Search

Objective: We investigated patient experience with screening contrast-enhanced mammography (CEM) to determine whether a general population of women with dense breasts would accept CEM in a screening setting., Methods: In this institutional review board-approved prospective study, patients with heterogeneous and extremely dense breasts on their mammogram were invited to undergo screening CEM and complete pre-CEM and post-CEM surveys. On the pre-CEM survey, patients were asked about their attitudes regarding supplemental screening in general. On the post-CEM survey, patients were asked about their experience undergoing screening CEM, including causes and severity of any discomfort and whether they would consider undergoing screening CEM again in the future or recommend it to a friend., Results: One hundred sixty-three women were surveyed before and after screening CEM. Most patients, 97.5% (159/163), reported minimal or no unpleasantness associated with undergoing screening CEM. In addition, 91.4% (149/163) said they would probably or very likely undergo screening CEM in the future if it cost the same as a traditional screening mammogram, and 95.1% (155/163) said they would probably or very likely recommend screening CEM to a friend. Patients in this study, who were all willing to undergo CEM, more frequently reported a family history of breast cancer than a comparison cohort of women with dense breasts (58.2% vs 47.1%, P = .027)., Conclusion: Patients from a general population of women with dense breasts reported a positive experience undergoing screening CEM, suggesting screening CEM might be well received by this patient population, particularly if the cost was comparable with traditional screening mammography., (© Society of Breast Imaging 2024. All rights reserved. For commercial re-use, please contact reprints@oup.com for reprints and translation rights for reprints. All other permissions can be obtained through our RightsLink service via the Permissions link on the article page on our site—for further information please contact journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Purpose: To determine what patient factors are associated with a high or an accurate perceived personal risk (PPR) for breast cancer., Methods: An IRB-approved survey study of women with dense breasts presenting for annual screening mammography was previously conducted from March 2017 to February 2018. Patients were asked to estimate their personal risk for breast cancer and to answer questions about prior breast care-related medical interactions. Survey data were combined post hoc with demographic and clinical data, including breast cancer risk status, and socioeconomic data imputed for each patient from census data. Logistic regression was used to determine which patient factors were associated with a high or accurate PPR., Results: Surveys were completed by 508 women with dense breasts (median age 59.0 years). A high PPR was independently associated with younger age (AOR, 1.71 [95% CI, 1.13, 2.60]), family history of breast cancer (AOR 4.27 [95% CI, 2.81-7.34]), having a clinical "high-risk" designation (AOR, 3.43 [95% CI, 1.13-10.39], and having been called back from screening (AOR, 1.94 [95% CI, 1.14-3.32]). A lower accuracy of PPR was independently associated with a family history of breast cancer (AOR, 0.25 [95% CI, 0.14-0.42]) and having been called back from screening (AOR, 0.58 [95% CI, 0.35-0.98])., Conclusion: Women with dense breasts who had a family history of breast cancer or who had been called back from screening had a higher but less accurate PPR. Women with a "high-risk" clinical designation had a higher PPR, even when controlling for family history., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest This study was conducted with funding support from the Charlottesville Women’s Four Miler Program., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose To compare the outcome of architectural distortion (AD) without associated mass only on digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) with AD seen at two-dimensional (2D) mammography and to evaluate if the incidence of malignancy is influenced by the presence of a correlate at ultrasonography (US). Materials and Methods This retrospective study had institutional review board approval and was HIPAA compliant. All consecutive cases in which patients with AD were ultimately assigned Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) 4 or 5 categories from 2009 to 2016 were reviewed by three readers for visibility (2D vs DBT). The level of suspicion was assigned using a Likert scale. Pathologic results were compared between 2D-detected and DBT-detected AD. Frequencies were compared by using the McNemar and Pearson χ 2 exact tests. Results One hundred eighty-one AD lesions were included; 122 (67.4%) were 2D visible while 59 (32.6%) were DBT detected. Forty-two women (with 43 lesions) underwent 2D mammography prior to initiation of DBT. In 117 women with 121 AD lesions who underwent 2D mammography plus DBT, 59 lesions (48.8%) were detected only with DBT. The malignancy rate based on final pathology was significantly higher for 2D-detected AD (53 [43.4%] of 122) compared with DBT (six [10.2%] of 59) (P < .001). A US correlate was more frequent with 2D-detected AD (103 [84.4%] of 122) than DBT (33 [55.9%] of 59) (P < .001). Malignancy rate was not different for DBT-detected AD with (four [12.1%] of 33; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 3.4%, 28.2%]) or without (two [7.7%] of 26; 95% CI: 0.9%, 25.1%]) a US correlate. NPV based on radiologists' level of suspicion was high (91.8%-98.0%) but not sufficient enough to forgo biopsy. Conclusion DBT-detected suspicious AD has a lower malignancy outcome compared with 2D mammography-detected suspicious AD, although still high enough to warrant biopsy. © RSNA, 2018 Online supplemental material is available for this article.

Objective: The purpose of this study was to compare assessments of breast density on synthetic 2D images as compared with digital 2D mammograms., Materials and Methods: This retrospective study included consecutive women undergoing screening with digital 2D mammography and tomosynthesis during May 2015 with a negative or benign outcome. In separate reading sessions, three radiologists with 5-25 years of clinical experience and 1 year of experience with synthetic 2D mammography read digital 2D and synthetic 2D images and assigned breast density categories according to the 5th edition of BI-RADS. Inter- and intrareader agreement was assessed for each BI-RADS density assessment and combined dense and nondense categories using percent agreement and Cohen kappa coefficient for consensus and all reads., Results: A total of 309 patients met study inclusion criteria. Agreement between consensus BI-RADS density categories assigned for digital and synthetic 2D mammography was 80.3% (95% CI, 75.4-84.5%) with κ = 0.73 (95% CI, 0.66-0.79). For combined dense and nondense categories, agreement reached 91.9% (95% CI, 88.2-94.7%). For consensus readings, similar numbers of patients were shifted between nondense and dense categories (11 and 14, respectively) with the synthetic 2D compared with digital 2D mammography. Interreader differences were apparent; assignment to dense categories was greater with digital 2D mammography for reader 1 (odds ratio [OR], 1.26; p = 0.002), the same for reader 2 (OR, 0.91; p = 0.262), and greater with synthetic 2D mammography for reader 3 (OR, 0.86; p = 0.033)., Conclusion: Overall, synthetic 2D mammography is comparable with digital 2D mammography in assessment of breast density, though there is some variability by reader. Practices can readily adopt synthetic 2D mammography without concern that it will affect density assessment and subsequent recommendations for supplemental screening.

Digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) is an emerging technology used in diagnostic breast imaging to evaluate potential abnormalities. In DBT, the compressed breast tissue is imaged in a quasi-three-dimensional manner by performing a series of low-dose radiographic exposures and using the resultant projection image dataset to reconstruct cross-sectional in-plane images in standard mammographic views. Improved visualization of breast detail at diagnostic DBT allows improved characterization of findings, including normal structures and breast cancer. This technology reduces the summation of overlapping breast tissue, which can mimic breast cancer, and provides improved detail of noncalcified mammographic findings seen in breast cancer. It also assists in lesion localization and determining mammographic extent of disease in women with known or suspected breast cancer. The authors review the potential uses, benefits, and limitations of DBT in the diagnostic setting and discuss how radiologists can best use DBT to characterize lesions, localize potential abnormalities, and evaluate the extent of known or suspected breast cancer. The authors' experience shows that DBT can be implemented effectively in the diagnostic workflow to evaluate and localize potential lesions more efficiently. DBT may potentially replace conventional supplemental mammography at diagnostic workup and obviate ultrasonography in select cases., (©RSNA, 2015.)

Residency is historically an apprenticeship, learning through observation and instruction with varying degrees of structure. Since July 2013, the Next Accreditation System (NAS) of the ACGME has required the use of progressive milestones for each radiology residency rotation. The authors describe how a breast imaging curriculum can be structured to comply with the NAS. The breast imaging rotations move from basic recognition and management of suspicious findings, through the detection of more subtle findings and learning of biopsy skills, and finally to the synthesis and management of more advanced findings. Likewise, patient communication moves from sharing imaging findings to the more challenging situation of breaking the bad news of a cancer diagnosis. This progression of skills mirrors the objectives of levels 1 to 4 of the NAS. Learning objectives have been adapted to form very specific milestones for each rotation, which results in a shared responsibility between residents and faculty members. Using clear expectations may improve the uniformity of teaching, resident satisfaction, and facilitate performance review for residents who are struggling. Didactic lectures, case-based conferences, teaching file cases, and assigned readings provide different approaches to education, allowing variation in learning styles. Performance on the breast imaging section on the ACR Diagnostic Radiology In-Training examination at our institution has risen from below the 50th percentile to around the 80th percentile beginning in 2011., (Copyright © 2014 American College of Radiology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)