Nguyen Derek L, Boron Agnieszka, Oluyemi Eniola T, Myers Kelly S, Mullen Lisa A, Ambinder Emily B
Johns Hopkins Medicine, 601 N Caroline St, Baltimore, MD 21287.
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2023 Feb;220(2):212-223. doi: 10.2214/AJR.22.28320. Epub 2022 Sep 14.
Studies have shown improved targeting and sampling of noncalcified lesions (asymmetries, masses, and architectural distortion) with digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT)-guided biopsy in comparison with digital mammography (DM)-guided stereotactic biopsy. Literature that compares the two techniques specifically for sampling calcifications has been scarce. The purpose of this study was to compare the performance and outcomes of DM- and DBT-guided biopsy of suspicious calcifications. This retrospective study included 1310 patients (mean age, 58 ± 12 [SD] years) who underwent a total of 1354 9-gauge vacuum-assisted core biopsies of suspicious calcifications performed at a single institution from May 22, 2017, to December 31, 2021. The decision to use a DM-guided or DBT-guided technique was made at the discretion of the radiologist performing the biopsy. Procedure time, the number of exposures during the procedure, and the histopathologic outcomes were recorded. The two techniques were compared using a two-sample test for continuous variables and a chi-square test for categoric variables. Additional tests were performed using generalized estimating equations to control for the effect of the individual radiologist performing the biopsy. A total of 348 (26%) biopsies used DM guidance, and 1006 (74%) used DBT guidance. The mean procedure time was significantly lower for DBT-guided biopsy (14.9 ± 8.0 [SD] minutes) than for DM-guided biopsy (24.7 ± 14.3 minutes) ( < .001). The mean number of exposures was significantly lower for DBT-guided biopsy (4.1 ± 1.0 [SD] exposures) than for DM-guided biopsy (9.1 ± 3.3 exposures) ( < .001). The differences in procedure time and number of exposures remained significant (both < .001) when controlling for the effect of the radiologist performing the biopsy. There were no significant differences (all > .05) between DM-guided and DBT-guided biopsy in terms of the malignancy rate on initial biopsy (20% vs 19%), the rate of high-risk lesion upgrading (14% vs 22%), or the final malignancy rate (23% vs 22%). DBT-guided biopsy of suspicious calcifications can be performed with shorter procedure time and fewer exposures compared with DM-guided biopsy, without a significant difference in rates of malignancy or high-risk lesion upgrading. The use of a DBT-guided, rather than a DM-guided, biopsy technique for suspicious calcifications can potentially reduce patient discomfort and radiation exposure without affecting clinical outcomes.
研究表明,与数字乳腺钼靶(DM)引导的立体定向活检相比,数字乳腺断层合成(DBT)引导的活检在对非钙化性病变(不对称性、肿块和结构扭曲)的靶向和取样方面有所改善。专门比较这两种技术对钙化灶取样的文献很少。本研究的目的是比较DM和DBT引导下对可疑钙化灶进行活检的性能和结果。这项回顾性研究纳入了1310例患者(平均年龄58±12[标准差]岁),他们于2017年5月22日至2021年12月31日在同一机构共接受了1354次对可疑钙化灶的9号真空辅助芯针活检。采用DM引导还是DBT引导技术由进行活检的放射科医生自行决定。记录手术时间、手术过程中的曝光次数以及组织病理学结果。使用两样本t检验比较连续变量,使用卡方检验比较分类变量。使用广义估计方程进行额外测试,以控制进行活检的个体放射科医生的影响。共有348例(26%)活检采用DM引导,1006例(74%)采用DBT引导。DBT引导的活检平均手术时间(14.9±8.0[标准差]分钟)显著低于DM引导(24.7±14.3分钟)(P<0.001)。DBT引导的活检平均曝光次数(4.1±1.0[标准差]次)显著低于DM引导(9.1±3.3次)(P<0.001)。在控制进行活检的放射科医生的影响后,手术时间和曝光次数的差异仍然显著(均P<0.001)。DM引导和DBT引导的活检在初次活检时的恶性率(20%对19%)、高危病变升级率(14%对22%)或最终恶性率(23%对22%)方面没有显著差异(均P>0.05)。与DM引导的活检相比,DBT引导的可疑钙化灶活检手术时间更短,曝光次数更少,在恶性率或高危病变升级率方面没有显著差异。对于可疑钙化灶,使用DBT引导而非DM引导的活检技术可能会减少患者的不适和辐射暴露,而不影响临床结果。