Skip to main content
Top
Published in: European Radiology 1/2010

01-01-2010 | Breast

Breast tomosynthesis in clinical practice: initial results

Authors: Hendrik J. Teertstra, Claudette E. Loo, Maurice A. A. J. van den Bosch, Harm van Tinteren, Emiel J. T. Rutgers, Sara H. Muller, Kenneth G. A. Gilhuijs

Published in: European Radiology | Issue 1/2010

Login to get access

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to assess the potential value of tomosynthesis in women with an abnormal screening mammogram or with clinical symptoms. Mammography and tomosynthesis investigations of 513 woman with an abnormal screening mammogram or with clinical symptoms were prospectively classified according to the ACR BI-RADS criteria. Sensitivity and specificity of both techniques for the detection of cancer were calculated. In 112 newly detected cancers, tomosynthesis and mammography were each false-negative in 8 cases (7%). In the false-negative mammography cases, the tumor was detected with ultrasound (n = 4), MRI (n = 2), by recall after breast tomosynthesis interpretation (n = 1), and after prophylactic mastectomy (n = 1). Combining the results of mammography and tomosynthesis detected 109 cancers. Therefore in three patients, both mammography and tomosynthesis missed the carcinoma. The sensitivity of both techniques for the detection of breast cancer was 92.9%, and the specificity of mammography and tomosynthesis was 86.1 and 84.4%, respectively. Tomosynthesis can be used as an additional technique to mammography in patients referred with an abnormal screening mammogram or with clinical symptoms. Additional lesions detected by tomosynthesis, however, are also likely to be detected by other techniques used in the clinical work-up of these patients.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Singletary SE, Allred C, Ashley P et al (2003) Staging system for breast cancer: revisions for the 6th edition of the AJCC Cancer Staging Manual. Surg Clin North Am 83:803–819CrossRefPubMed Singletary SE, Allred C, Ashley P et al (2003) Staging system for breast cancer: revisions for the 6th edition of the AJCC Cancer Staging Manual. Surg Clin North Am 83:803–819CrossRefPubMed
2.
go back to reference Wallis MG, Walsh MT, Lee JR (1991) A review of false negative mammography in a symptomatic population. Clin Radiol 44:13–15CrossRefPubMed Wallis MG, Walsh MT, Lee JR (1991) A review of false negative mammography in a symptomatic population. Clin Radiol 44:13–15CrossRefPubMed
3.
go back to reference Coveney EC, Geraghty JG, O’Laide R et al (1994) Reasons underlying negative mammography in patients with palpable breast cancer. Clin Radiol 49:123–125CrossRefPubMed Coveney EC, Geraghty JG, O’Laide R et al (1994) Reasons underlying negative mammography in patients with palpable breast cancer. Clin Radiol 49:123–125CrossRefPubMed
4.
go back to reference Joensuu H, Asola R, Holli K et al (1994) Delayed diagnosis and large size of breast cancer after a false negative mammogram. Eur J Cancer 30:1299–1302CrossRef Joensuu H, Asola R, Holli K et al (1994) Delayed diagnosis and large size of breast cancer after a false negative mammogram. Eur J Cancer 30:1299–1302CrossRef
5.
go back to reference Chew SB, Hughes M, Kennedy C, Gillett D, Carmalt H (1996) Mammographically negative breast cancer at the Strathfield Breast Centre. Aust N Z J Surg 66:134–137CrossRefPubMed Chew SB, Hughes M, Kennedy C, Gillett D, Carmalt H (1996) Mammographically negative breast cancer at the Strathfield Breast Centre. Aust N Z J Surg 66:134–137CrossRefPubMed
6.
go back to reference Moss HA, Britton PD, Flower CD et al (1999) How reliable is modern breast imaging in differentiating benign from malignant breast lesions in a symptomatic population? Clin Radiol 54:676–682CrossRefPubMed Moss HA, Britton PD, Flower CD et al (1999) How reliable is modern breast imaging in differentiating benign from malignant breast lesions in a symptomatic population? Clin Radiol 54:676–682CrossRefPubMed
7.
go back to reference Kolb TM, Lichy J, Newhouse JH (2002) Comparison of the performance of screening mammography, physical examination, and breast US and evaluation of factors that influence them: an analysis of 27,825 patient evaluations. Radiology 225:165–175CrossRefPubMed Kolb TM, Lichy J, Newhouse JH (2002) Comparison of the performance of screening mammography, physical examination, and breast US and evaluation of factors that influence them: an analysis of 27,825 patient evaluations. Radiology 225:165–175CrossRefPubMed
8.
go back to reference Flobbe K, Bosch AM, Kessels AG et al (2003) The additional diagnostic value of ultrasonography in the diagnosis of breast cancer. Arch Intern Med 163:1194–1199CrossRefPubMed Flobbe K, Bosch AM, Kessels AG et al (2003) The additional diagnostic value of ultrasonography in the diagnosis of breast cancer. Arch Intern Med 163:1194–1199CrossRefPubMed
9.
go back to reference Benson SR, Blue J, Judd K, Harman JE (2004) Ultrasound is now better than mammography for the detection of invasive breast cancer. Am J Surg 188:381–385CrossRefPubMed Benson SR, Blue J, Judd K, Harman JE (2004) Ultrasound is now better than mammography for the detection of invasive breast cancer. Am J Surg 188:381–385CrossRefPubMed
10.
go back to reference Berg WA, Gutierrez L, NessAiver MS, Carter WB, Bhargavan M, Lewis RS, Ioffe OB (2004) Diagnostic accuracy of mammography, clinical examination, US, and MR imaging in preoperative assessment of breast cancer. Radiology 233:830–849CrossRefPubMed Berg WA, Gutierrez L, NessAiver MS, Carter WB, Bhargavan M, Lewis RS, Ioffe OB (2004) Diagnostic accuracy of mammography, clinical examination, US, and MR imaging in preoperative assessment of breast cancer. Radiology 233:830–849CrossRefPubMed
11.
go back to reference Murphy IG, Dillon MF, Doherty AO, McDermott EW, Kelly G, O'Higgins N, Hill AD (2007) Analysis of patients with false negative mammography and symptomatic breast carcinoma. J Surg Oncol 96:457–463CrossRefPubMed Murphy IG, Dillon MF, Doherty AO, McDermott EW, Kelly G, O'Higgins N, Hill AD (2007) Analysis of patients with false negative mammography and symptomatic breast carcinoma. J Surg Oncol 96:457–463CrossRefPubMed
12.
go back to reference Kneeshaw PJ, Turnbull LW, Drew PJ (2003) Current applications and future direction of MR mammography. Br J Cancer 88:4–10CrossRefPubMed Kneeshaw PJ, Turnbull LW, Drew PJ (2003) Current applications and future direction of MR mammography. Br J Cancer 88:4–10CrossRefPubMed
13.
go back to reference Kuhl CK (2007) Current status of breast MR imaging. Part 2. Clinical applications. Radiology 244:672–691CrossRefPubMed Kuhl CK (2007) Current status of breast MR imaging. Part 2. Clinical applications. Radiology 244:672–691CrossRefPubMed
14.
go back to reference Orel S (2008) Who should have breast magnetic resonance imaging evaluation? J Clin Oncol 26:703–11CrossRefPubMed Orel S (2008) Who should have breast magnetic resonance imaging evaluation? J Clin Oncol 26:703–11CrossRefPubMed
15.
go back to reference D'Orsi CJ, Newell MS (2007) Digital mammography: clinical implementation and clinical trials. Semin Roentgenol 42:236–242CrossRefPubMed D'Orsi CJ, Newell MS (2007) Digital mammography: clinical implementation and clinical trials. Semin Roentgenol 42:236–242CrossRefPubMed
16.
17.
go back to reference Pisano ED, Gatsonis C, Hendrick E et al (2005) Digital Mammographic Imaging Screening Trial (DMIST) Investigators Group: diagnostic performance of digital versus film mammography for breast-cancer screening. N Engl J Med 353:1773–1783CrossRefPubMed Pisano ED, Gatsonis C, Hendrick E et al (2005) Digital Mammographic Imaging Screening Trial (DMIST) Investigators Group: diagnostic performance of digital versus film mammography for breast-cancer screening. N Engl J Med 353:1773–1783CrossRefPubMed
18.
go back to reference Pisano ED, Hendrick RE, Yaffe MJ et al (2008) Diagnostic accuracy of digital versus film mammography: exploratory analysis of selected population subgroups in DMIST. Radiology 246:376–383CrossRefPubMed Pisano ED, Hendrick RE, Yaffe MJ et al (2008) Diagnostic accuracy of digital versus film mammography: exploratory analysis of selected population subgroups in DMIST. Radiology 246:376–383CrossRefPubMed
19.
go back to reference Park JM, Franken EA Jr, Garg M, Fajardo LL, Niklason LT (2007) Breast tomosynthesis: present considerations and future applications. Radiographics 27:S231–S240CrossRefPubMed Park JM, Franken EA Jr, Garg M, Fajardo LL, Niklason LT (2007) Breast tomosynthesis: present considerations and future applications. Radiographics 27:S231–S240CrossRefPubMed
20.
go back to reference Lewin JM, Niklason L (2007) Advanced applications of digital mammography: breast tomosynthesis and contrast-enhanced digital mammography. Semin Roentgenol 42:243–252CrossRefPubMed Lewin JM, Niklason L (2007) Advanced applications of digital mammography: breast tomosynthesis and contrast-enhanced digital mammography. Semin Roentgenol 42:243–252CrossRefPubMed
21.
go back to reference Poplack SP, Tosteson TD, Kogel CA, Nagy HM (2007) Digital breast tomosynthesis: initial experience in 98 women with abnormal digital screening mammography. Am J Roentgenol 189:616–623CrossRef Poplack SP, Tosteson TD, Kogel CA, Nagy HM (2007) Digital breast tomosynthesis: initial experience in 98 women with abnormal digital screening mammography. Am J Roentgenol 189:616–623CrossRef
22.
go back to reference Niklason LT, Christian BT, Niklason LE et al (1997) Digital breast tomosynthesis in breast imaging. Radiology 205:399–406PubMed Niklason LT, Christian BT, Niklason LE et al (1997) Digital breast tomosynthesis in breast imaging. Radiology 205:399–406PubMed
23.
go back to reference Good WF, Abrams GS, Catullo VJ, Chough DM, Ganott MA, Hakim CM, Gur D (2008) Digital breast tomosynthesis: a pilot observer study. AJR Am J Roentgenol 190(4):865–869CrossRefPubMed Good WF, Abrams GS, Catullo VJ, Chough DM, Ganott MA, Hakim CM, Gur D (2008) Digital breast tomosynthesis: a pilot observer study. AJR Am J Roentgenol 190(4):865–869CrossRefPubMed
24.
go back to reference Andersson I, Ikeda DM, Zackrisson S, Ruschin M, Svahn T, Timberg P, Tingberg A (2008) Breast tomosynthesis and digital mammography: a comparison of breast cancer visibility and BIRADS classification in a population of cancers with subtle mammographic findings. Eur Radiol 18(12):2817–2825CrossRefPubMed Andersson I, Ikeda DM, Zackrisson S, Ruschin M, Svahn T, Timberg P, Tingberg A (2008) Breast tomosynthesis and digital mammography: a comparison of breast cancer visibility and BIRADS classification in a population of cancers with subtle mammographic findings. Eur Radiol 18(12):2817–2825CrossRefPubMed
25.
go back to reference Hendrick RE, Bassett L, Botsco MA et al (1999) Mammography quality control manual. American College of Radiology, Reston Hendrick RE, Bassett L, Botsco MA et al (1999) Mammography quality control manual. American College of Radiology, Reston
26.
go back to reference Boone JM (1999) Glandular breast dose for monoenergetic and high-energy x-ray beams: Monte Carlo assessment 1. Radiology 213:23–37PubMed Boone JM (1999) Glandular breast dose for monoenergetic and high-energy x-ray beams: Monte Carlo assessment 1. Radiology 213:23–37PubMed
27.
go back to reference Liberman L, Menell JH (2002) Breast imaging reporting and data system (BI-RADS). Radiol Clin North Am 40:409–430CrossRefPubMed Liberman L, Menell JH (2002) Breast imaging reporting and data system (BI-RADS). Radiol Clin North Am 40:409–430CrossRefPubMed
28.
go back to reference D'Orsi CJ, Newell MS (2007) BI-RADS decoded: detailed guidance on potentially confusing issues. Radiol Clin North Am 45:751–763CrossRefPubMed D'Orsi CJ, Newell MS (2007) BI-RADS decoded: detailed guidance on potentially confusing issues. Radiol Clin North Am 45:751–763CrossRefPubMed
29.
go back to reference Chen SC, Carton AK, Albert M, Conant EF, Schnall MD, Maidment AD (2007) Initial clinical experience with contrast-enhanced digital breast tomosynthesis. Acad Radiol 14:229–238CrossRefPubMed Chen SC, Carton AK, Albert M, Conant EF, Schnall MD, Maidment AD (2007) Initial clinical experience with contrast-enhanced digital breast tomosynthesis. Acad Radiol 14:229–238CrossRefPubMed
30.
go back to reference Kaas R, Kroger R, Hendriks JH et al (2004) The significance of circumscribed malignant mammographic masses in the surveillance of BRCA 1/2 gene mutation carriers. Eur Radiol 14:1647–1653CrossRefPubMed Kaas R, Kroger R, Hendriks JH et al (2004) The significance of circumscribed malignant mammographic masses in the surveillance of BRCA 1/2 gene mutation carriers. Eur Radiol 14:1647–1653CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Breast tomosynthesis in clinical practice: initial results
Authors
Hendrik J. Teertstra
Claudette E. Loo
Maurice A. A. J. van den Bosch
Harm van Tinteren
Emiel J. T. Rutgers
Sara H. Muller
Kenneth G. A. Gilhuijs
Publication date
01-01-2010
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
European Radiology / Issue 1/2010
Print ISSN: 0938-7994
Electronic ISSN: 1432-1084
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-009-1523-2

Other articles of this Issue 1/2010

European Radiology 1/2010 Go to the issue