Suppr超能文献

乳腺癌诊断中乳腺磁共振成像与对比增强乳腺X线摄影的阅片者间一致性:一项多阅片者回顾性研究

Inter-reader agreement of breast magnetic resonance imaging and contrast-enhanced mammography in breast cancer diagnosis: a multi-reader retrospective study.

作者信息

Pesapane Filippo, Nicosia Luca, Tantrige Priyan, Schiaffino Simone, Liguori Alessandro, Montesano Marta, Bozzini Anna, Rotili Anna, Cellina Michaela, Orsi Marcello, Penco Silvia, Pizzamiglio Maria, Carrafiello Gianpaolo, Cassano Enrico

机构信息

Breast Imaging Division, IEO European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy.

Department of Radiology, King's College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.

出版信息

Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2023 Dec;202(3):451-459. doi: 10.1007/s10549-023-07093-w. Epub 2023 Sep 25.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

Breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and contrast-enhanced mammography (CEM) are nowadays used in breast imaging but studies about their inter-reader agreement are lacking. Therefore, we compared the inter-reader agreement of CEM and MRI in breast cancer diagnosis in the same patients.

METHODS

Breast MRI and CEM exams performed in a single center (09/2020-09/2021) for an IRB-approved study were retrospectively and independently evaluated by four radiologists of two different centers with different levels of experience who were blinded to the clinical and other imaging data. The reference standard was the histological diagnosis or at least 1-year negative imaging follow-up. Inter-reader agreement was examined using Cohen's and Fleiss' kappa (κ) statistics and compared with the Wald test.

RESULTS

Of the 750 patients, 395 met inclusion criteria (44.5 ± 14 years old), with 752 breasts available for CEM and MRI. Overall agreement was moderate (κ = 0.60) for MRI and substantial (κ = 0.74) for CEM. For expert readers, the agreement was substantial (κ = 0.77) for MRI and almost perfect (κ = 0.82) for CEM; for non-expert readers was fair (κ = 0.39); and for MRI and moderate (κ = 0.57) for CEM. Pairwise agreement between expert readers and non-expert readers was moderate (κ = 0.50) for breast MRI and substantial (κ = 0.74) for CEM and it showed a statistically superior agreement of the expert over the non-expert readers only for MRI (p = 0.011) and not for CEM (p = 0.062).

CONCLUSIONS

The agreement of CEM was superior to that of MRI (p = 0.012), including for both expert (p = 0.031) and non-expert readers (p = 0.005).

摘要

目的

乳腺磁共振成像(MRI)和对比增强乳腺X线摄影(CEM)如今用于乳腺成像,但关于它们在不同阅片者之间一致性的研究尚缺。因此,我们比较了同一患者中CEM和MRI在乳腺癌诊断方面不同阅片者之间的一致性。

方法

对在单一中心(2020年9月至2021年9月)进行的、经机构审查委员会批准的一项研究中的乳腺MRI和CEM检查,由来自两个不同中心、经验水平不同的四位放射科医生进行回顾性且独立的评估,这些医生对临床和其他影像数据不知情。参考标准为组织学诊断或至少1年的阴性影像随访。使用科恩(Cohen)和弗莱希(Fleiss)卡方(κ)统计量检查不同阅片者之间的一致性,并与沃尔德检验进行比较。

结果

750例患者中,395例符合纳入标准(44.5±14岁),有752个乳房可供进行CEM和MRI检查。MRI的总体一致性为中等(κ = 0.60),CEM的总体一致性为较高(κ = 0.74)。对于专家阅片者,MRI的一致性较高(κ = 0.77),CEM的一致性几乎为完美(κ = 0.82);对于非专家阅片者,MRI的一致性为一般(κ = 0.39),CEM的一致性为中等(κ = 0.57)。专家阅片者与非专家阅片者之间,乳腺MRI的两两一致性为中等(κ = 0.50),CEM的两两一致性为较高(κ = 0.74),且仅在MRI方面显示专家阅片者的一致性在统计学上优于非专家阅片者(p = 0.011),而在CEM方面则不然(p = 0.062)。

结论

CEM的一致性优于MRI(p = 0.012),包括专家阅片者(p = 0.031)和非专家阅片者(p = 0.005)。

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