Institute of Anatomy, Department of Experimental Medicine, University of Genoa, Largo Rosanna Benzi 8, 16132, Genoa, Italy.
Eur Radiol. 2012 Mar;22(3):539-44. doi: 10.1007/s00330-011-2305-1. Epub 2011 Oct 11.
To assess if digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) is at least equal to digital spot compression view (DSCV).
Following institutional approval and written informed consent, both DBT and DSCV were obtained in women with a screening abnormality. The diagnostic accuracy of DBT and DSCV was evaluated by two radiologists of varying experience (Reader1 and Reader2).
52 consecutive recalled women without calcification (mean age: 51 ± 12 years) underwent DSCV and DBT. Overall sensitivity was equal for both techniques (100% [95% CI, 91-100%] for DBT and 100% [95% CI, 91-100%] for DSCV). Overall specificity was higher for DBT (100% [95%CI, 91-100%]) than for DSCV (94% [95% CI, 91-100%]). Specificity for DSCV was higher for Reader1 (95% [95% CI, 91-100%]). Reader2 had lower values of specificity (92% [95% CI, 90-92%]). On DSCV, three and two false positives were recorded by Reader2 and Reader1, respectively. Overall, the area under the curve (AUC) was greater for DBT (AUC = 1) than for DSCV (AUC = 0.963). The mean difference between the two techniques was not significantly different (P = 0.43).
In this dataset, diagnostic accuracy of digital breast tomosynthesis is at least equal to that of digital spot compression.
• Digital spot compression views (DSCVs) are often needed in breast screening programmes. • Digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) now offers an alternative to DSCV • In recalls without calcification, DBT was at least equally accurate as DSCVs • DBT has a lower mean glandular dose than DSCVs • Thus DBT has the potential to help reduce the recall rate.
评估数字乳腺断层合成(DBT)是否至少与数字点压视图(DSCV)相当。
在机构批准并获得书面知情同意后,对有筛查异常的女性同时进行 DBT 和 DSCV 检查。两位经验不同的放射科医生(Reader1 和 Reader2)评估 DBT 和 DSCV 的诊断准确性。
52 例连续的无钙化召回女性(平均年龄:51±12 岁)进行了 DSCV 和 DBT 检查。两种技术的整体敏感性相同(DBT 为 100%[95%CI,91-100%],DSCV 为 100%[95%CI,91-100%])。DBT 的整体特异性(100%[95%CI,91-100%])高于 DSCV(94%[95%CI,91-100%])。Reader1 的 DSCV 特异性较高(95%[95%CI,91-100%]),Reader2 的特异性较低(92%[95%CI,90-92%])。Reader2 和 Reader1 在 DSCV 上分别记录了三个和两个假阳性。总体而言,DBT 的曲线下面积(AUC)大于 DSCV(AUC=1 和 AUC=0.963)。两种技术之间的平均差异无显著差异(P=0.43)。
在本数据集,数字乳腺断层合成的诊断准确性至少与数字点压视图相当。
乳腺筛查方案中经常需要数字点压视图(DSCVs)。
数字乳腺断层合成(DBT)现在是 DSCV 的替代方案。
在无钙化的召回中,DBT 与 DSCVs 一样准确。
DBT 的平均腺体剂量低于 DSCVs。
因此,DBT 有可能降低召回率。