Comparison of handheld ultrasound and automated breast ultrasound in women recalled after mammography screening
| Autor: | Karin Leifland, Ariel Saracco, Fuat Celebioglu, Per Hall, Roxanna Hellgren, Paul W. Dickman |
|---|---|
| Rok vydání: | 2016 |
| Předmět: |
Adult
medicine.medical_specialty Breast Neoplasms Sensitivity and Specificity Pattern Recognition Automated 030218 nuclear medicine & medical imaging 03 medical and health sciences 0302 clinical medicine Image Interpretation Computer-Assisted medicine Humans Mammography Breast volume Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging Breast Breast ultrasound Early Detection of Cancer Aged Handheld ultrasound Radiological and Ultrasound Technology medicine.diagnostic_test business.industry Ultrasound General Medicine Middle Aged 030220 oncology & carcinogenesis Female Ultrasonography Mammary Mammography screening Radiology business |
| Zdroj: | Acta Radiologica. 58:515-520 |
| ISSN: | 1600-0455 0284-1851 |
| DOI: | 10.1177/0284185116665421 |
| Popis: | Background Automated breast volume scanner (ABVS) is an ultrasound (US) device with a wide scanner that sweeps over a large area of the breast and the acquired transverse images are sent to a workstation for reconstruction and review. Whether ABVS is as reliable as handheld US is, however, still not established. Purpose To compare the sensitivity and specificity of ABVS to handheld breast US for detection of breast cancer, in the situation of recall after mammography screening. Material and Methods A total of 113 women, five with bilateral suspicious findings, undergoing handheld breast US due to a suspicious mammographic finding in screening, underwent additional ABVS. The methods were assessed for each breast and each detected lesion separately and classified into two categories: breasts with mammographic suspicion of malignancy and breasts with a negative mammogram. Results Twenty-six cancers were found in 25 women. In the category of breasts with a suspicious mammographic finding (n = 118), the sensitivity of both handheld US and ABVS was 88% (22/25). The specificity of handheld US was 93.5% (87/93) and ABVS was 89.2% (83/93). In the category of breasts with a negative mammography (n = 103), the sensitivity of handheld US and ABVS was 100% (1/1). The specificity of handheld US was 100% (102/102) and ABVS was 94.1% (96/102). Conclusion ABVS can potentially replace handheld US in the investigation of women recalled from mammography screening due to a suspicious finding. Due to the small size of our study population, further investigation with larger study populations is necessary before the implementation of such practice. |
| Databáze: | OpenAIRE |
| Externí odkaz: |
|