Change in Indications and Outcomes for Stereotactic Biopsy Following Transition from Full Field Digital Mammography + Digital Breast Tomosynthesis to Full Field Synthetic Mammography + Digital Breast Tomosynthesis.

Q1 Medicine
Jose Net, Antoine Hamedi-Sangsari, Taylor Schwartz, Mirelys Barrios, Nicole Brofman, Cedric Pluguez-Turull, Jamie Spoont, Sarah Stamler, Monica Yepes
{"title":"Change in Indications and Outcomes for Stereotactic Biopsy Following Transition from Full Field Digital Mammography + Digital Breast Tomosynthesis to Full Field Synthetic Mammography + Digital Breast Tomosynthesis.","authors":"Jose Net, Antoine Hamedi-Sangsari, Taylor Schwartz, Mirelys Barrios, Nicole Brofman, Cedric Pluguez-Turull, Jamie Spoont, Sarah Stamler, Monica Yepes","doi":"10.3390/medsci13010029","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Synthetic 2D mammography was developed to decrease radiation exposure, but to our knowledge there have been no studies evaluating the impact of implementation of full field synthetic mammography/digital breast tomosynthesis (FFSM/DBT) on indications for stereotactic biopsy.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To compare indications and biopsy outcomes for stereotactic biopsy for full field digital mammography (FFDM/DBT) to those of FFSM/DBT.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Retrospective chart review of stereotactic biopsies performed from July 2014 to September 2018. Reports were reviewed and indication for biopsy, lesion size, and final pathology were recorded. Comparison between the two groups following transition to FFSM/DBT in 2016 was performed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>66 of 361 stereotactic biopsies performed in the FFDM/DBT group were malignant (PPV 18.3%), compared to 60 of the 391 biopsies performed in the FFSM/DBT group (PPV 15.4%) with no significant difference in PPV (<i>p</i> = 0.281). There were statistically significant changes in indications for biopsies after transitioning to FFSM/DBT: with a decrease in calcifications referred for biopsy (68.03% vs. 89.75%; <i>p</i> < 0.001), and a statistically significant increase in referral of masses (10.74% vs. 4.43%; <i>p</i> < 0.001), asymmetries (15.60% vs. 5.26%; <i>p</i> < 0.001), and architectural distortion (5.63% vs. 0.55%; <i>p</i> < 0.001). PPV across all indications (21.8% in FFSM/DBT vs. 20.3% in FFDM; <i>p</i> = 0.213), and invasive cancer yield (5.63% vs. 3.32%; <i>p</i> = 0.129) remained comparable following transition to FFSM/DBT without statistically significant differences.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Following transition to FFSM/DBT, statistically significant shifts in indications for biopsies were observed with a decrease in referral of calcifications and an increase for masses, asymmetries and architectural distortions. PPV for stereotactic biopsy was not significantly different and cancer yield across all indications remained similar, with an increase in invasive cancer diagnosis.</p>","PeriodicalId":74152,"journal":{"name":"Medical sciences (Basel, Switzerland)","volume":"13 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11944155/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medical sciences (Basel, Switzerland)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/medsci13010029","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Synthetic 2D mammography was developed to decrease radiation exposure, but to our knowledge there have been no studies evaluating the impact of implementation of full field synthetic mammography/digital breast tomosynthesis (FFSM/DBT) on indications for stereotactic biopsy.

Objective: To compare indications and biopsy outcomes for stereotactic biopsy for full field digital mammography (FFDM/DBT) to those of FFSM/DBT.

Methods: Retrospective chart review of stereotactic biopsies performed from July 2014 to September 2018. Reports were reviewed and indication for biopsy, lesion size, and final pathology were recorded. Comparison between the two groups following transition to FFSM/DBT in 2016 was performed.

Results: 66 of 361 stereotactic biopsies performed in the FFDM/DBT group were malignant (PPV 18.3%), compared to 60 of the 391 biopsies performed in the FFSM/DBT group (PPV 15.4%) with no significant difference in PPV (p = 0.281). There were statistically significant changes in indications for biopsies after transitioning to FFSM/DBT: with a decrease in calcifications referred for biopsy (68.03% vs. 89.75%; p < 0.001), and a statistically significant increase in referral of masses (10.74% vs. 4.43%; p < 0.001), asymmetries (15.60% vs. 5.26%; p < 0.001), and architectural distortion (5.63% vs. 0.55%; p < 0.001). PPV across all indications (21.8% in FFSM/DBT vs. 20.3% in FFDM; p = 0.213), and invasive cancer yield (5.63% vs. 3.32%; p = 0.129) remained comparable following transition to FFSM/DBT without statistically significant differences.

Conclusions: Following transition to FFSM/DBT, statistically significant shifts in indications for biopsies were observed with a decrease in referral of calcifications and an increase for masses, asymmetries and architectural distortions. PPV for stereotactic biopsy was not significantly different and cancer yield across all indications remained similar, with an increase in invasive cancer diagnosis.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
9.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
6 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信