Skip to main content

Lund University Publications

LUND UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES

Breast cancer detection in digital breast tomosynthesis and digital mammography - A side-by-side review of discrepant cases.

Lång, Kristina LU ; Andersson, Ingvar LU and Zackrisson, Sophia LU (2014) In British Journal of Radiology 87(1040).
Abstract
Objective: To analyse discrepant breast cancer detection in digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) and digital mammography (DM). Methods: From a previous detection study comparing DBT and DM, 26 discrepant cases were extracted, 19 detected by DBT only and 7 by DM only. An expert panel of 3 radiologists reviewed these cases and documented level of discrepancy, lesion visibility, radiographic pattern, lesion conspicuity and assessed the reason for non-detection. Differences between groups were tested using the Wilcoxon Rank Sum test, the Kruskal-Wallis test and visual grading characteristics. Results: The proportion of lesion periphery in fatty tissue was statistically significantly larger, and there were significantly more spiculated masses in... (More)
Objective: To analyse discrepant breast cancer detection in digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) and digital mammography (DM). Methods: From a previous detection study comparing DBT and DM, 26 discrepant cases were extracted, 19 detected by DBT only and 7 by DM only. An expert panel of 3 radiologists reviewed these cases and documented level of discrepancy, lesion visibility, radiographic pattern, lesion conspicuity and assessed the reason for non-detection. Differences between groups were tested using the Wilcoxon Rank Sum test, the Kruskal-Wallis test and visual grading characteristics. Results: The proportion of lesion periphery in fatty tissue was statistically significantly larger, and there were significantly more spiculated masses in DBT compared to DM in the DBT Only group (p=0.018; p=0.015). The main reasons for missing a lesion were poor lesion visibility when using DM and interpretative error when using DBT. Conclusion: Lesion visualization is superior with DBT, particularly of spiculated tumours. A major reason for non-detection in DBT seems to be interpretative error, which may be due to lack of experience. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
; and
organization
publishing date
type
Contribution to journal
publication status
published
subject
in
British Journal of Radiology
volume
87
issue
1040
article number
20140080
publisher
British Institute of Radiology
external identifiers
  • pmid:24896197
  • wos:000339419800010
  • scopus:84907487498
  • pmid:24896197
ISSN
1748-880X
DOI
10.1259/bjr.20140080
language
English
LU publication?
yes
id
484b4418-696e-42fe-8529-b0eed7f52b58 (old id 4529274)
alternative location
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24896197?dopt=Abstract
date added to LUP
2016-04-01 10:07:40
date last changed
2022-01-25 19:57:24
@article{484b4418-696e-42fe-8529-b0eed7f52b58,
  abstract     = {{Objective: To analyse discrepant breast cancer detection in digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) and digital mammography (DM). Methods: From a previous detection study comparing DBT and DM, 26 discrepant cases were extracted, 19 detected by DBT only and 7 by DM only. An expert panel of 3 radiologists reviewed these cases and documented level of discrepancy, lesion visibility, radiographic pattern, lesion conspicuity and assessed the reason for non-detection. Differences between groups were tested using the Wilcoxon Rank Sum test, the Kruskal-Wallis test and visual grading characteristics. Results: The proportion of lesion periphery in fatty tissue was statistically significantly larger, and there were significantly more spiculated masses in DBT compared to DM in the DBT Only group (p=0.018; p=0.015). The main reasons for missing a lesion were poor lesion visibility when using DM and interpretative error when using DBT. Conclusion: Lesion visualization is superior with DBT, particularly of spiculated tumours. A major reason for non-detection in DBT seems to be interpretative error, which may be due to lack of experience.}},
  author       = {{Lång, Kristina and Andersson, Ingvar and Zackrisson, Sophia}},
  issn         = {{1748-880X}},
  language     = {{eng}},
  number       = {{1040}},
  publisher    = {{British Institute of Radiology}},
  series       = {{British Journal of Radiology}},
  title        = {{Breast cancer detection in digital breast tomosynthesis and digital mammography - A side-by-side review of discrepant cases.}},
  url          = {{https://lup.lub.lu.se/search/files/1586150/5238839}},
  doi          = {{10.1259/bjr.20140080}},
  volume       = {{87}},
  year         = {{2014}},
}