One-view digital breast tomosynthesis as a stand-alone modality for breast cancer detection: do we need more?
One-view digital breast tomosynthesis as a stand-alone modality for breast cancer detection: do we need more?
复制标题
DOI：
10.1007/s00330-017-5167-3
复制
发表时间：
2018-05
影响因子：
5.9
通讯作者：
Sechopoulos I
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Rodriguez-Ruiz A;Gubern-Merida A;Imhof-Tas M;Lardenoije S;Wanders AJT;Andersson I;Zackrisson S;Lång K;Dustler M;Karssemeijer N;Mann RM;Sechopoulos I
目的：比较单视图数字化乳腺断层扫描(1V-DBT)与其他三种结合DBT和乳房X线摄影(DM)的乳腺癌检测方法的性能。6位放射科医生，其中3位有过1V-DBT的筛查经验，在两次会议上回顾了181例(恶性76例，良性50例，正常55例)。首先，按顺序进行评分：1v-DBT(内侧斜肌，MLO)、1v-DBT(MLO)+1v-DM(头尾侧，CC)和二视图DM+DBT(2v-DM+2v-DBT)。第二个疗程只涉及2v-DM。使用BI-RADS®和可疑程度(1-10)对病变进行评分。计算敏感度、特异度、受试者操作特征(ROC)和杰克-刀替代自由反应ROC(JAFROC)。平均而言，1V-DBT在JAFROC优值系数、ROC曲线下面积、灵敏度或特异度方面不逊于任何其他方案(p>；0.391)。没有1v-DBT筛查经验的读者在添加更多图像时敏感性提高(69-79%，p=0.019)，而有经验的读者在1v-DBT和2v-DM+2v-DBT之间显示出相似的敏感性(76%)和特异性(70%)(p=0.482)。根据病变类型和乳房密度进行的子分析显示，不同模式之间没有差异。1V-DBT的检测性能在统计上并不低于2V-DM或2V-DM+2V-DBT；它作为一种独立的模式使用可能足以满足经验丰富的读者的需求。·单视角乳房断层合成技术不逊于双视角数字乳房X光摄影。·单视DBT不逊于2视DM加2视DBT。·培训可使1V-dBT足以用于筛查。
To compare the performance of one-view digital breast tomosynthesis (1v-DBT) to that of three other protocols combining DBT and mammography (DM) for breast cancer detection. Six radiologists, three experienced with 1v-DBT in screening, retrospectively reviewed 181 cases (76 malignant, 50 benign, 55 normal) in two sessions. First, they scored sequentially: 1v-DBT (medio-lateral oblique, MLO), 1v-DBT (MLO) + 1v-DM (cranio-caudal, CC) and two-view DM + DBT (2v-DM+2v-DBT). The second session involved only 2v-DM. Lesions were scored using BI-RADS® and level of suspiciousness (1–10). Sensitivity, specificity, receiver operating characteristic (ROC) and jack-knife alternative free-response ROC (JAFROC) were computed. On average, 1v-DBT was non-inferior to any of the other protocols in terms of JAFROC figure-of-merit, area under ROC curve, sensitivity or specificity (p>0.391). While readers inexperienced with 1v-DBT screening improved their sensitivity when adding more images (69–79 %, p=0.019), experienced readers showed similar sensitivity (76 %) and specificity (70 %) between 1v-DBT and 2v-DM+2v-DBT (p=0.482). Subanalysis by lesion type and breast density showed no difference among modalities. Detection performance with 1v-DBT is not statistically inferior to 2v-DM or to 2v-DM+2v-DBT; its use as a stand-alone modality might be sufficient for readers experienced with this protocol. • One-view breast tomosynthesis is not inferior to two-view digital mammography. • One-view DBT is not inferior to 2-view DM plus 2-view DBT. • Training may lead to 1v-DBT being sufficient for screening.
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子：
19.7
作者：
Skaane, Per;Bandos, Andriy I.;Gullien, Randi
通讯作者：
Gullien, Randi
影响因子：
1.3
作者：
Skaane, Per;Gullien, Randi;Kreger, Mona
通讯作者：
Kreger, Mona
影响因子：
2.6
作者：
Bernardi, D.;Ciatto, S.;Houssami, N.
通讯作者：
Houssami, N.
影响因子：
3.3
作者：
Clauser, Paola;Nagl, Georg;Baltzer, Pascal A. T.
通讯作者：
Baltzer, Pascal A. T.
影响因子：
28.4
作者：
McDonald, Elizabeth S.;Oustimov, Andrew;Conant, Emily F.
通讯作者：
Conant, Emily F.