Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40421154›Full record

ReviewTranslational breast cancer research : a journal focusing on translational research in breast cancer2025

Contrast-enhanced mammography in high-dense breasts: a narrative review.

Daniele Ugo Tari, Marika Santarsiere, Davide Raffaele De Lucia, Rosalinda Santonastaso

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Translational breast cancer research : a journal focusing on translational research in breast cancer, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Current and future perspectives of molecular breast imaging with [European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2026
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
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

4 authors.

Daniele Ugo TariDepartment of Breast Imaging, District 12, Caserta Local Health Authority, Caserta, CE, Italy.
Marika SantarsiereDepartment of Breast Imaging, District 12, Caserta Local Health Authority, Caserta, CE, Italy.
Davide Raffaele De LuciaDepartment of Breast Imaging, District 12, Caserta Local Health Authority, Caserta, CE, Italy.
Rosalinda SantonastasoDepartment of Economics, University of Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli", Capua, CE, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background and Objective: Contrast-enhanced mammography (CEM) combines iodine-based contrast agents with dual-energy imaging to enhance the detection of breast cancer, especially in women with dense breast tissue. Dense breasts, which obscure conventional mammography results, present unique diagnostic challenges and an elevated risk of cancer. This review explores the role of CEM in improving diagnostic accuracy in high-density breasts, its comparative performance with other imaging modalities, and its potential implications for clinical practice. Methods: We conducted a narrative analysis on the use of CEM in dense breast tissue by searching PubMed, Web of Science (WoS), and Google Scholar between September and November 2024. Keywords, rather than MeSH terms, were utilized to refine the search, focusing on terms appearing in article titles. Sixty-six articles were identified, and duplicates or non-eligible studies were excluded, resulting in a final selection of 21 articles published between 2013 and 2024. Additional references were identified through snowballing to contextualize findings. Key Content and Findings: CEM demonstrates high sensitivity (89-97.7%) and specificity (50-89%) in detecting malignancies within dense breasts, offering comparable diagnostic accuracy to magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) but with better accessibility and lower cost. Unlike traditional mammography, CEM enhances visibility through functional imaging of contrast uptake, improving detection of small or occult lesions. It also aids in pre-surgical planning by assessing tumor size and multiplicity with greater precision. However, CEM is not without limitations, including radiation exposure and variability in equipment standards. Comparative analyses suggest CEM bridges the gap between conventional mammography and advanced techniques like MRI, particularly in resource-constrained settings. Conclusions: CEM represents a significant advancement in breast cancer detection, addressing limitations posed by dense breast tissue. Its diagnostic accuracy, cost-effectiveness, and patient accessibility position it as a valuable tool in personalized screening strategies. Further standardization and integration into clinical workflows could expand its role in routine breast cancer management.

Indexed as

breast cancerContrast-enhanced mammography (CEM)dense breastsdiagnostic imagingscreening

Identifiers

PMID40421154
PMCPMC12104952

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.