patients' "Mobility", ease of patient "Positioning", patients' adherence to the examination ("Compliance") and expected image quality. Visibility of fibroglandular tissue in SBCT was independently rated by two breast radiologists on a 10-point Likert Scale. Subgroups stratified by menopausal status and body mass index (BMI) were analyzed. RESULTS: Patients reported significantly lower pain during SBCT (4.73 ± 0.57) compared to DM (4.09 ± 0.90; P < 0.01). This effect was independent from BMI. However, pain reduction by SBCT was most pronounced in premenopausal (SBCT vs. DM: 4.79 ± 0.50 vs. 3.89 ± 0.99) compared to postmenopausal patients (4.71 ± 0.77 vs. 4.20 ± 0.89). Overall patient comfort in premenopausal patients tended to be higher in SBCT compared to DM (P = 0.08). Radiologic technicians rated the SBCT procedure generally as positive (average: 4.62 ± 0.56). Coverage of fibroglandular tissue in SBCT was generally high (9.82 ± 0.43) and interrater agreement was good (κ = 0.77). CONCLUSIONS: Patients experience less pain during spiral breast computed tomography compared to DM, especially in premenopausal women. Imaging is feasible at a high level of anatomical breast coverage and without problems with the clinical workflow.
Authors: Julius Henning Niehoff; Andreas Heuser; Arwed Elias Michael; Simon Lennartz; Jan Borggrefe; Jan Robert Kroeger Journal: Tomography Date: 2022-05-23
Authors: Anna Landsmann; Carlotta Ruppert; Jann Wieler; Patryk Hejduk; Alexander Ciritsis; Karol Borkowski; Moritz C Wurnig; Cristina Rossi; Andreas Boss Journal: Eur Radiol Exp Date: 2022-07-20