Journal of the Korean Society of Radiology (대한영상의학회지)

The Korean Society of Radiology (대한영상의학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Diagnostic Performance of Digital Breast Tomosynthesis with the Two-Dimensional Synthesized Mammogram for Suspicious Breast Microcalcifications Compared to Full-Field Digital Mammography in Stereotactic Breast Biopsy

정위적 유방 조직검사 시 미세석회화 의심 병변에서의 디지털 유방단층영상합성법과 전역 디지털 유방촬영술의 진단능 비교

  • Jiwon Shin (Department of Radiology, Korea University Guro Hospital, College of Medicine, Korea University) ;
  • Ok Hee Woo (Department of Radiology, Korea University Guro Hospital, College of Medicine, Korea University) ;
  • Hye Seon Shin (Department of Radiology, Korea University Guro Hospital, College of Medicine, Korea University) ;
  • Sung Eun Song (Department of Radiology, Korea University Anam Hospital, College of Medicine, Korea University) ;
  • Kyu Ran Cho (Department of Radiology, Korea University Anam Hospital, College of Medicine, Korea University) ;
  • Bo Kyoung Seo (Department of Radiology, Korea University Ansan Hospital, College of Medicine, Korea University)
  • 신지원 (고려대학교 의과대학 구로병원 영상의학과) ;
  • 우옥희 (고려대학교 의과대학 구로병원 영상의학과) ;
  • 신혜선 (고려대학교 의과대학 구로병원 영상의학과) ;
  • 송성은 (고려대학교 의과대학 안암병원 영상의학과) ;
  • 조규란 (고려대학교 의과대학 안암병원 영상의학과) ;
  • 서보경 (고려대학교 의과대학 안산병원 영상의학과)
  • Received : 2021.06.02
  • Accepted : 2021.09.23
  • Published : 2022.09.01
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Purpose To evaluate the diagnostic performance of digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) with the two-dimensional synthesized mammogram (2DSM), compared to full-field digital mammography (FFDM), for suspicious microcalcifications in the breast ahead of stereotactic biopsy and to assess the diagnostic image visibility of the images. Materials and Methods This retrospective study involved 189 patients with microcalcifications, which were histopathologically verified by stereotactic breast biopsy, who underwent DBT with 2DSM and FFDM between January 8, 2015, and January 20, 2020. Two radiologists assessed all cases of microcalcifications based on Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) independently. They were blinded to the histopathologic outcome and additionally evaluated lesion visibility using a fivepoint scoring scale. Results Overall, the inter-observer agreement was excellent (0.9559). Under the setting of category 4A as negative due to the low possibility of malignancy and to avoid the dilution of malignancy criteria in our study, McNemar tests confirmed no significant difference between the performances of the two modalities in detecting microcalcifications with a high potential for malignancy (4B, 4C, or 5; p = 0.1573); however, the tests showed a significant difference between their performances in detecting microcalcifications with a high potential for benignancy (4A; p = 0.0009). DBT with 2DSM demonstrated superior visibility and diagnostic performance than FFDM in dense breasts. Conclusion DBT with 2DSM is superior to FFDM in terms of total diagnostic accuracy and lesion visibility for benign microcalcifications in dense breasts. This study suggests a promising role for DBT with 2DSM as an accommodating tool for stereotactic biopsy in female with dense breasts and suspicious breast microcalcifications.

목적 본 연구는 미세석회화가 의심되는 유방에서 정위적 조직검사에 앞서서 시행하는 디지털 유방단층영상합성법(digital breast tomosynthesis with the two-dimensional synthesized mammogram; 이하 DBT with 2DSM)과 전면디지털유방촬영술(full-field digital mammography; 이하 FFDM)의 진단능을 비교 평가하고 영상의 진단적 명확도를 평가하기 위해서 시행하였다 대상과 방법 2015년 1월에서 2020년 1월까지 후향적 연구로서 189명의 환자 중 정위적 조직검사를 통한 조직병리검사상 미세석회화 병변이 확인된 환자를 중 DBT with 2DSM나 FFDM을 시행한 환자군에서 시행되었다. 두 명의 영상의학과 의사가 눈가림 상태로, Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) 분류에 따른 미세석회화의 평가 및 본 연구에서 별도로 1-5점 척도를 통해 정의한 진단적 명확도에 대한 평가를 시행하였다. 결과 전반적인 검사자간 일치도는 우수한 것으로 확인되었다. 맥네머 검정에서 악성가능성이 높은 미세석회화(4B, 4C, or 5)의 검출에 있어서는 두 진단방법 간에 통계적 유의성은 보이지 않았으나, 양성가능성이 높은 미세석회화(4A)의 진단에 있어서는 통계적 유의성을 보였다. DBT with 2DSM는 FFDM보다 더 높은 가시성을 보임이 확인되었고, 치밀유방에서도 FFDM보다 진단에 있어서 더 우수하였다. 결론 DBT with 2DSM는 FFDM과 비교하여 미세석회화 병변에 대해서 더 높은 전반적 진단적 정확도와 진단적 명확성을 제공하였다. DBT with 2DSM는 FFDM보다 양성 미세석회화 병변에서와 치밀유방에서 우수성을 보였다. 본 연구에서는 치밀 유방에서 미세석회화 병변에 대해서 정위적 생검을 시행할 때 유용한 진단 기구로서의 DBT with 2DSM의 역할을 확인할 수 있었다.

Keywords

References

  1. Tse GM, Tan PH, Cheung HS, Chu WC, Lam WW. Intermediate to highly suspicious calcification in breast lesions: a radio-pathologic correlation. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2008;110:1-7 
  2. Carney PA, Miglioretti DL, Yankaskas BC, Kerlikowske K, Rosenberg R, Rutter CM, et al. Individual and combined effects of age, breast density, and hormone replacement therapy use on the accuracy of screening mammography. Ann Intern Med 2003;138:168-175 
  3. Ciatto S, Houssami N, Bernardi D, Caumo F, Pellegrini M, Brunelli S, et al. Integration of 3D digital mammography with tomosynthesis for population breast-cancer screening (STORM): a prospective comparison study. Lancet Oncol 2013;14:583-589 
  4. Friedewald SM, Rafferty EA, Rose SL, Durand MA, Plecha DM, Greenberg JS, et al. Breast cancer screening using tomosynthesis in combination with digital mammography. JAMA 2014;311:2499-2507 
  5. Ohashi R, Nagao M, Nakamura I, Okamoto T, Sakai S. Improvement in diagnostic performance of breast cancer: comparison between conventional digital mammography alone and conventional mammography plus digital breast tomosynthesis. Breast Cancer 2018;25:590-596 
  6. Zuley ML, Bandos AI, Abrams GS, Cohen C, Hakim CM, Sumkin JH, et al. Time to diagnosis and performance levels during repeat interpretations of digital breast tomosynthesis: preliminary observations. Acad Radiol 2010;17:450-455 
  7. Svahn TM, Houssami N, Sechopoulos I, Mattsson S. Review of radiation dose estimates in digital breast tomosynthesis relative to those in two-view full-field digital mammography. Breast 2015;24:93-99 
  8. Gur D, Zuley ML, Anello MI, Rathfon GY, Chough DM, Ganott MA, et al. Dose reduction in digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) screening using synthetically reconstructed projection images: an observer performance study. Acad Radiol 2012;19:166-171 
  9. Tagliafico A, Houssami N. Digital breast tomosynthesis might not be the optimal modality for detecting microcalcification. Radiology 2015;275:618-619 
  10. Kopans D, Gavenonis S, Halpern E, Moore R. Calcifications in the breast and digital breast tomosynthesis. Breast J 2011;17:638-644 
  11. Choi JS, Han BK, Ko EY, Kim GR, Ko ES, Park KW. Comparison of synthetic and digital mammography with digital breast tomosynthesis or alone for the detection and classification of microcalcifications. Eur Radiol 2019;29:319-329 
  12. Ho CP, Tromans C, Schnabel JA, Brady M. Classification of clusters of microcalcifications in digital breast tomosynthesis. Annu Int Conf IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc 2010;2010:3166-3169 
  13. Kettritz U, Rotter K, Schreer I, Murauer M, Schulz-Wendtland R, Peter D, et al. Stereotactic vacuum-assisted breast biopsy in 2874 patients: a multicenter study. Cancer 2004;100:245-251 
  14. Rotter K, Haentschel G, Koethe D, Goetz L, Bornhofen-Poschke A, Lebrecht A, et al. Evaluation of mammographic and clinical follow-up after 755 stereotactic vacuum-assisted breast biopsies. Am J Surg 2003;186:134-142 
  15. Elezaby M, Li G, Bhargavan-Chatfield M, Burnside ES, DeMartini WB. ACR BI-RADS assessment category 4 subdivisions in diagnostic mammography: utilization and outcomes in the national mammography database. Radiology 2018;287:416-422 
  16. Choi Y, Woo OH, Shin HS, Cho KR, Seo BK, Choi GY. Quantitative analysis of radiation dosage and image quality between digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) with two-dimensional synthetic mammography and full-field digital mammography (FFDM). Clin Imaging 2019;55:12-17 
  17. Schrading S, Distelmaier M, Dirrichs T, Detering S, Brolund L, Strobel K, et al. Digital breast tomosynthesis-guided vacuum-assisted breast biopsy: initial experiences and comparison with prone stereotactic vacuum-assisted biopsy. Radiology 2015;274:654-662 
  18. Imschweiler T, Haueisen H, Kampmann G, Rageth L, Seifert B, Rageth C, et al. MRI-guided vacuum-assisted breast biopsy: comparison with stereotactically guided and ultrasound-guided techniques. Eur Radiol 2014;24:128-135 
  19. Choi JS, Han BK, Ko EY, Ko ES, Hahn SY, Shin JH, et al. Comparison between two-dimensional synthetic mammography reconstructed from digital breast tomosynthesis and full-field digital mammography for the detection of T1 breast cancer. Eur Radiol 2016;26:2538-2546 
  20. Esen G, Tutar B, Uras C, Calay Z, Ince u, Tutar O. Vacuum-assisted stereotactic breast biopsy in the diagnosis and management of suspicious microcalcifications. Diagn Interv Radiol 2016;22:326-333 
  21. Ferreira VCCS, Etchebehere ECSC, Bevilacqua JLB, de Barros N. Suspicious amorphous microcalcifications detected on full-field digital mammography: correlation with histopathology. Radiol Bras 2018;51:87-94 
  22. Clauser P, Nagl G, Helbich TH, Pinker-Domenig K, Weber M, Kapetas P, et al. Diagnostic performance of digital breast tomosynthesis with a wide scan angle compared to full-field digital mammography for the detection and characterization of microcalcifications. Eur J Radiol 2016;85:2161-2168 
  23. Dibble EH, Lourenco AP, Baird GL, Ward RC, Maynard AS, Mainiero MB. Comparison of digital mammography and digital breast tomosynthesis in the detection of architectural distortion. Eur Radiol 2018;28:3-10 
  24. Hadjipanteli A, Elangovan P, Looney PT, Mackenzie A, Wells K, Dance DR, et al. Detection of microcalcification clusters by 2D-mammography and narrow and wide angle digital breast tomosynthesis. Medical Imaging 2016;9783:978306 
  25. Sechopoulos I, Ghetti C. Optimization of the acquisition geometry in digital tomosynthesis of the breast. Med Phys 2009;36:1199-1207 
  26. Destounis SV, Arieno AL, Morgan RC. Preliminary clinical experience with digital breast tomosynthesis in the visualization of breast microcalcifications. J Clin Imaging Sci 2013;3:65 
  27. Svane G, Azavedo E, Lindman K, Urech M, Nilsson J, Weber N, et al. Clinical experience of photon counting breast tomosynthesis: comparison with traditional mammography. Acta Radiol 2011;52:134-142 
  28. Kopans DB. Digital breast tomosynthesis from concept to clinical care. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2014;202:299-308 
  29. Spangler ML, Zuley ML, Sumkin JH, Abrams G, Ganott MA, Hakim C, et al. Detection and classification of calcifications on digital breast tomosynthesis and 2D digital mammography: a comparison. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2011;196:320-324 
  30. Timberg P, Baath M, Andersson I, Mattsson S, Tingberg A, Ruschin M. Visibility of microcalcification clusters and masses in breast tomosynthesis image volumes and digital mammography: a 4AFC human observer study. Med Phys 2012;39:2431-2437 
  31. Cockmartin L, Marshall NW, Van Ongeval C, Aerts G, Stalmans D, Zanca F, et al. Comparison of digital breast tomosynthesis and 2D digital mammography using a hybrid performance test. Phys Med Biol 2015;60:3939-3958 
  32. Bernardi D, Ciatto S, Pellegrini M, Tuttobene P, Fanto' C, Valentini M, et al. Prospective study of breast tomosynthesis as a triage to assessment in screening. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2012;133:267-271 
  33. Andersson I, Ikeda DM, Zackrisson S, Ruschin M, Svahn T, Timberg P, et al. 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 2008;18:2817-2825 
  34. Viala J, Gignier P, Perret B, Hovasse C, Hovasse D, Chancelier-Galan MD, et al. Stereotactic vacuum-assisted biopsies on a digital breast 3D-tomosynthesis system. Breast J 2013;19:4-9 
  35. Seo M, Chang JM, Kim SA, Kim WH, Lim JH, Lee SH, et al. Addition of digital breast tomosynthesis to full-field digital mammography in the diagnostic setting: additional value and cancer detectability. J Breast Cancer 2016;19:438-446