Department of Health and Functioning, Faculty of Health and Social Sciences, Western Norway University of Applied Sciences, Høgskulen på Vestlandet, Postbox 7030, 5020, Bergen, Norway.
Division of Research, Internationalisation and Innovation, Library, Western Norway University of Applied Sciences, Høgskulen på Vestlandet, Postbox 7030, 5020, Bergen, Norway.
Eur Radiol. 2020 Aug;30(8):4223-4233. doi: 10.1007/s00330-020-06798-6. Epub 2020 Mar 28.
To summarise and compare the performance of magnification mammography and digital zoom utilising a full-field digital mammography (FFDM) system in the detection and diagnosis of microcalcifications.
We ran an extended search in MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Engineering Village and Web of Science. Diagnostic test studies, experimental breast phantom studies and a Monte Carlo phantom study were included. A narrative approach was selected to summarise and compare findings regarding the detection of microcalcifications, while a hierarchical model with bivariate analysis was used for the meta-analysis of sensitivity and specificity for diagnosing microcalcifications.
Nine studies were included. Phantom studies suggested that the size of microcalcifications, magnification or zoom factor, exposure factors and detector technology determine whether digital zoom is equivalent to magnification mammography in the detection of microcalcifications. Pooled sensitivity for magnification and zoom calculated from the diagnostic test studies was 0.93 (95% CI 0.84-0.97) and 0.85 (95% CI 0.70-0.94), respectively. Pooled specificity was 0.55 (95% CI 0.51-0.58) and 0.56 (95% CI 0.50-0.62), respectively. The differences between the sensitivities and specificities were not statistically significant.
Digital zoom may be equivalent to magnification mammography. Diagnostic test studies and phantom studies using newer detector technology would contribute additional knowledge on this topic.
• The performance of digital zoom is comparable to magnification for detecting microcalcifications when newer detector technology and optimised imaging procedures are utilised. • The accuracy of digital zoom appears equivalent to geometric magnification in diagnosing microcalcifications.
总结和比较使用全视野数字乳腺摄影术（FFDM）系统的放大乳腺摄影术和数字变焦在检测和诊断微钙化中的性能。
我们在 MEDLINE、EMBASE、CINAHL、Engineering Village 和 Web of Science 中进行了扩展搜索。纳入了诊断性测试研究、实验性乳腺体模研究和蒙特卡罗体模研究。选择叙述性方法来总结和比较关于微钙化检测的发现，而使用二元分析的层次模型则用于微钙化诊断的敏感性和特异性的荟萃分析。
纳入了 9 项研究。体模研究表明，微钙化的大小、放大倍数或变焦系数、曝光因素和探测器技术决定了数字变焦在检测微钙化方面是否等同于放大乳腺摄影术。来自诊断性测试研究的放大和变焦的汇总敏感性分别为 0.93（95%置信区间 0.84-0.97）和 0.85（95%置信区间 0.70-0.94）。汇总特异性分别为 0.55（95%置信区间 0.51-0.58）和 0.56（95%置信区间 0.50-0.62）。敏感性和特异性之间的差异无统计学意义。
数字变焦可能等同于放大乳腺摄影术。使用更新的探测器技术和优化的成像程序的诊断性测试研究和体模研究将有助于对此主题的进一步了解。
当使用更新的探测器技术和优化的成像程序时，数字变焦在检测微钙化方面的性能与放大乳腺摄影术相当。
数字变焦在诊断微钙化方面的准确性似乎与几何放大相当。
