Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27134963›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical and diagnostic research : JCDR2016

Digital Mammography in Young Women: Is a Single View Sufficient?

Johannes Gossner

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical and diagnostic research : JCDR, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Johannes GossnerFaculty, Department of Clinical Radiology, Evangelisches Krankenhaus Göttingen- Weende , An der Lutter 24, 37024 Göttingen, Germany .

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionSingle view mammography may be a less time consuming, more comfortable and radiation reduced alternative for young women, but there are no studies examining this approach after the implementation of digital mammography into clinical practice. MATERIALS AND

methodsRetrospective analysis of all mammographies performed in women younger than 40 years during a 24 month period. The sample consisted of 109 women with 212 examined breasts. All patients initially received standard two- view mammography. In the study setting the MLO- views were read by a single viewer and compared to a composite reference standard.

resultsIn this sample 7 malignant findings were present and the review of the MLO-view detected 6 of them (85%). In patients with dense breasts 4 out of 5 malignant findings were found on the single-view (sensitivity 80%) and all 2 malignant findings were detected in patients with low breast density (sensitivity 100%). There were 7 false positive findings (3.3%). i.e. in total 8 out of 212 examined breasts were therefore misinterpreted (3.8%).

conclusionSingle view digital mammography detects the vast majority of malignant findings, especially in low density breast tissue and the rate of false-positive findings is within acceptable limits. Therefore this approach may be used in different scenarios (for example in increasing patient throughout in resource poor settings, reducing radiation burden in the young or in combination with ultrasound to use the strengths of both methods). More research on this topic is needed to establish its potential role in breast imaging.

Indexed as

Breast cancerDiagnostic performanceDigital mammography

Identifiers

PMID27134963
PMCPMC4843348

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.