Literature DB >> 9680578

Findings at mammographic screening on only one standard projection: outcomes analysis.

E A Sickles1.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To determine the radiographic and clinical outcomes of findings seen at mammographic screening on only one standard projection.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: To identify prospectively marked benign-appearing and abnormal findings that were seen on only one standard projection, 63,836 consecutive two-view mammographic screening studies were reviewed. Subsequent outcomes analysis included determination of the frequency of occurrence, mammographic features, work-up performed, and final imaging assessment. For imaging findings that prompted tissue sampling, histopathologic diagnosis was recorded. To identify breast cancers among the remaining findings, screening cases were linked with a regional tumor registry.
RESULTS: Of the 61,273 screening studies available for review, 2,023 (3.3%) involved prospectively identified findings seen on only one standard projection. One thousand eighty-six (53.7%) studies with one-view-only findings were judged to represent superimposition of normal breast structures (summation artifact) simply from the standard projections obtained at screening; findings in an additional 587 (29.0%) studies were characterized as representing superimposition of normal structures after recall for further diagnostic imaging. None of these 1,673 cases was subsequently found to be cancer. Cancers were identified in 36 one-view-only studies; six involved ductal carcinoma in situ; 18, invasive ductal carcinoma; and 12, invasive lobular carcinoma (a large percentage [33%], since only 10% of all cancers are invasive lobular carcinoma).
CONCLUSION: Findings seen on only one standard projection are common among lesions identified at mammographic screening. More than 80% can be correctly assessed as representing superimposition of normal structures, either without or with the aid of additional imaging studies. Among those findings that truly are cancer, a disproportionately high percentage are invasive lobular carcinoma.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1998        PMID: 9680578     DOI: 10.1148/radiology.208.2.9680578

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Radiology        ISSN: 0033-8419            Impact factor:   11.105


  10 in total

1.  A controlled evaluation of tuned-aperture computed tomography applied to digital spot mammography.

Authors:  R L Webber; H R Underhill; R I Freimanis
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2000-05       Impact factor: 4.056

2.  The potential use of ultra-low radiation dose images in digital mammography--a clinical proof-of-concept study in craniocaudal views.

Authors:  A M J Bluekens; W J H Veldkamp; K H Schuur; N Karssemeijer; M J M Broeders; G J den Heeten
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2015-01-09       Impact factor: 3.039

Review 3.  Digital Breast Tomosynthesis: Concepts and Clinical Practice.

Authors:  Alice Chong; Susan P Weinstein; Elizabeth S McDonald; Emily F Conant
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2019-05-14       Impact factor: 11.105

4.  Breast Cancer Conspicuity on Simultaneously Acquired Digital Mammographic Images versus Digital Breast Tomosynthesis Images.

Authors:  Katrina E Korhonen; Emily F Conant; Eric A Cohen; Marie Synnestvedt; Elizabeth S McDonald; Susan P Weinstein
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2019-05-14       Impact factor: 11.105

5.  Positive predictive value of specific mammographic findings according to reader and patient variables.

Authors:  Aruna Venkatesan; Philip Chu; Karla Kerlikowske; Edward A Sickles; Rebecca Smith-Bindman
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2009-01-21       Impact factor: 11.105

Review 6.  Strategies to Increase Cancer Detection: Review of True-Positive and False-Negative Results at Digital Breast Tomosynthesis Screening.

Authors:  Katrina E Korhonen; Susan P Weinstein; Elizabeth S McDonald; Emily F Conant
Journal:  Radiographics       Date:  2016-10-07       Impact factor: 5.333

7.  Analysing the Insights and Assessing the Impact of a Digital Mammography and Tomosynthesis Based 2-year Long Prospective Breast Screening Programme Organised in Western India.

Authors:  Pranav Ajmera; Pratiksha Yadav; Udayan Dosi; Shreeya Goyal
Journal:  Asian Pac J Cancer Prev       Date:  2022-01-01

8.  Improved automated early detection of breast cancer based on high resolution 3D micro-CT microcalcification images.

Authors:  Redona Brahimetaj; Inneke Willekens; Annelien Massart; Ramses Forsyth; Jan Cornelis; Johan De Mey; Bart Jansen
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2022-02-11       Impact factor: 4.430

9.  Direct-Conversion Molecular Breast Imaging of Invasive Breast Cancer: Imaging Features, Extent of Invasive Disease, and Comparison Between Invasive Ductal and Lobular Histology.

Authors:  Amy Lynn Conners; Katie N Jones; Carrie B Hruska; Jennifer R Geske; Judy C Boughey; Deborah J Rhodes
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2015-09       Impact factor: 3.959

10.  Mammographic density changes in surgical weight loss-an indication for personalized screening.

Authors:  Natalia Partain; Ali Mokdad; Nancy Puzziferri; Jessica Porembka; Stephen Seiler; Alana Christie; Deborah Farr; Aeisha Rivers; A Marilyn Leitch; Rachel Wooldridge; James Huth; Roshni Rao
Journal:  BMC Med Imaging       Date:  2018-05-09       Impact factor: 1.930

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.