Fitzgerald Anita, Berentson-Shaw Jessica
New Zealand Guidelines Group, Wellington, New Zealand.
N Z Med J. 2012 Mar 9;125(1351):80-91.
To determine the effectiveness of digital infrared thermography for the detection of breast cancer in a screening population, and as a diagnostic tool in women with suspected breast cancer.
A comprehensive search of electronic databases together with a search of international websites was conducted. Diagnostic studies comparing thermography with mammography for screening in asymptomatic populations; or comparing thermography with histology in women with suspected breast cancer; were eligible for inclusion. Quality of included studies was appraised using the QUADAS criteria.
One study reported results for thermography in screening population and five studies reported diagnostic accuracy of thermography in women with suspected breast cancer. Overall, studies were of average quality. Sensitivity for thermography as a screening tool was 25% (specificity 74%) compared to mammography. Sensitivity for thermography as a diagnostic tool ranged from 25% (specificity 85%) to 97% (specificity 12%) compared to histology.
Currently there is not sufficient evidence to support the use of thermography in breast cancer screening, nor is there sufficient evidence to show that thermography provides benefit to patients as an adjunctive tool to mammography or to suspicious clinical findings in diagnosing breast cancer.
确定数字红外热成像技术在筛查人群中检测乳腺癌以及作为疑似乳腺癌女性诊断工具的有效性。
对电子数据库进行全面检索,并检索国际网站。纳入比较热成像与乳腺X线摄影在无症状人群中进行筛查的诊断性研究;或比较热成像与疑似乳腺癌女性组织学检查结果的研究。采用QUADAS标准评估纳入研究的质量。
一项研究报告了热成像在筛查人群中的结果,五项研究报告了热成像在疑似乳腺癌女性中的诊断准确性。总体而言,研究质量为中等。与乳腺X线摄影相比,热成像作为筛查工具的敏感性为25%(特异性为74%)。与组织学检查相比,热成像作为诊断工具的敏感性范围为25%(特异性为85%)至97%(特异性为12%)。
目前没有足够的证据支持在乳腺癌筛查中使用热成像技术,也没有足够的证据表明热成像作为乳腺X线摄影或诊断乳腺癌时可疑临床发现的辅助工具能给患者带来益处。