Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36647512›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of radiology open2023

Our experience using synthesized mammography vs full field digital mammography in population-based screening.

Nasrin Ahmadinejad, Seyedehsahel Rasoulighasemlouei, Negin Rostamzadeh, Arvin Arian, Amirhassan Mohajeri, Seyedeh Nooshin Miratashi Yazdi

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of radiology open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact, top 100% of its field
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

0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Nasrin AhmadinejadAdvanced Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology Research Center (ADIR), Medical Imaging Center, Imam Khomeini Hospital Complex, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Seyedehsahel RasoulighasemloueiAdvanced Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology Research Center (ADIR), Medical Imaging Center, Imam Khomeini Hospital Complex, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Negin RostamzadehDepartment of Pediatrics, Urmia University of Medical Sciences, Urmia, Iran.
Arvin ArianAdvanced Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology Research Center (ADIR), Medical Imaging Center, Imam Khomeini Hospital Complex, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Amirhassan MohajeriIslamic Azad University Tehran Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Seyedeh Nooshin Miratashi YazdiAdvanced Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology Research Center (ADIR), Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Imam Khomeini Hospital · IRIslamic Azad University Medical Branch of Tehran · IRTehran University of Medical Sciences · IRUrmia University · IR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Synthesized Mammogram (SM) from Digital Breast Tomosynthesis (DBT) images is introduced to replace the routine Full Field Digital Mammography (FFDM) to reduce radiation dose. Purpose: to compare the conspicuity of cancer related findings between SM and FFDM and combination of these methods with DBT. Methods: The study was conducted in a tertiary breast imaging center, where 200 women referred for screening were enrolled in the study sequentially. Patients underwent FFDM and DBT simultaneously and a two-year follow-up was done. Data was evaluated for Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) score, breast density, mass lesions, calcification, and focal asymmetry by two expert breast radiologists. Comparison between different methods was made by Cohen Kappa test. Results: 22 patients with likely malignant findings went under biopsy. Taking histopathologic findings and two-year follow up as reference, the overall sensitivity and specificity for FFDM+DBT (86.1 and 88.9 respectively) and SM+DBT (86.1 and 88.2) didn't show a meaningful difference. Comparing SM and FFDM, calcification in 20 subjects were overlooked on SM, but later detected when combined with DBT. Considering breast composition and BI-RADS categorization, an excellent agreement existed between the readers. Conclusion: Screening with SM+DBT shows comparable results with FFDM+DBT considering BI-RADS categorization of the patients. Although SM showed slightly inferior sensitivity compared to FFDM, after combining DBT with SM no malignant appearing calcification or mass lesion was missed.

Indexed as

AWS, Acquisition WorkstationBI-RADS, Breast Imaging Reporting and Data SystemBI-RADS categorizationBreast cancerCC, Cranio-CaudalDBT, Digital Breast TomosynthesisDigital breast tomographyDigital mammographyFFDM, Digital MammographyICC, Intra Class CorrelationsMLO, Medio Lateral ObliqueNPV, Negative Predictive ValuePPV, Positive Predictive ValueSM, Synthesized MammogramsSynthesized mammographyTUMS, Tehran University of Medical Sciences

Identifiers

PMID36647512
PMCPMC9840104
OpenAlexW4313856008

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.