Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress 2023 EHA Congress 2023 ASCO Annual Meeting
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

A round-up of the ONWARDS phase 3 clinical trials evaluating the novel weekly insulin icodec in people with diabetes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
European Radiology
Published in: European Radiology 11/2022

10-05-2022 | Mammography | Breast

Does the patient-assisted compression mode affect the mammography quality? A within-woman randomized controlled trial

Authors: Daniela Perez-Leon, Margarita Posso, Javier Louro, Belén Ejarque, Mónica Arranz, Natalia Arenas, Jose Maiques, Juan Martínez, Francesc Maciá, Marta Román, Ana Rodríguez-Arana, Xavier Castells, Rodrigo Alcántara

Published in: European Radiology | Issue 11/2022

Login to get access

Abstract

Objectives

Evaluate the image quality of a mammography screening device using the patient-assisted compression (PAC) compared with the standard compression (SC) mode.

Methods

This prospective within-woman, randomized controlled trial was conducted between September 2017 and December 2019. Participants were asymptomatic women aged 50 to 69 years attending their second or subsequent screening mammography round. By random assignment, one breast underwent the SC and the other breast, the PAC. Image quality was evaluated as perfect, good, moderate, or inadequate (PGMI) on 10 criteria for the craniocaudal (CC) view and 8 criteria for the mediolateral oblique (MLO) view. Pearson’s chi-square test, with Yates’ correction if pertinent, was performed to compare image quality between compression modes.

Results

A total of 444 participants were included (mean [± standard deviation] age, 60 [± 4.9] years). There were no differences in the percentages of PGMI between the PAC and SC modes for the CC view (perfect, 37% [162/444] vs 37% [163/444]; good, 1% [5/444] vs 2% [9/444]; moderate, 62% [277/444] vs 61% [271/444]; inadequate, 0% vs 0.2% [1/444]; p = .88) or for the MLO view (perfect, 53% [237/444] vs 56% [247/444]; good, 22% [99/444] vs 22% [97/444]; moderate, 23% [102/444] vs 22% [98/444]; inadequate, 1% [6/444] vs 0.5% [2/444]; p = .72). No differences were found when we stratified by laterality or when analyzed by PGMI criteria.

Conclusion

PAC does not seem to impair mammographic image quality. Future research should focus in a daily practice setting.

Key Points

  • No differences were found in the distribution of the PGMI classification, a tool for quality assessment, between patient-assisted compression and standard compression.
  • Similar results were found on stratification of image quality by mammographic view and breast laterality for both types of compression.
  • None of the PGMI criteria had significantly more errors in patient-assisted compression than in standard compression.
Literature
1.
Bray F, Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I (2018) Global Cancer Statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin 68(6):394–424CrossRef
2.
3.
Perry N, Broeders M, de Wolf C, Törnberg S, Holland R, von Karsa L (2008) European guidelines for quality assurance in breast cancer screening and diagnosis. Fourth edition - Summary document. Ann Oncol 19(4):614–622CrossRef
4.
Canelo-Aybar C, Ferreira DS, Ballesteros M et al (2021) Benefits and harms of breast cancer mammography screening for women at average risk of breast cancer: a systematic review for the European Commission Initiative on Breast Cancer (ECIBC). J Med Screen. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1177/​0969141321993866​
5.
Moshina N, Sagstad S, Sebuødegård S et al (2020) Breast compression and reported pain during mammographic screening. Radiography (Lond) 26(2):133–139
6.
Whelehan P, Evans A, Wells M, MacGillivray S (2013) The effect of mammography pain on repeat participation in breast cancer screening: a systematic review. Breast 22(4):389–394CrossRef
7.
Chida K, Komatsu Y, Sai M et al (2009) Reduced compression mammography to reduce breast pain. Clin Imaging 33(1):7–10
8.
Feder K, Grunert JH (2017) Is individualizing breast compression during mammography useful? - Investigations of pain indications during mammography relating to compression force and surface area of the compressed breast. Breast 189(1):39–48
9.
De Groot JE, Broeders MJM, Branderhorst W, Den Heeten GJ, Grimbergen CA (2013) A novel approach to mammographic breast compression: improved standardization and reduced discomfort by controlling pressure instead of force. Med Phys 40(8):081901CrossRef
10.
De Groot JE, Broeders MJM, Grimbergen CA, Den Heeten GJ (2015) Pain-preventing strategies in mammography: an observational study of simultaneously recorded pain and breast mechanics throughout the entire breast compression cycle. BMC Womens Health 15(1):1–9CrossRef
11.
12.
de Groot JE, Hopman IGM, van Lier MGJTB, Branderhorst W, Grimbergen CA, den Heeten G (2017) Pressure-standardised mammography does not affect visibility, contrast and sharpness of stable lesions. Eur J Radiol 86:289–295
13.
Li Y, Poulos A, McLean D, Rickard M (2010) A review of methods of clinical image quality evaluation in mammography. Eur J Radiol 74(3):e122–e131CrossRef
14.
Moreira C, Svoboda K, Poulos A, Taylor R, Page A, Rickard M (2005) Comparison of the validity and reliability of two image classification systems for the assessment of mammogram quality. J Med Screen 12(1):38–42CrossRef
15.
National Quality Assurance Coordinating Group for Radiography (2006) Quality assurance guidelines for mammography including radiographic quality control. NHSBSP 63:1–64
16.
Boyce M, Gullien R, Parashar D, Taylor K (2015) Comparing the use and interpretation of PGMI scoring to assess the technical quality of screening mammograms in the UK and Norway. Radiography (Lond) 21(4):342–347
17.
18.
Kornguth PJ, Rimer BK, Conaway MR et al (1993) Impact of patient-controlled compression on the mammography experience. Radiology 186(1):99–102
19.
Balleyguier C, Cousin M, Dunant A, Attard M, Delaloge S, Arfi-rouche J (2018) Patient-assisted compression helps for image quality reduction dose and improves patient experience in mammography. Eur J Cancer 103:137–142CrossRef
20.
Henrot P, Boisserie-Lacroix M, Boute V et al (2019) Self-compression technique vs standard compression in mammography. A randomized clinical trial. JAMA Intern Med 179(3):407–414
Metadata
Title
Does the patient-assisted compression mode affect the mammography quality? A within-woman randomized controlled trial
Authors
Daniela Perez-Leon
Margarita Posso
Javier Louro
Belén Ejarque
Mónica Arranz
Natalia Arenas
Jose Maiques
Juan Martínez
Francesc Maciá
Marta Román
Ana Rodríguez-Arana
Xavier Castells
Rodrigo Alcántara
Publication date
10-05-2022
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in
European Radiology / Issue 11/2022
Print ISSN: 0938-7994
Electronic ISSN: 1432-1084
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-022-08834-z

Other articles of this Issue 11/2022

European Radiology 11/2022 Go to the issue

Gastrointestinal

Differentiating between benign and malignant ampullary strictures: a prediction model using a nomogram based on CT imaging and clinical findings

Magnetic Resonance

Health effects related to exposure of static magnetic fields and acoustic noise—comparison between MR and CT radiographers

Breast

Background parenchymal enhancement in contrast-enhanced MR imaging suggests systemic effects of intrauterine contraceptive devices

Imaging Informatics and Artificial Intelligence

Radiology artificial intelligence: a systematic review and evaluation of methods (RAISE)

Contrast Media

Anterior chamber enhancement predicts optic nerve infiltration in retinoblastoma

Head and Neck

CT-based radiomics signature analysis for sevaluation of response to induction chemotherapy and progression-free survival in locally advanced hypopharyngeal carcinoma