Microcalcifications Detected at Screening Mammography: Synthetic Mammography and Digital Breast Tomosynthesis versus Digital Mammography.

Radiology

From the Department of Radiology, Taipei Veterans General Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan (Y.C.L.); School of Medicine, National Yang-Ming University, Taipei, Taiwan (Y.C.L.); Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, University of California San Francisco, 1600 Divisadero St, Box 1667, Room C250, San Francisco, CA 94115 (A.Y.L., J.H.H., R.I.F., I.V.L., B.N.J.); and Department of Radiology, The Permanente Medical Group, 3600 Broadway, Oakland, CA 94611 (K.M.R.).

Published: December 2018

Purpose To compare the performance of two-dimensional synthetic mammography (SM) plus digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) versus conventional full-field digital mammography (FFDM) in the detection of microcalcifications on screening mammograms. Materials and Methods In this retrospective multireader observer study, 72 consecutive screening mammograms recalled for microcalcifications from June 2015 through August 2016 were evaluated with both FFDM and DBT. The data set included 54 mammograms with benign microcalcifications and 18 mammograms with malignant microcalcifications, and 20 additional screening mammograms without microcalcifications used as controls. FFDM alone was compared to synthetic mammography plus DBT. Four readers independently reviewed each data set and microcalcification recalls were tabulated. Sensitivity and specificity for microcalcification detection were calculated for SM plus DBT and for FFDM alone. Interreader agreement was calculated with Fleiss kappa values. Results Reader agreement was kappa value of 0.66 (P < .001) for FFDM and 0.63 (P < .001) for SM plus DBT. For FFDM, the combined reader sensitivity for all microcalcifications was 80% (229 of 288; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 74%, 84%) and for malignant microcalcifications was 92% (66 of 72; 95% CI: 83%, 97%). For SM plus DBT, the combined reader sensitivity for all microcalcifications was 75% (215 of 288; 95% CI: 69%, 80%) and for malignant microcalcifications was 94% (68 of 72; 95% CI: 86%, 98%). For FFDM, the combined reader specificity for all microcalcifications was 98% (78 of 80; 95% CI: 91%, 100%) and for malignant microcalcifications was 98% (78 of 80; 95% CI: 91%, 100%). For SM plus DBT, combined reader specificity for all microcalcifications was 95% (76 of 80; 95% CI: 88%, 99%) and for malignant microcalcifications was 95% (76 of 80; 95% CI: 88%, 99%). Mixed-effects model concluded no differences between modalities (‒0.03; 95% CI: ‒0.08, 0.01; P = .13). Conclusion Relative to full-field digital mammography, synthetic mammography plus digital breast tomosynthesis had similar sensitivity and specificity for the detection of microcalcifications previously identified for recall at screening mammography. © RSNA, 2018 See also the editorial by Bae and Moon in this issue.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2018181180DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

malignant microcalcifications
20
synthetic mammography
16
combined reader
16
microcalcifications
15
mammography digital
12
digital breast
12
breast tomosynthesis
12
digital mammography
12
screening mammograms
12
95%
11

Similar Publications

Assessing Malignant Risk in B3 Breast Lesions: Clinical Insights and Implications.

J Clin Med

December 2024

Multidisciplinary Breast Centre, Dipartimento Scienze della Salute della Donna e del Bambino e di Sanità Pubblica, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Agostino Gemelli IRCCS, 00168 Rome, Italy.

: B3 breast lesions, characterized by uncertain malignant potential, pose a significant challenge for clinicians. With the increasing use of preoperative biopsies, there is a need for careful management strategies, including watchful waiting, vacuum-assisted excision (VAE), and surgery. This study aims to assess the concordance between preoperative biopsy findings and postoperative histology, with a focus on evaluating the positive predictive value (PPV) for malignancy in B3 lesions.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

False-Negative Review from the Mammography Audit: Refining Breast Imaging Practice.

Radiographics

February 2025

From the Washington University School of Medicine, Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, 510 S Kingshighway Blvd, St. Louis, MO 63110.

Annual review of false-negative (FN) mammograms is a mandatory and critical component of the Mammography Quality Standards Act (MQSA) annual mammography audit. FN review can help hone reading skills and improve the ability to detect cancers at mammography. Subtle architectural distortion, asymmetries (seen only on one view), small lesions, lesions with probably benign appearance (circumscribed regular borders), isolated microcalcifications, and skin thickening are the most common mammographic findings when the malignancy is visible at retrospective review of FN mammograms.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

: Microcalcifications in the breast are often an early warning sign of breast cancer, and their accurate detection is crucial for the early discovery and management of the disease. In recent years, deep learning technology, particularly models based on object detection, has significantly improved the ability to detect microcalcifications. This study aims to use the advanced YOLO-v8 object detection algorithm to identify breast microcalcifications and explore its advantages in terms of performance and clinical application.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Objective: This study develops a BI-RADS-like scoring system for vascular microcalcifications in mammographies, correlating breast arterial calcification (BAC) in a mammography with coronary artery calcification (CAC), and specifying differences between microcalcifications caused by BAC and microcalcifications potentially associated with malignant disease.

Materials And Methods: This retrospective single-center cohort study evaluated 124 consecutive female patients (with a median age of 57 years). The presence of CAC was evaluated based on the Agatston score obtained from non-enhanced coronary computed tomography, and the calcifications detected in the mammography were graded on a four-point Likert scale, with the following criteria: (1) no visible or sporadically scattered microcalcifications, (2) suspicious microcalcification not distinguishable from breast arterial calcification, (3) minor breast artery calcifications, and (4) major breast artery calcifications.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Background: Brain calcifications, found in various conditions, may be incidental or crucial for diagnosis. They occur in physiological changes, infections, genetic diseases, neurodegenerative conditions, vascular syndromes, metabolic disorders, endocrine disorders, and primary tumors like oligodendroglioma. While often incidental, their presence can be vital for accurate diagnosis.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!