Suppr超能文献

数字乳腺断层合成二维图像与全视野数字化乳腺摄影用于人群筛查的比较:来自维罗纳筛查项目的结果。

Digital Breast Tomosynthesis with Synthesized Two-Dimensional Images versus Full-Field Digital Mammography for Population Screening: Outcomes from the Verona Screening Program.

机构信息

From the UOSD Breast Unit ULSS9, Ospedale di Marzana, Piazzale Lambranzi, 1, 37034 Verona, Italy (F.C., S.B., G.R., L.C., P.B.); Veneto Tumour Registry, Veneto Region, Padua, Italy (M.Z.); Dipartimento di Scienze Radiologiche, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy (R.R); Organizational Unit Prevention and Public Health, Veneto Region, Venice, Italy (C.F.); DAI Patologia e Diagnostica, Azienda Ospedaliera Universitaria Integrata, Verona, Italy (S.M.); and Sydney School of Public Health, Sydney Medical School, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia (N.H.).

出版信息

Radiology. 2018 Apr;287(1):37-46. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2017170745. Epub 2017 Dec 13.

Abstract

Purpose To examine the outcomes of a breast cancer screening program based on digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) plus synthesized two-dimensional (2D) mammography compared with those after full-field digital mammography (FFDM). Materials and Methods This prospective study included 16 666 asymptomatic women aged 50-69 years who were recruited in April 2015 through March 2016 for DBT plus synthetic 2D screening in the Verona screening program. A comparison cohort of women screened with FFDM (n = 14 423) in the previous year was included. Screening detection measures for the two groups were compared by calculating the proportions associated with each outcome, and the relative rates (RRs) were estimated with multivariate logistic regression. Results Cancer detection rate (CDR) for DBT plus synthetic 2D imaging was 9.30 per 1000 screening examinations versus 5.41 per 1000 screening examinations with FFDM (RR, 1.72; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.30, 2.29). CDR was significantly higher in patients screened with DBT plus synthetic 2D imaging than in those screened with FFDM among women classified as having low breast density (RR, 1.53; 95% CI: 1.13, 2.10) or high breast density (RR, 2.86; 95% CI: 1.42, 6.25). The positive predictive value (PPV) for recall was almost doubled with DBT plus synthetic 2D imaging: 23.3% versus 12.9% of recalled patients who were screened with FFDM (RR, 1.81; 95% CI: 1.34, 2.47). The recall rate was similar between groups (RR, 0.95; 95% CI: 0.84, 1.06), whereas the recall rate with invasive assessment was higher for DBT plus synthetic 2D imaging than for FFDM (RR, 1.93; 95% CI: 1.31, 2.03). The mean number of screening studies interpreted per hour was significantly lower for screening examinations performed with DBT plus synthetic 2D imaging (38.5 screens per hour) than with FFDM (60 screens per hour) (P < .001). Conclusion DBT plus synthetic 2D imaging increases CDRs with recall rates comparable to those of FFDM. DBT plus synthetic 2D imaging increased image reading time and the time needed for invasive assessments. RSNA, 2017.

摘要

目的 本研究旨在评估基于数字乳腺断层合成摄影术(DBT)联合合成二维(2D)乳腺摄影的乳腺癌筛查方案的结果,并与全数字化乳腺摄影(FFDM)后的结果进行比较。

材料与方法 本前瞻性研究纳入了 2015 年 4 月至 2016 年 3 月期间通过维罗纳筛查计划招募的 16666 名年龄在 50-69 岁之间的无症状女性,这些女性接受了 DBT 联合合成 2D 筛查。同时纳入了前一年接受 FFDM 筛查的女性(n=14423)作为对照组。通过计算每个结果相关的比例,比较两组的筛查检出率(CDR),并使用多变量逻辑回归估计相对风险(RR)。

结果 DBT 联合合成 2D 成像的 CDR 为 9.30/1000 例筛查检查,而 FFDM 的 CDR 为 5.41/1000 例筛查检查(RR,1.72;95%置信区间[CI]:1.30,2.29)。在乳腺密度低(RR,1.53;95%CI:1.13,2.10)或乳腺密度高(RR,2.86;95%CI:1.42,6.25)的患者中,与 FFDM 相比,DBT 联合合成 2D 成像的 CDR 显著更高。DBT 联合合成 2D 成像的召回阳性预测值(PPV)几乎翻倍:接受 FFDM 筛查的召回患者中,23.3%与 12.9%(RR,1.81;95%CI:1.34,2.47)需要进一步检查。两组的召回率相似(RR,0.95;95%CI:0.84,1.06),但 DBT 联合合成 2D 成像的有创评估召回率更高(RR,1.93;95%CI:1.31,2.03)。与 FFDM 相比,DBT 联合合成 2D 成像的每小时解释的筛查研究数量明显更少(每小时 38.5 次筛查)(P<0.001)。

结论 DBT 联合合成 2D 成像提高了 CDR,同时保持了与 FFDM 相当的召回率。DBT 联合合成 2D 成像增加了图像阅读时间和有创评估所需的时间。RSNA,2017 年。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验