검색 상세

Accuracy of Digital Breast Tomosynthesis for Detecting Breast Cancer in the Diagnostic Setting: A Systematic Review and Meta

  • 주제(키워드) Breast cancer , Manmmography&nbsp , Breast tomosynthesis , Meta-analysis , Performance
  • 주제(기타) Radiology, Nuclear Medicine & Medical Imaging
  • 설명문(일반) [Ko, Min Jung; Park, Dong A.; Kim, Sung Hyun] Natl Evidence Based Healthcare Collaborating Agcy, Div Healthcare Technol Assessment Res, Seoul, South Korea; [Ko, Eun Sook] Sungkyunkwan Univ, Samsung Med Ctr, Dept Radiol, Sch Med, Seoul, South Korea; [Shin, Kyung Hwan] Seoul Natl Univ, Dept Radiat Oncol, Coll Med, Seoul, South Korea; [Chang, Jung Min] Seoul Natl Univ, Dept Radiol, Coll Med, Seoul, South Korea; [Lim, Woosung] Ewha Womans Univ, Coll Med, Dept Surg, Seoul, South Korea; [Kwak, Beom Seok] Dongguk Univ, Dept Surg, Ilsan Hosp, Goyang, South Korea; [Chang, Jung Min] Seoul Natl Univ Hosp, Dept Radiol, 101 Daehak Ro, Seoul 03080, South Korea
  • 등재 SCIE, SCOPUS, KCI등재
  • 발행기관 KOREAN RADIOLOGICAL SOC
  • 발행년도 2021
  • 총서유형 Journal
  • URI http://www.dcollection.net/handler/ewha/000000182360
  • 본문언어 영어
  • Published As http://dx.doi.org/10.3348/kjr.2020.1227

초록/요약

Objective: To compare the accuracy for detecting breast cancer in the diagnostic setting between the use of digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT), defined as DBT alone or combined DBT and digital mammography (DM), and the use of DM alone through a systematic review and meta-analysis. Materials and Methods: Ovid-MEDLINE, Ovid-Embase, Cochrane Library and five Korean local databases were searched for articles published until March 25, 2020. We selected studies that reported diagnostic accuracy in women who were recalled after screening or symptomatic. Study quality was assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 tool. A bivariate random effects model was used to estimate pooled sensitivity and specificity. We compared the diagnostic accuracy between DBT and DM alone using meta-regression and subgroup analyses by modality of intervention, country, existence of calcifications, breast density, Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System category threshold, study design, protocol for participant sampling, sample size, reason for diagnostic examination, and number of readers who interpreted the studies. Results: Twenty studies (n = 44513) that compared DBT and DM alone were included. The pooled sensitivity and specificity were 0.90 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.86-0.93) and 0.90 (95% CI 0.84-0.94), respectively, for DBT, which were higher than 0.76 (95% CI 0.68-0.83) and 0.83 (95% CI 0.73-0.89), respectively, for DM alone (p < 0.001). The area under the summary receiver operating characteristics curve was 0.95 (95% CI 0.93-0.97) for DBT and 0.86 (95% CI 0.82-0.88) for DM alone. The higher sensitivity and specificity of DBT than DM alone were consistently noted in most subgroup and meta-regression analyses. Conclusion: Use of DBT was more accurate than DM alone for the diagnosis of breast cancer. Women with clinical symptoms or abnormal screening findings could be more effectively evaluated for breast cancer using DBT, which has a superior diagnostic to DM alone.

more