Automatisierter Brustultraschall vs. handgeführter Brustultraschall: BI-RADS-Einstufung, Untersuchungsdauer und Erlebnisqualität der Untersuchung

Prosch, Helmut; Halbwachs, C.; Strobl, C.; Reisner, L.-M.; Hondl, M.; Weber, Michael; Mostbeck, G.

doi:10.1055/s-0031-1273414

Cited by 18 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Previous works [14,17,18] have compared ABUS to HHUS in terms of clinical performance in the detection and characterisation of breast lesions, but very few studies [9,19] evaluated the patient's perspective and tolerability of the examination.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In a previous study, Prosch et al [9] assessed patient comfort using a standardised questionnaire administered to 76 women undergoing ABUS and HHUS. The ABUS examination was rated as completely painless by 64% patients, 25% indicated minor pain and 10% indicated moderate pain.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Recently, other studies have also evaluated ABUS in the diagnostic setting such as breast cancer staging, neoadjuvant therapy response evaluation, and second look after magnetic resonance imaging [8]. However, there are only a few works which evaluated patient experience with ABUS compared to HHUS [9].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Breast ultrasound: automated or hand-held? Exploring patients’ experience and preference

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Our aim was to compare women's experience with automated breast ultrasound (ABUS) versus breast hand-held ultrasound (HHUS) and to evaluate their acceptance rate. Methods: After ethical approval, from October 2017 to March 2018, 79 consecutive patients were enrolled in this prospective study. On the same day, patients underwent HHUS followed by ABUS. Each patient's experience was assessed using the modified testing morbidities index (TMI) (the lower the score, the better is the experience). Nine items were assessed for both techniques: seven directly related to the examination technique (pain or discomfort immediately before (preparation), during and after testing, fear or anxiety immediately before (preparation) and during testing, physical and mental function after testing) and two indirectly related to the examination technique (embarrassment during testing and overall satisfaction). Finally, we asked patients to choose between the two techniques for a potential next breast examination. Wilcoxon signed ranks test was used. Results: The median TMI score for the seven items was found to be significantly better for HHUS (8, interquartile range [IQR] 7-11) compared to ABUS (9, IQR 8-12) (p = 0.003). The item 'pain/discomfort during the test' (p < 0.001) was significantly higher for ABUS compared to HHUS. Instead, the item 'fear/anxiety before the test' was higher for HHUS (p = 0.001). Overall, 40.5% of the patients chose HHUS, 29.1% chose ABUS, and 30.4% were unable to choose. Conclusions: ABUS and HHUS exams were well tolerated and accepted. However, HHUS was perceived to be less painful than ABUS.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Breast ultrasound: automated or hand-held? Exploring patients’ experience and preference

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, the interpretation time for a full bilateral automated 3D breast ultrasound dataset is almost as long as the exam time for a tailored hand-held ultrasound by an experienced physician [59,] and the automated ultrasound lacks the 2 key aspects that make ultrasound an important component of high-risk surveillance: the reassuring direct contact of the patient with a physician and the possibility to tailor the ultrasound exam specifically for the correlation of nonspecific MRI findings.…”

Section: Breast Ultrasoundmentioning

confidence: 99%

Intensified Surveillance for Early Detection of Breast Cancer in High-Risk Patients

Bick

2015

Breast Care

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Efforts for early detection of breast cancer play an important role in the care of high-risk women. This will include both women with a pathological mutation in one of the known breast cancer susceptibility genes as well as women with a high breast cancer risk based on family history only. Due to the much higher incidence of breast cancer in premenopausal women with a genetic predisposition or a familial background, to be most effective, imaging-based breast surveillance should start at an age as early as 25-30 years. There is now ample evidence that magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is by far the most sensitive imaging modality in young high-risk women. With high-risk multimodality screening at least 30% of breast cancers will be detected primarily by MRI and would have been missed at regular screening without MRI. Therefore, most high-risk breast surveillance programs now offer annual MRI to eligible high-risk women from age 25 to 30, usually supplemented by regular mammography starting at least from age 40. The inclusion of clinical breast exam (CBE) and/or ultrasound in the high-risk surveillance has little impact on the detection of additional cancers, but may improve compliance and reduce unnecessary call-backs for nonspecific findings on MRI. To reduce advanced stage interval cancers, especially in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers, some programs offer additional semiannual CBE and/or ultrasound or alternate MRI and mammography every 6 months. How long regular MRI should be continued in high-risk women is a matter of considerable debate. It appears feasible that MRI can safely be discontinued even in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers between the age of 60 and 70, especially if mammographic breast density is low. Even though several cohort studies have now demonstrated a very favorable stage distribution of breast cancers found in women undergoing high-risk surveillance with MRI, data on long-term survival and mortality in these patients is still rare.

show abstract

“…Pain was shown to be the major factor for discontinuing MG screening [21]. In contrast, BUS as well as automated breast ultrasound was usually not considered painful [22]. Factors underlying comfort ratings for BUS have so far not been investigated, neither in general nor with regard to radial versus meander-like scanning.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Patient perception of meander-like versus radial breast ultrasound

Brasier-Lutz,

Jäggi-Wickes,

Schädelin

et al. 2024

Ultrasound Int Open

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Radial breast ultrasound scanning (r-US) and commonly used meander-like ultrasound scanning (m-US) have recently been shown to be equally sensitive and specific with regard to the detection of breast malignancies. As patient satisfaction has a strong influence on patient compliance and thus on the quality of health care, we compare here the two US scanning techniques with regard to patient comfort during breast ultrasound (BUS) and analyze whether the patient has a preference for either scanning technique. Materials and Methods Symptomatic and asymptomatic women underwent both m-US and r-US scanning by two different examiners. Patient comfort and preference were assessed using a visual analog scale-based (VAS) questionnaire and were compared using a Mann-Whitney U test. Results Analysis of 422 VAS-based questionnaires showed that perceived comfort with r-US (r-VAS 8 cm, IQR [5.3, 9.1]) was significantly higher compared to m-US (m-VAS 5.6 cm, IQR [5.2, 7.4]) (p < 0.001). 53.8% of patients had no preference, 44.3% of patients clearly preferred r-US, whereas only 1.9% of patients preferred m-US. Conclusion: Patients experience a higher level of comfort with r-US and favor r-US over m-US. As the diagnostic accuracy of r-US has been shown to be comparable to that of m-US and the time required for examination is shorter, a switch from m-US to r-US in routine clinical practice might be beneficial. R-US offers considerable potential to positively affect patient compliance but also to save examination time and thus costs.

show abstract

Automatisierter Brustultraschall vs. handgeführter Brustultraschall: BI-RADS-Einstufung, Untersuchungsdauer und Erlebnisqualität der Untersuchung

Abstract: ABUS examinations focusing on the BIRADS classification have low inter-observer variability, compared to handheld US. The sensitivity of ABUS did not differ significantly from handheld US.

Cited by 18 publications

References 7 publications

Breast ultrasound: automated or hand-held? Exploring patients’ experience and preference

Breast ultrasound: automated or hand-held? Exploring patients’ experience and preference

Intensified Surveillance for Early Detection of Breast Cancer in High-Risk Patients

Patient perception of meander-like versus radial breast ultrasound

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About