Reducing radiation doses for breast tomosynthesis
ABOUT MAMMOGRAPHY AND TOMOSYNTHESIS
DBT should be used as an adjunct to conventional 2D breast imaging, not as a replacement, according to the FDA. With that, many breast imagers believe in the technology combination, one even predicting it could become an industry standard. “We’re finding more cancers with tomosynthesis, and we have a reduced recall rate,” says Jaime Geisel, MD, an assistant professor of diagnostic radiology at the Yale University School of Medicine. “If we can reduce false-positives with mammography and tomosynthesis, then maybe we have a better screening test. The new gold standard could be 2D with 3D.”
mean glandular dose for breast tomosynthesis: ..
Geisel was the principal investigator among a team of researchers at the university’s Smilow Cancer Hospital in New Haven, Connecticut, which recently announced results of a study on adding DBT to screening mammography. The retrospective review of 14,684 women who received screening mammograms at Yale from August 2011 through July 2012 showed an 11% increase in the rate of breast cancer detection among women who underwent both 2D and 3D screening. Geisel adds that tomosynthesis appeared to be more valuable in women with dense breast tissue, as 54% of the women whose cancer was found with tomosynthesis had dense breast tissue.
Tomosynthesis/3D Mammography - Jefferson Radiology
Clinical studies reviewed by the FDA showed radiologists reading digital mammography (2D) plus breast tomosynthesis (3D) as compared to 2D mammography alone demonstrated superior clinical performance in specificity, fewer recalls for overlapping normal tissue on screening mammograms, and improved sensitivity, the proportion of mammograms with cancer which was correctly diagnosed.
Mammography and Tomosynthesis | Q&A - YouTube
A number of studies of DBT for breast screening were identified. The seven largest studies (each enrolling more than 10,000 women)28,31,33-38 were selected for detailed review in this report (Table 1). All studies were based on established breast screening programs using Hologic Selenia Dimensions technology for 3D screening, with six studies conducted in the US28,31,33-35,38 and the seventh in Norway.36 The Norwegian study was prospective (women received both types of imaging and served as their own controls), while the American studies were retrospective (four were before-and-after studies of outcomes once the new technology was installed33-35,38 and two enrolled groups of women who received the older and newer technologies at different sites over the same time period).28,31 The Norwegian study involved double reading with arbitration: all images in the study were interpreted by two independent radiologists who had to reach a consensus for the need for recall before a woman was asked to return for more imaging.36 Study sizes ranged from approximately 13,000 to approximately 450,000 women. Of the six studies that reported sources of research support and conflicts of interest, three noted ties to Hologic.35,36,38 Additional study details are presented in Appendix A.