Renaldo Andrew, Miller Matthew, Caley Matthew, Ganti Ramapriya, Patrie James, Rochman Carrie, Nguyen Jonathan V
University of Virginia Health System, Department of Radiology and Medical Imaging, Charlottesville, VA, USA.
University of Virginia School of Medicine, Department of Public Health Sciences, Charlottesville, VA, USA.
J Breast Imaging. 2022 Jan 20;4(1):19-24. doi: 10.1093/jbi/wbab094. eCollection 2022 Jan-Feb.
Some vendors have created algorithms that generate synthetic 2D (s2D) images from a digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) dataset to reduce the radiation from obtaining a separate 2D digital mammography (DM). This study evaluated the visibility of amorphous calcifications on 2D DM versus s2D on screening mammography.
This IRB-approved, retrospective, reader study included screening mammograms from 36 women who received screening DBT exams where both 2D DM and s2D images were obtained: 28 screening mammograms that were eventually given BI-RADS category 4 or 5 for amorphous calcifications and 8 BI-RADS category 1 or 2 screening exams. Two rounds of interpretation were conducted with a six-week washout period. Cases were randomized to display either the 2D DM or s2D images, which were then alternated in the second round. Four fellowship-trained breast radiologists determined whether a study merited recall for calcifications. If so, they rated calcification visibility on a scale of 1 to 5. McNemar chi-square tests were conducted to assess differences in recall rates and Wilcoxon signed rank tests were used to examine shifts in visibility.
There was no difference in detection rates of amorphous calcifications between 2D DM and s2D, which were 75.9% and 75.0%, respectively ( = 1.000). Collectively, amorphous calcifications were more visible on s2D than 2D DM, with mean visibility scores of 3.4 versus 3.0, respectively ( = 0.005).
Synthetic 2D did not change identification of amorphous calcifications compared to 2D DM, and readers considered them more visible on average.
一些供应商开发了算法，可从数字乳腺断层合成（DBT）数据集中生成合成二维（s2D）图像，以减少获取单独的二维数字乳腺摄影（DM）时的辐射。本研究评估了在筛查乳腺摄影中，二维DM与s2D上非晶态钙化的可见性。
这项经机构审查委员会批准的回顾性读者研究纳入了36名接受筛查DBT检查的女性的筛查乳腺摄影图像，这些女性同时获得了二维DM和s2D图像：28例最终因非晶态钙化被判定为乳腺影像报告和数据系统（BI-RADS）4类或5类的筛查乳腺摄影，以及8例BI-RADS 1类或2类的筛查检查。进行了两轮解读，间隔六周洗脱期。病例被随机分配以显示二维DM或s2D图像，然后在第二轮中交替显示。四位经过专科培训的乳腺放射科医生确定一项研究是否因钙化值得召回。如果是，他们对钙化可见性进行1至5级评分。采用McNemar卡方检验评估召回率差异，采用Wilcoxon符号秩检验检查可见性变化。
二维DM和s2D之间非晶态钙化的检出率无差异，分别为75.9%和75.0%（P = 1.000）。总体而言，非晶态钙化在s2D上比在二维DM上更易见，平均可见性评分分别为3.4和3.0（P = 0.005）。
与二维DM相比，合成二维并未改变非晶态钙化的识别，且读者认为其平均可见性更高。
