Ali Moosavi, Jason Ha, Brianna Papoutsis, Erik Lehman, Alison L. Chetlen, Angela I. Choe
{"title":"乳房植入成像监测实践:乳腺成像学会乳腺成像放射医师调查。","authors":"Ali Moosavi, Jason Ha, Brianna Papoutsis, Erik Lehman, Alison L. Chetlen, Angela I. Choe","doi":"10.1093/jbi/wbae017","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"OBJECTIVE\nThe objectives of this Society of Breast Imaging (SBI)-member survey study were to assess the current imaging patterns for evaluation of symptomatic and asymptomatic breast implant integrity, including modalities used and imaging intervals.\n\n\nMETHODS\nA 12-question survey assessing the frequency of imaging modalities used to evaluate implant integrity, approximate number of breast implant integrity studies requested per month, intervals of integrity studies, and referring provider and radiology practice characteristics was distributed to members of the SBI.\n\n\nRESULTS\nThe survey response rate was 7.6% (143/1890). Of responding radiologists, 54.2% (77/142) were in private, 29.6% (42/142) in academic, and 16.2% (23/142) in hybrid practice. Among respondents, the most common initial examination for evaluating implant integrity was MRI without contrast at 53.1% (76/143), followed by handheld US at 46.9% (67/143). Of respondents using US, 67.4% (91/135) also evaluated the breast tissue for abnormalities. Among respondents, 34.1% (46/135) reported being very confident or confident in US for diagnosing implant rupture. There was a range of reported intervals for performing implant integrity studies: 39.1% (43/110) every 2-3 years, 26.4% (29/110) every 4-5 years, 15.5% (17/110) every 6-10 years, and 19.1% (21/110) every 10 years.\n\n\nCONCLUSION\nFor assessment of implant integrity, the majority of respondents (53.2%, 76/143) reported MRI as initial imaging test. US is less costly, but the minority of respondents (34.1%, 46/135) had confidence in US performance. Also, the minority of respondents (39.1%, 43/110) performed implant integrity evaluations every 2-3 years per the FDA recommendations for asymptomatic surveillance.","PeriodicalId":2,"journal":{"name":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Breast Implant Imaging Surveillance Practice: Survey of Breast Imaging Radiologists in the Society of Breast Imaging.\",\"authors\":\"Ali Moosavi, Jason Ha, Brianna Papoutsis, Erik Lehman, Alison L. Chetlen, Angela I. Choe\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/jbi/wbae017\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"OBJECTIVE\\nThe objectives of this Society of Breast Imaging (SBI)-member survey study were to assess the current imaging patterns for evaluation of symptomatic and asymptomatic breast implant integrity, including modalities used and imaging intervals.\\n\\n\\nMETHODS\\nA 12-question survey assessing the frequency of imaging modalities used to evaluate implant integrity, approximate number of breast implant integrity studies requested per month, intervals of integrity studies, and referring provider and radiology practice characteristics was distributed to members of the SBI.\\n\\n\\nRESULTS\\nThe survey response rate was 7.6% (143/1890). Of responding radiologists, 54.2% (77/142) were in private, 29.6% (42/142) in academic, and 16.2% (23/142) in hybrid practice. Among respondents, the most common initial examination for evaluating implant integrity was MRI without contrast at 53.1% (76/143), followed by handheld US at 46.9% (67/143). Of respondents using US, 67.4% (91/135) also evaluated the breast tissue for abnormalities. Among respondents, 34.1% (46/135) reported being very confident or confident in US for diagnosing implant rupture. There was a range of reported intervals for performing implant integrity studies: 39.1% (43/110) every 2-3 years, 26.4% (29/110) every 4-5 years, 15.5% (17/110) every 6-10 years, and 19.1% (21/110) every 10 years.\\n\\n\\nCONCLUSION\\nFor assessment of implant integrity, the majority of respondents (53.2%, 76/143) reported MRI as initial imaging test. US is less costly, but the minority of respondents (34.1%, 46/135) had confidence in US performance. Also, the minority of respondents (39.1%, 43/110) performed implant integrity evaluations every 2-3 years per the FDA recommendations for asymptomatic surveillance.\",\"PeriodicalId\":2,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ACS Applied Bio Materials\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ACS Applied Bio Materials\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/jbi/wbae017\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jbi/wbae017","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
乳房成像学会 (SBI) 会员调查研究的目的是评估目前用于评估有症状和无症状乳房植入物完整性的成像模式,包括使用的模式和成像间隔。方法向 SBI 会员分发了一份 12 个问题的调查表,评估用于评估植入物完整性的成像模式的频率、每月要求进行的乳房植入物完整性检查的大致数量、完整性检查的间隔以及转诊提供者和放射科的执业特点。在回复的放射科医生中,54.2%(77/142)为私人放射科医生,29.6%(42/142)为学术放射科医生,16.2%(23/142)为混合放射科医生。在受访者中,评估种植体完整性最常见的初始检查是无对比剂核磁共振成像,占 53.1%(76/143),其次是手持 US,占 46.9%(67/143)。在使用 US 的受访者中,67.4%(91/135)还对乳腺组织进行了异常评估。在受访者中,34.1%(46/135)表示对 US 诊断假体破裂非常有信心或有信心。受访者报告的假体完整性检查间隔时间不一:39.1%(43/110)每 2-3 年进行一次,26.4%(29/110)每 4-5 年进行一次,15.5%(17/110)每 6-10 年进行一次,19.1%(21/110)每 10 年进行一次。US 的成本较低,但少数受访者(34.1%,46/135)对 US 的性能有信心。此外,少数受访者(39.1%,43/110)根据 FDA 关于无症状监测的建议,每 2-3 年进行一次植入物完整性评估。
Breast Implant Imaging Surveillance Practice: Survey of Breast Imaging Radiologists in the Society of Breast Imaging.
OBJECTIVE
The objectives of this Society of Breast Imaging (SBI)-member survey study were to assess the current imaging patterns for evaluation of symptomatic and asymptomatic breast implant integrity, including modalities used and imaging intervals.
METHODS
A 12-question survey assessing the frequency of imaging modalities used to evaluate implant integrity, approximate number of breast implant integrity studies requested per month, intervals of integrity studies, and referring provider and radiology practice characteristics was distributed to members of the SBI.
RESULTS
The survey response rate was 7.6% (143/1890). Of responding radiologists, 54.2% (77/142) were in private, 29.6% (42/142) in academic, and 16.2% (23/142) in hybrid practice. Among respondents, the most common initial examination for evaluating implant integrity was MRI without contrast at 53.1% (76/143), followed by handheld US at 46.9% (67/143). Of respondents using US, 67.4% (91/135) also evaluated the breast tissue for abnormalities. Among respondents, 34.1% (46/135) reported being very confident or confident in US for diagnosing implant rupture. There was a range of reported intervals for performing implant integrity studies: 39.1% (43/110) every 2-3 years, 26.4% (29/110) every 4-5 years, 15.5% (17/110) every 6-10 years, and 19.1% (21/110) every 10 years.
CONCLUSION
For assessment of implant integrity, the majority of respondents (53.2%, 76/143) reported MRI as initial imaging test. US is less costly, but the minority of respondents (34.1%, 46/135) had confidence in US performance. Also, the minority of respondents (39.1%, 43/110) performed implant integrity evaluations every 2-3 years per the FDA recommendations for asymptomatic surveillance.