Dual-energy contrast-enhanced digital mammography: initial clinical results

被引:193
|
作者
Dromain, Clarisse [1 ,2 ]
Thibault, Fabienne [3 ]
Muller, Serge [4 ]
Rimareix, Francoise [5 ]
Delaloge, Suzette [6 ]
Tardivon, Anne [3 ]
Balleyguier, Corinne [2 ]
机构
[1] Inst Cancerol Gustave Roussy, Dept Radiol, F-94805 Villejuif, France
[2] Inst Cancerol Gustave Roussy, Dept Imaging, F-94805 Villejuif, France
[3] Inst Curie, Dept Imaging, F-75248 Paris 05, France
[4] GE Healthcare, F-78530 Buc, France
[5] Inst Gustave Roussy, Dept Surg, F-94805 Villejuif, France
[6] Inst Gustave Roussy, Dept Med, F-94805 Villejuif, France
关键词
BREAST-CANCER; DIAGNOSIS; MORTALITY; WOMEN; US;
D O I
10.1007/s00330-010-1944-y
中图分类号
R8 [特种医学]; R445 [影像诊断学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100207 ; 1009 ;
摘要
To assess the diagnostic accuracy of Dual-Energy Contrast-Enhanced Digital Mammography (CEDM) as an adjunct to mammography (MX) versus MX alone and versus mammography plus ultrasound (US). 120 women with 142 suspect findings on MX and/or US underwent CEDM. A pair of low- and high-energy images was acquired using a modified full-field digital mammography system. Exposures were taken in MLO at 2 min and in CC at 4 min after the injection of 1.5 ml/kg of an iodinated contrast agent. One reader evaluated MX, US and CEDM images during 2 sessions 1 month apart. Sensitivity, specificity, and area under the ROC curve were estimated. The results from pathology and follow-up identified 62 benign and 80 malignant lesions. Areas under the ROC curves were significantly superior for MX+CEDM than it was for MX alone and for MX+US using BI-RADS. Sensitivity was higher for MX+CEDM than it was for MX (93% vs. 78%; p < 0.001) with no loss in specificity. The lesion size was closer to the histological size for CEDM. All 23 multifocal lesions were correctly detected by MX+CEDM vs. 16 and 15 lesions by MX and US respectively. Initial clinical results show that CEDM has better diagnostic accuracy than mammography alone and mammography+ultrasound.
引用
收藏
页码:565 / 574
页数:10
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Performance of Dual-Energy Contrast-enhanced Digital Mammography for Screening Women at Increased Risk of Breast Cancer
    Sung, Janice S.
    Lebron, Lizza
    Keating, Delia
    D'Alessio, Donna
    Comstock, Christopher E.
    Lee, Carol H.
    Pike, Malcolm C.
    Ayhan, Miranda
    Moskowitz, Chaya S.
    Morris, Elizabeth A.
    Jochelson, Maxine S.
    RADIOLOGY, 2019, 293 (01) : 81 - 88
  • [22] Anatomical noise in contrast-enhanced digital mammography. Part II. Dual-energy imaging
    Hill, Melissa L.
    Mainprize, James G.
    Carton, Ann-Katherine
    Saab-Puong, Sylvie
    Iordache, Razvan
    Muller, Serge
    Jong, Roberta A.
    Dromain, Clarisse
    Yaffe, Martin J.
    MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2013, 40 (08)
  • [23] Estimating breast thickness for dual-energy subtraction in contrast-enhanced digital mammography using calibration phantoms
    Lau, Kristen C.
    Kwon, Young Joon
    Aziz, Moez Karim
    Acciavatti, Raymond J.
    Maidment, Andrew D. A.
    MEDICAL IMAGING 2016: PHYSICS OF MEDICAL IMAGING, 2016, 9783
  • [24] Dual-energy contrast-enhanced spectral mammography (CESM) for breast cancer screening
    Sorin, Vera
    Sklair-Levy, Miri
    QUANTITATIVE IMAGING IN MEDICINE AND SURGERY, 2019, 9 (11) : 1914 - 1917
  • [25] DUAL-ENERGY MAMMOGRAPHY - INITIAL EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS
    JOHNS, PC
    DROST, DJ
    YAFFE, MJ
    FENSTER, A
    MEDICAL PHYSICS, 1985, 12 (03) : 297 - 304
  • [26] A novel approach to background subtraction in contrast-enhanced dual-energy digital mammography with commercially available mammography devices: Noise minimization
    Contillo, Adriano
    Di Domenico, Giovanni
    Cardarelli, Paolo
    Gambaccini, Mauro
    Taibi, Angelo
    MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2016, 43 (06) : 3080 - 3089
  • [27] A novel approach to background subtraction in contrast-enhanced dual-energy digital mammography with commercially available mammography devices: Polychromaticity correction
    Contillo, Adriano
    Di Domenico, Giovanni
    Cardarelli, Paolo
    Gambaccini, Mauro
    Taibi, Angelo
    MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2015, 42 (11) : 6641 - 6650
  • [28] Bilateral Contrast-enhanced Dual-Energy Digital Mammography: Feasibility and Comparison with Conventional Digital Mammography and MR Imaging in Women with Known Breast Carcinoma
    Jochelson, Maxine S.
    Dershaw, D. David
    Sung, Janice S.
    Heerdt, Alexandra S.
    Thornton, Cynthia
    Moskowitz, Chaya S.
    Ferrara, Jessica
    Morris, Elizabeth A.
    RADIOLOGY, 2013, 266 (03) : 743 - 751
  • [29] Susceptibility of iodine concentration map of dual-energy contrast-enhanced digital mammography for quantitative and tumor enhancement assessment
    Hwang, Yi-Shuan
    Cheung, Yun-Chung
    Lin, Yu-Ying
    Hsu, Hsiao-Lan
    Tsai, Hui-Yu
    ACTA RADIOLOGICA, 2018, 59 (08) : 893 - 901
  • [30] Dual-energy contrast-enhanced digital breast tomosynthesis - a feasibility study
    Carton, A-K
    Gavenonis, S. C.
    Currivan, J. A.
    Conant, E. F.
    Schnall, M. D.
    Maidment, A. D. A.
    BRITISH JOURNAL OF RADIOLOGY, 2010, 83 (988): : 344 - 350