COMPARATIVE STUDY
JOURNAL ARTICLE
Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

Improvement in diagnostic performance of breast cancer: comparison between conventional digital mammography alone and conventional mammography plus digital breast tomosynthesis.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to determine if the diagnostic performance of breast lesion examinations could be improved using both digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) and conventional digital mammography (CDM).

METHODS: Our institutional review board approved the protocol, and patients were provided the opportunity to opt out of the study. A total of 628 patients aged 22-91 years with abnormal screening results or clinical symptoms were consecutively enrolled between June 2015 and March 2016. All patients underwent DBT and CDM, and 1164 breasts were retrospectively analyzed by three radiologists who interpreted the results based on the Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System. Categories 4 and 5 were considered positive, and pathological results were the gold standard. The diagnostic performance of CDM and CDM plus DBT was compared using the mean areas under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves.

RESULTS: A total of 100 breast cancer cases were identified. The areas under the ROC curves were 0.9160 (95% confidence interval 0.8779-0.9541) for CDM alone and 0.9376 (95% confidence interval 0.9019-0.9733) for CDM plus DBT. The cut-off values for both CDM alone and CDM plus DBT measurements were 4, with sensitivities of 61.0% (61/100) and 83.0% (83/100), respectively, and specificities of 99.1% (1054/1064) and 98.9% (1052/1064), respectively. CDM yielded 39 false-negative diagnoses, while CDM plus DBT identified breast cancer in 22 of those cases (56.4%).

CONCLUSION: The combination of DBT and CDM for the diagnosis of breast cancer in women with abnormal examination findings or clinical symptoms proved effective and should be used to improve the diagnostic performance of breast cancer examinations.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app