Volume 19 Issue 7
Jul.  2021
Turn off MathJax
Article Contents
Article Navigation >  Chinese Journal of General Practice  > 2021  >  19(7): 1186-1190
WANG Xiang-zhi, TANG Xiao-min, YANG Ju-ping, GAO Zhi-zhen, XIE Zong-yu, SHEN Jun-jie. A comparison of diagnosis of benign and malignant breast diseases between digital breast tomosynthesis and MRI[J]. Chinese Journal of General Practice, 2021, 19(7): 1186-1190. doi: 10.16766/j.cnki.issn.1674-4152.002017
Citation: WANG Xiang-zhi, TANG Xiao-min, YANG Ju-ping, GAO Zhi-zhen, XIE Zong-yu, SHEN Jun-jie. A comparison of diagnosis of benign and malignant breast diseases between digital breast tomosynthesis and MRI[J]. Chinese Journal of General Practice, 2021, 19(7): 1186-1190. doi: 10.16766/j.cnki.issn.1674-4152.002017
shu

A comparison of diagnosis of benign and malignant breast diseases between digital breast tomosynthesis and MRI

doi: 10.16766/j.cnki.issn.1674-4152.002017
  • 1.

    Department of Radiology, the First Affiliated Hospital of Bengbu Medical College, Bengbu, Anhui 233004, China

Funds:

 KJ2019A0402

 BYTM2019043

  • Received Date: 2012-12-15
    Available Online: 2022-02-16
    Abstract
  •   Objective  To explore the diagnostic of benign and malignant breast diseases between digital mammography (DM), digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) and MRI.  Methods  During the period from January 2019 to October 2020, 116 patients with suspected lesions by palpation underwent further imaging exam in the First Affiliated Hospital of Bengbu Medical College. The DM, DBT and MRI were performed on all the patients. All breast lesions were analyzed according to BI-RADS. The pathological results were "gold standard" to evaluate the diagnostic efficacy of the DM+DBT and MRI in benign and malignant breast diseases. The ability of the DM+DBT and MRI to evaluate the actual lesion size and malignant signs. The difference of average glandular dose between DM and DBT.  Results  Among the 116 lesions, 86 were malignant and 30 were benign. The sensitivity of DM+DBT was 88.4%, specificity 86.7%, and accuracy 87.9%. The sensitivity of MRI was 96.5%, specificity 73.3%, and accuracy 90.5%. The ROC area under the curve of DM+DBT and MRI for diagnosis of breast diseases were 0.911 and 0.948. There was no significant difference in AUC value between DM+DBT and MRI (Z=1.084, P=0.278). The DM+DBT and MRI were slightly overestimated the size of malignant tumor, but both of them were positively correlated with the pathological measurements (all P>0.05). The calcification was significantly higher for DM+DBT detection than for MRI (χ2=22.114, P < 0.05). The infiltration of pectoralis major and axillary lymph nodes were significantly higher for MRI than that for DM+DBT detection (χ2=4.900, 21.333, all P < 0.05). The average glandular dose (AGD) of DM and DBT was (1.574±0.422) mGy and (2.534±0.521) mGy, respectively. The AGD of DBT was significantly higher than DM (t=-29.213, P < 0.001).  Conclusion  DM+DBT can effectively diagnose benign and malignant breast lesions, providing a comparable efficiency to MRI. It is easy for patients and does not need contrast injections. DM+DBT is recommend for patients with dense gland type breast.

     

    • FullText(HTML)
  • loading
    • References(21)
  • [1]
    BRAY F, FERLAY J, SOERJOMATARAM I, et al. Erratum: Global cancer statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries[J]. CA Cancer J Clin, 2020, 70(4): 313.
    [2]
    RAY K M, JOE B N, FREIMANIS R I, et al. Screening mammography in women 40-49 years old: Current evidence[J]. AJR Am J Roentgenol, 2018, 210(2): 264-270. doi: 10.2214/AJR.17.18707
    [3]
    代晓倩, 张伟. 数字乳腺断层摄影与超声对致密型乳腺内病变的诊断效能对比研究[J]. 中国医药, 2019, 14(5): 738-741. doi: 10.3760/j.issn.1673-4777.2019.05.024
    [4]
    ALZAGHAL A A, DIPIRO P J. Applications of advanced breast imaging modalities[J]. Curr Oncol Rep, 2018, 20(7): 57. doi: 10.1007/s11912-018-0700-3
    [5]
    徐海燕, 赵红, 邹立巍, 等. 利用3.0T MR血管成像探讨乳腺癌周围血供特点及相关因素[J]. 中华全科医学, 2016, 14(1): 108-110, 130. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-SYQY201601039.htm
    [6]
    中国抗癌协会乳腺癌专业委员会. 中国抗癌协会乳腺癌诊治指南与规范(2019年版)[J]. 中国癌症杂志, 2019, 29(8): 609-680. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-ZGAZ201709004.htm
    [7]
    NG K H, LAU S. Vision 20/20: Mammographic breast density and its clinical applications[J]. Med Phys, 2015, 42(12): 7059-7077. doi: 10.1118/1.4935141
    [8]
    DESTOUET J M, BASSETT L W, YAFFE M J, et al. The acr's mammography accreditation program: Ten years of experience since mqsa[J]. J Am Coll Radiol, 2005, 2(7): 585-594. doi: 10.1016/j.jacr.2004.12.005
    [9]
    MOSHINA N, AASE H S, DANIELSEN A S, et al. Comparing screening outcomes for digital breast tomosynthesis and digital mammography by automated breast density in a randomized controlled trial: Results from the to-betrial[J]. Radiology, 2020, 297 (3): 522-531. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2020201150
    [10]
    BASHA M A A, SAFWAT H K, ALAA ELDIN A M, et al. The added value of digital breast tomosynthesis in improving diagnostic performance of BI-RADS categorization of mammographically indeterminate breast lesions[J]. Insights Imaging, 2020, 11(1): 26. doi: 10.1186/s13244-020-0835-2
    [11]
    黄新玲, 胡汉金. 数字乳腺断层合成摄影和MRI检查对乳腺癌诊断效能的比较[J]. 临床放射学杂志, 2020, 39(6): 1085-1089. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-LCFS202006013.htm
    [12]
    HA T, KANG D K, KIM T H. Percentage volume of delayed kinetics in computer-aided diagnosis of MRI of the breast to reduce false-positive results and unnecessary biopsies[J]. Clin Radiol, 2020, 75(12): 962e1-962e8. doi: 10.1016/j.crad.2020.08.005
    [13]
    汤伟, 杨孟, 高毅, 等. 数字乳腺断层融合X线摄影术前评估乳腺癌肿块大小的效能对比研究[J]. 中国癌症杂志, 2018, 28(11): 813-818. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-ZGAZ201811004.htm
    [14]
    CHAND J T, SHARMA M M, DHARMARAJAN J P, et al. Digital breast tomosynthesis as a tool in confirming negative surgical margins in non-palpable breast lesions[J]. Indian J Surg Oncol, 2019, 10(4): 624-628. doi: 10.1007/s13193-019-00956-z
    [15]
    MARINOVICH M L, BERNARDI D, MACASKILL P, et al. Agreement between digital breast tomosynthesis and pathologic tumour size for staging breast cancer, and comparison with standard mammography[J]. Breast, 2019, 43: 59-66. doi: 10.1016/j.breast.2018.11.001
    [16]
    GIROMETTI R, MARCONI V, LINDA A, et al. Preoperative assessment of breast cancer: Multireader comparison of contrast-enhanced mri versus the combination of unenhanced MRI and digital breast tomosynthesis[J]. Breast, 2020, 49: 174-182. doi: 10.1016/j.breast.2019.11.013
    [17]
    O'GRADY S, MORGAN M P. Microcalcifications in breast cancer: From pathophysiology to diagnosis and prognosis[J]. Biochim Biophys Acta Rev Cancer, 2018, 1869(2): 310-320. doi: 10.1016/j.bbcan.2018.04.006
    [18]
    SPANGLER M L, ZULEY M L, SUMKIN J H, et al. Detection and classification of calcifications on digital breast tomosynthesis and 2d digital mammography: A comparison[J]. AJR Am J Roentgenol, 2011, 196(2): 320-324. doi: 10.2214/AJR.10.4656
    [19]
    LI J T, ZHANG H W, JIANG H, et al. Diagnostic performance of digital breast tomosynthesis for breast suspicious calcifications from various populations: A comparison with full-field digital mammography[J]. Comput Struct Biotechnol J, 2019, 17: 82-89. doi: 10.1016/j.csbj.2018.12.004
    [20]
    谢四梅, 张安秦, 朱彩霞, 等. 触诊及影像学检查对乳腺癌腋淋巴结转移状况预测价值探讨[J]. 中华肿瘤防治杂志, 2014, 21(15): 1179-1183. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-QLZL201415011.htm
    [21]
    郭相华, 宋黎涛, 黄松, 等. 乳腺钼靶联合磁共振成像检查在老年乳腺癌患者诊断中的价值[J]. 中国肿瘤临床与康复, 2019, 26(3): 297-299. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-ZGZK201903017.htm
    • Relative Articles
    • Supplements(0)
    • Cited By
  • 加载中

Catalog

    通讯作者: 陈斌, bchen63@163.com
    • 1. 

      沈阳化工大学材料科学与工程学院 沈阳 110142

    1. 本站搜索
    2. 百度学术搜索
    3. 万方数据库搜索
    4. CNKI搜索

    Figures(3)  / Tables(1)

    Get Citation
    PDF
    XML

    Article Metrics

    Article views (236) PDF downloads(5) Cited by()
    Proportional views
    Related

    Address：No. 287, Changhuai Road, Bengbu, Anhui Province, 233004, P.R.ChinaphoneNo：0552-3066635； 0552-3051890Email：zhqkyx@163.com

    Copyright © Chinese Journal of General Practice皖ICP备2020018345号-2

    Supported by: Beijing Renhe Information Technology Co., Ltd.    

    /

    DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint
    Return
    Return