Skip to main content
Top
Published in: La radiologia medica 11/2016

01-11-2016 | BREAST RADIOLOGY

Analysis of mammographic diagnostic errors in breast clinic

Authors: V. Palazzetti, F. Guidi, L. Ottaviani, G. Valeri, S. Baldassarre, GM Giuseppetti

Published in: La radiologia medica | Issue 11/2016

Login to get access

Abstract

Mammography is the gold standard for detection of early breast cancer and it is still the only diagnostic tool which shows reduction of the mortality from that. Despite that, there is a high chance of false negatives that can lead to diagnostic errors resulting in delays of treatment and worsening of prognosis. The aim of this study is to analyze the rate of false negative in mammography and assess the source of diagnostic errors. Two radiologists have retrospectively evaluated 500 mammograms performed between January 2008 and December 2011 in Breast Imaging Clinic. 250 patients (Group A) had been operated for breast cancer and 250 patients (Group B) were healthy woman submitted to mammography according to the guideline for early detection of breast cancer. In Group A, 138 patients (55.2 %) were true missed cancer, 61 had minimal sign (24.4 %) and 53 were false negative (FN) (20.4 %). The source of errors amongst the FN were in 42 % of cases due to perception, in 15 % to interpretation, in 10 % to subtle/unusual lesion characteristics, in 9 % error for satisfaction of search, in 7 % to inherent limitations of mammography, in 4 % to poor technique and 13 % for inadequate clinical management. The diagnostic errors in breast clinic services are not negligible. The largest number of FN results from perception errors, misinterpretation and inadequate clinical management. These can be related to factors such as inattention, fatigue or lack of experience. To reduce it, it is necessary to have a dedicated multidisciplinary staff and adequate equipment and workloads.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Kuhl CK, Kuhn W, Schild H (2005) Management of women at high risk for breast cancer: new imaging beyond mammography. Breast 14(6):480–486CrossRefPubMed Kuhl CK, Kuhn W, Schild H (2005) Management of women at high risk for breast cancer: new imaging beyond mammography. Breast 14(6):480–486CrossRefPubMed
2.
go back to reference Duijm LE, Guit GL, Zaat JO, Koomen AR, Willebrand D (1997) Sensitivity, specificity and predictive values of breast imaging in the detection of cancer. Br J Cancer 76(3):377–381CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Duijm LE, Guit GL, Zaat JO, Koomen AR, Willebrand D (1997) Sensitivity, specificity and predictive values of breast imaging in the detection of cancer. Br J Cancer 76(3):377–381CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
3.
go back to reference Pistolese CA, Perretta T, Cossu E et al (2011) Value of the correct diagnostic pathway through conventional imaging (mammography and ultrasound) in evaluating breast disease. Radiol Med 116:584–594CrossRefPubMed Pistolese CA, Perretta T, Cossu E et al (2011) Value of the correct diagnostic pathway through conventional imaging (mammography and ultrasound) in evaluating breast disease. Radiol Med 116:584–594CrossRefPubMed
4.
go back to reference Gandhi TK, Kachalia A, Thomas EJ, Puopolo AL, Yoon C, Brennan TA et al (2006) Missed and delayed diagnoses in the ambulatory setting: a study of closed malpractice claims. Ann Int Med 145:488–496CrossRefPubMed Gandhi TK, Kachalia A, Thomas EJ, Puopolo AL, Yoon C, Brennan TA et al (2006) Missed and delayed diagnoses in the ambulatory setting: a study of closed malpractice claims. Ann Int Med 145:488–496CrossRefPubMed
5.
go back to reference Ciatto S, Catarzia S, Lamberinib MP et al (2007) Interval breast cancers in screening: the effect of mammography review method on classification. Breast 16:646–652CrossRefPubMed Ciatto S, Catarzia S, Lamberinib MP et al (2007) Interval breast cancers in screening: the effect of mammography review method on classification. Breast 16:646–652CrossRefPubMed
6.
go back to reference Pellegrini M, Bernardi D, Di Michele S, Tuttobene P, Fantò C, Valentini M, Peterlongo P, Caumo F, Frigerio A, Ciatto S (2011) Analysis of proportional incidence and review of interval cancer cases observed within the mammography screening programme in Trento province, Italy. Radiol med 116(8):1217–1225CrossRefPubMed Pellegrini M, Bernardi D, Di Michele S, Tuttobene P, Fantò C, Valentini M, Peterlongo P, Caumo F, Frigerio A, Ciatto S (2011) Analysis of proportional incidence and review of interval cancer cases observed within the mammography screening programme in Trento province, Italy. Radiol med 116(8):1217–1225CrossRefPubMed
7.
go back to reference Perry N, Broeders M, deWolf C, Törnberg S, Holland R, von Karsa L (2006) European guidelines for quality assurance in breast cancer screening and diagnosis. European Communities. http://europa.eu.int Perry N, Broeders M, deWolf C, Törnberg S, Holland R, von Karsa L (2006) European guidelines for quality assurance in breast cancer screening and diagnosis. European Communities. http://​europa.​eu.​int
8.
go back to reference Berbaum KS, Franken EA Jr, Dorfman DD, Rooholamini SA, Kathol MH, Barloon TJ, Behlke FM, Sato Y, Lu CH, el-Khoury GY et al (1990) Satisfaction of search in diagnostic radiology. Invest Radiol 25(2):133–140CrossRefPubMed Berbaum KS, Franken EA Jr, Dorfman DD, Rooholamini SA, Kathol MH, Barloon TJ, Behlke FM, Sato Y, Lu CH, el-Khoury GY et al (1990) Satisfaction of search in diagnostic radiology. Invest Radiol 25(2):133–140CrossRefPubMed
9.
go back to reference Samuel S, Kundel HL, Nodine CF, Toto LC (1995) Mechanism of satisfaction of search: eye position recordings in the reading of chest radiographs. Radiology 194(3):895–902CrossRefPubMed Samuel S, Kundel HL, Nodine CF, Toto LC (1995) Mechanism of satisfaction of search: eye position recordings in the reading of chest radiographs. Radiology 194(3):895–902CrossRefPubMed
11.
go back to reference Fratello F, Federici A, Ghirardini A, Giuseppetti GM et al (2008) Gruppo di lavoro SIRM- GISMa. Programma di screening mammografico: significato e gestione dei cancri di intervallo. Ministero della Salute. Direzione Generale della Prevenzione Sanitaria, Roma Fratello F, Federici A, Ghirardini A, Giuseppetti GM et al (2008) Gruppo di lavoro SIRM- GISMa. Programma di screening mammografico: significato e gestione dei cancri di intervallo. Ministero della Salute. Direzione Generale della Prevenzione Sanitaria, Roma
12.
go back to reference Pescarini L, Inches I (2006) Systematic approach to human error in radiology. Radiol Med 111(2):252–267CrossRefPubMed Pescarini L, Inches I (2006) Systematic approach to human error in radiology. Radiol Med 111(2):252–267CrossRefPubMed
13.
go back to reference Huynh PT, Jarolimek AM, Daye S (1998) The false negative mammogram. Radiographics 18(5):1137–1154CrossRefPubMed Huynh PT, Jarolimek AM, Daye S (1998) The false negative mammogram. Radiographics 18(5):1137–1154CrossRefPubMed
14.
go back to reference Majid AS, de Paredes ES, Doherty RD, Sharma NR, Salvador X (2003) Missed breast carcinoma: pitfalls and pearls. Radiographics 23(4):881–895CrossRefPubMed Majid AS, de Paredes ES, Doherty RD, Sharma NR, Salvador X (2003) Missed breast carcinoma: pitfalls and pearls. Radiographics 23(4):881–895CrossRefPubMed
15.
go back to reference Muttarak M, Pojchamarnwiputh S, Chaiwun B (2006) Breast carcinomas: why are they missed? Singap Med J 47(10):851–857 Muttarak M, Pojchamarnwiputh S, Chaiwun B (2006) Breast carcinomas: why are they missed? Singap Med J 47(10):851–857
16.
go back to reference Dobbins JT 3rd, Godfrey DJ (2003) Digital X-ray tomosynthesis: current state of the art and clinical potential. Phys Med Biol 48(19):R65–R106CrossRefPubMed Dobbins JT 3rd, Godfrey DJ (2003) Digital X-ray tomosynthesis: current state of the art and clinical potential. Phys Med Biol 48(19):R65–R106CrossRefPubMed
17.
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. AJR 189(3):616CrossRefPubMed Poplack SP, Tosteson TD, Kogel CA, Nagy HM (2007) Digital breast tomosynthesis: initial experience in 98 women with abnormal digital screening mammography. AJR 189(3):616CrossRefPubMed
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(1):S231–S240CrossRefPubMed Park JM, Franken EA Jr, Garg M, Fajardo LL, Niklason LT (2007) Breast tomosynthesis: present considerations and future applications. Radiographics 27(1):S231–S240CrossRefPubMed
20.
go back to reference Elmore JG, Jackson SL, Abraham L, Miglioretti DL, Carney PA, Geller BM, Yankaskas BC, Kerlikowske K, Onega T, Rosenberg RD, Sickles EA, Buist DS (2009) Variability in interpretive performance at screening mammography and radiologists’ characteristics associated with accuracy. Radiology 253:641–651CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Elmore JG, Jackson SL, Abraham L, Miglioretti DL, Carney PA, Geller BM, Yankaskas BC, Kerlikowske K, Onega T, Rosenberg RD, Sickles EA, Buist DS (2009) Variability in interpretive performance at screening mammography and radiologists’ characteristics associated with accuracy. Radiology 253:641–651CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
21.
go back to reference Ciatto S, Ambrogetti D, Morrone D, Del Turco MR (2006) Analysis of the results of a proficiency test in screening mammography at the CSPO of Florence: review of 705 tests. Radiol med 111:797–803CrossRefPubMed Ciatto S, Ambrogetti D, Morrone D, Del Turco MR (2006) Analysis of the results of a proficiency test in screening mammography at the CSPO of Florence: review of 705 tests. Radiol med 111:797–803CrossRefPubMed
22.
go back to reference Miglioretti DL, Gard CC, Carney PA, Onega TL, Buist DS, Sickles EA, Kerlikowske K, Rosenberg RD, Yankaskas BC, Geller BM, Elmore JG (2009) When Radiologists Perform Best: the learning curve in screening mammogram interpretation. Radiology 253:632–640CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Miglioretti DL, Gard CC, Carney PA, Onega TL, Buist DS, Sickles EA, Kerlikowske K, Rosenberg RD, Yankaskas BC, Geller BM, Elmore JG (2009) When Radiologists Perform Best: the learning curve in screening mammogram interpretation. Radiology 253:632–640CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
Metadata
Title
Analysis of mammographic diagnostic errors in breast clinic
Authors
V. Palazzetti
F. Guidi
L. Ottaviani
G. Valeri
S. Baldassarre
GM Giuseppetti
Publication date
01-11-2016
Publisher
Springer Milan
Published in
La radiologia medica / Issue 11/2016
Print ISSN: 0033-8362
Electronic ISSN: 1826-6983
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11547-016-0655-0

Other articles of this Issue 11/2016

La radiologia medica 11/2016 Go to the issue