Skip to main content
Top
Published in: European Radiology 11/2022

13-09-2022 | Mammography | Editorial Comment

Contrast-enhanced mammography for screening recalls: a problem-solving assessment tool ready for use?

Author: Per Skaane

Published in: European Radiology | Issue 11/2022

Login to get access

Excerpt

Full-field digital mammography (DM) is the standard technique as of today for breast cancer screening, although digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) is increasingly used in some countries, especially in the USA. Conventional DM has, however, two important limitations as a screening technique: a low sensitivity in women with dense breast parenchyma due to a masking effect, and a relatively low specificity due to superpositioning causing so-called pseudotumors. Non-conclusive findings at standard two-view mammographic screening need recall and further diagnostic work-up including supplementary mammographic views, ultrasound, digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT), MRI, and/or needle biopsy to confirm or exclude the presence of cancer. Adverse effects of mammography screening include false-negative interpretations causing interval cancer and false positive findings causing unnecessary recalls. Assessments of false-positive screening recalls represent a great problem not only to the women often causing psychologic distress and transient anxiety but also to the health care providers since unnecessary work-up including needle biopsies are expensive and represent a financial burden. Consequently, there is a need for a single diagnostic test with high diagnostic accuracy that could replace the several procedures included in today’s standard work-up for screening recalls. …
Literature
1.
go back to reference Dromain C, Thibault F, Muller S et al (2011) Dual-energy contrast-enhanced digital mammography: initial clinical results. Eur Radiol 21:565–574CrossRef Dromain C, Thibault F, Muller S et al (2011) Dual-energy contrast-enhanced digital mammography: initial clinical results. Eur Radiol 21:565–574CrossRef
2.
go back to reference Jochelson MS, Lobbes MBI (2021) Contrast-enhanced mammography: state of the art. Radiology. 299:36–48CrossRef Jochelson MS, Lobbes MBI (2021) Contrast-enhanced mammography: state of the art. Radiology. 299:36–48CrossRef
3.
go back to reference Cozzi A, Magni V, Zanardo M, Schiaffino S, Sardanelli F (2022) Contrast-enhanced mammography: a systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic performance. Radiology. 302:568–581CrossRef Cozzi A, Magni V, Zanardo M, Schiaffino S, Sardanelli F (2022) Contrast-enhanced mammography: a systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic performance. Radiology. 302:568–581CrossRef
4.
go back to reference Sudhir R, Sannapareddy K, Potlapalli A, Boggaram Krishnamurthy P, Buddha S, Koppula V (2021) Diagnostic accuracy of contrast-enhanced digital mammography in breast cancer detection in comparison to tomosynthesis, synthetic 2D mammography and tomosynthesis combined with ultrasound in women with dense breast. Br J Radiol 94(1118):20201046CrossRef Sudhir R, Sannapareddy K, Potlapalli A, Boggaram Krishnamurthy P, Buddha S, Koppula V (2021) Diagnostic accuracy of contrast-enhanced digital mammography in breast cancer detection in comparison to tomosynthesis, synthetic 2D mammography and tomosynthesis combined with ultrasound in women with dense breast. Br J Radiol 94(1118):20201046CrossRef
6.
go back to reference Lalji UC, Houben IPL, Prevos R et al (2016) Contrast-enhanced spectral mammography in recalls from the Dutch breast cancer screening program: validation of results in a large multireader, multicase study. Eur Radiol 26:4371–4379CrossRef Lalji UC, Houben IPL, Prevos R et al (2016) Contrast-enhanced spectral mammography in recalls from the Dutch breast cancer screening program: validation of results in a large multireader, multicase study. Eur Radiol 26:4371–4379CrossRef
7.
go back to reference Houben IPL, Vanwetswinkel S, Kalia V et al (2019) Contrast-enhanced spectral mammography in the evaluation of breast suspicious calcifications: diagnostic accuracy and impact on surgical management. Acta Radiol 60:1110–1117CrossRef Houben IPL, Vanwetswinkel S, Kalia V et al (2019) Contrast-enhanced spectral mammography in the evaluation of breast suspicious calcifications: diagnostic accuracy and impact on surgical management. Acta Radiol 60:1110–1117CrossRef
8.
go back to reference van Nijnatten TJA, Jochelson MS, Pinker K et al (2019) Differences in degree of lesion enhancement on CEM between ILC and IDC. BJR Open 1:20180046 van Nijnatten TJA, Jochelson MS, Pinker K et al (2019) Differences in degree of lesion enhancement on CEM between ILC and IDC. BJR Open 1:20180046
9.
go back to reference Rudnicki W, Heinze S, Niemiec J et al (2019) Correlation between quantitative assessment of contrast enhancement in contrast-enhanced spectral mammography (CESM) and histopathology – preliminary results. Eur Radiol 29:6220–6226CrossRef Rudnicki W, Heinze S, Niemiec J et al (2019) Correlation between quantitative assessment of contrast enhancement in contrast-enhanced spectral mammography (CESM) and histopathology – preliminary results. Eur Radiol 29:6220–6226CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Contrast-enhanced mammography for screening recalls: a problem-solving assessment tool ready for use?
Author
Per Skaane
Publication date
13-09-2022
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/s00330-022-09094-7

Other articles of this Issue 11/2022

European Radiology 11/2022 Go to the issue