EUSOBI and 30 national breast radiology bodies support mammography for population-based screening, demonstrated to reduce breast cancer (BC) mortality and treatment impact. According to the International Agency for Research on Cancer, the reduction in mortality is 40 % for women aged 50–69 years taking up the invitation while the probability of false-positive needle biopsy is <1 % per round and overdiagnosis is only 1–10 % for a 20-year screening. Mortality reduction was also observed for the age groups 40–49 years and 70–74 years, although with “limited evidence”. Thus, we firstly recommend biennial screening mammography for average-risk women aged 50–69 years; extension up to 73 or 75 years, biennially, is a second priority, from 40–45 to 49 years, annually, a third priority. Screening with thermography or other optical tools as alternatives to mammography is discouraged. Preference should be given to population screening programmes on a territorial basis, with double reading. Adoption of digital mammography (not film-screen or phosphor-plate computer radiography) is a priority, which also improves sensitivity in dense breasts. Radiologists qualified as screening readers should be involved in programmes. Digital breast tomosynthesis is also set to become “routine mammography” in the screening setting in the next future. Dedicated pathways for high-risk women offering breast MRI according to national or international guidelines and recommendations are encouraged.Key points• EUSOBI and 30 national breast radiology bodies support screening mammography.• A first priority is double-reading biennial mammography for women aged 50–69 years.• Extension to 73–75 and from 40–45 to 49 years is also encouraged.• Digital mammography (not film-screen or computer radiography) should be used.• DBT is set to become “routine mammography” in the screening setting in the next future.

No abstract

Funding Acknowledgements Type of funding sources: None. Objective  Coronary CT angiography (CTA) remains as the technique of choice to rule out coronary artery disease (CAD) in symptomatic patients with intermediate-low risk. Despite its sensitivity, numerous artifacts that reduce its accuracy have been described, as well as factors related to CAD. The presence of calcium in the aortic arch (AoA) on the chest radiography (CXR) is an accessible and highly available finding in this patients and to our knowledge it have not been studied at this scenario. Our aim is to evaluate the presence of AoA as a new CTA artifact and predictor of significant coronary lesions. Materials and methods  We conducted an observational descriptive single-center study of patients who underwent CTA to rule out CAD from July 1st to December 31st of 2020. Patients without CXR were excluded. We evaluated the presence of AoA in the postero-anterior CXR. The results of the CTA were classified into 4 categories: absence of lesions, non-significant lesions, significant lesions and inconclusive study due to artifacts. Results  251 patients were included, mean age 60 ± 12 years, 51% males, 24% diabetics, 57% hypertensive, 13% smokers, 45% dyslipidemic. 18% presented AoA in the CXR. Mean heart rate (HR) was 60 ± 16 bpm. The results of the CTA were: 45% absense of lesions, 26% non-significant lesions, 17% significant lesions and 12% inconclusive due to artifacts. Patients with AoA presented a greater probability of inconclusive CTA and significant coronary lesions both in the univariate analysis and when adjusted for age, sex and HR [OR = 3.2 (1.2-8.1), p = 0.017 ] and [OR = 3.7 (1.5-8.7), p = 0.003] respectively. Conclusions  Calcification of the aortic arch on chest radiography is an independent factor of inconclusive CTA and significant coronary lesions with a 3.2 and 3.7 fold higher risk compared to those who do not present this finding