ArticleEuropean radiology2013
Digital breast tomosynthesis versus mammography and breast ultrasound: a multireader performance study.
Article in European radiology, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
14 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Performance of digital breast tomosynthesis with digital mammography for detecting breast cancer in the diagnostic setting: a meta-analysis.Clinical and experimental medicine · 2025Pooled it
- Digital breast tomosynthesis for breast cancer detection: a diagnostic test accuracy systematic review and meta-analysis.European radiology · 2020Pooled it
- Diagnostic accuracy of digital breast tomosynthesis versus digital mammography for benign and malignant lesions in breasts: a meta-analysis.European radiology · 2014Pooled it
- Enhancing diagnostic precision: comparative analysis of MR-guided breast biopsies performed in two centres.Polish journal of radiology · 2024Article
- Application of molybdenum target X-ray photography in imaging analysis of caudal intervertebral disc degeneration in rats.World journal of clinical cases · 2020Article
- Initial Clinical Experience with Stationary Digital Breast Tomosynthesis.Academic radiology · 2019Article
- Characterization of Breast Masses in Digital Breast Tomosynthesis and Digital Mammograms: An Observer Performance Study.Academic radiology · 2017Article
- Detection and characterization of breast lesions in a selective diagnostic population: diagnostic accuracy study for comparison between one-view digital breast tomosynthesis and two-view full-field digital mammography.The British journal of radiology · 2016Article
- Comparison of the diagnostic performance of digital breast tomosynthesis and magnetic resonance imaging added to digital mammography in women with known breast cancers.European radiology · 2016Article
- Digital Breast Tomosynthesis: State of the Art.Radiology · 2015Article
- Review of radiation dose estimates in digital breast tomosynthesis relative to those in two-view full-field digital mammography.Breast (Edinburgh, Scotland) · 2015Review
- Diagnostic performance of dual-energy contrast-enhanced subtracted mammography in dense breasts compared to mammography alone: interobserver blind-reading analysis.European radiology · 2014Article
- Letter to the Editor re: Diagnostic accuracy of digital breast tomosynthesis versus digital mammography for benign and malignant lesions in breasts: a meta-analysis.European radiology · 2014Article
- Reply to Letter to the Editor re: Diagnostic accuracy of digital breast tomosynthesis versus digital mammography for benign and malignant lesions in breasts: a meta-analysis.European radiology · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo compare the diagnostic performance of single-view breast tomosynthesis (BT) with that of dual-view mammography (MX); to assess the benefit of adding the craniocaudal (CC) mammographic view to BT, and of adding BT to MX plus breast ultrasound, considered to be the reference work-up.
methodsOne hundred and fifty-five consenting patients with unresolved mammographic and/or ultrasound findings or breast symptoms underwent conventional work-up plus mediolateral oblique-view BT of the affected breast. The final study set in 130 patients resulted in 55 malignant and 76 benign and normal cases. Seven breast radiologists rated the cases through five sequential techniques using a BIRADS-based scale: MX, MX + ultrasound, MX + ultrasound + BT, BT, BT + MX(CC). Multireader, multicase receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis was performed and performance of the techniques was assessed from the areas under ROC curves. The performance of BT and of BT + MX(CC) was tested versus MX; the performance of MX + ultrasound + BT tested versus MX + ultrasound.
resultsTomosynthesis was found to be non-inferior to mammography. BT + MX(CC) did not appear to be superior to MX, and MX + ultrasound + BT not superior to MX + ultrasound.
conclusionsOverall, none of the five techniques tested outperformed the others. Further clinical studies are needed to clarify the role of BT as a substitute for traditional work-up in the diagnostic environment. KEY POINTS: • Digital breast tomosynthesis is a new adjunct to mammography and breast ultrasound. • We compared the diagnostic performance of these investigations in an experimental observer study. • Single-view breast tomosynthesis was confirmed as non-inferior to dual-view mammography. • None of the investigations (or combinations) tested outperformed the others. • Further prospective studies are needed to clarify precise role of tomosynthesis for diagnostic application.
Indexed as
Identifiers
23673573What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.