Contrast enhanced digital mammography: Is it useful in detecting lesions in edematous breast?

Abstract

Introduction: Breast edema can be caused by a variety of pathologic processes of benign or malignant diseases. Contrast enhanced digital mammogram (CEDM) has been shown to improve the probability of malignancy detection when compared with the conventional mammography alone. Patients and methods: This study was prospectively carried on 34 female patients with breast edema at the female imaging unit of the Radiology Department. The age range was 29-80 years. Bilateral conventional mammography (MX) and contrast-enhanced digital mammographic procedure (CEDM) were performed in approximately 7-10 min and followed by complementary ultrasound (US). Results: As regards enhancement patterns in our study, noncontrast uptake and diffuse parenchymal uptake were considered as benign and intense contrast uptake is considered malignant and ring enhancement in keeping with both benign and malignant lesions. The calculated sensitivity and specificity of dual energy contrast enhanced digital mammography were 95%, and 73% respectively, with a positive predictive value (PPV) of 88% and negative predictive value (NPV) of 88%. Conclusion: Dual-energy contrast-enhanced digital mammography is a useful technique in identification of lesions in mammographically dense edematous breasts and proved to be a useful tool in the follow-up of cases presenting by edema after conservative breast surgery and chemotherapy.

Contrast enhanced dual energy spectral mammogram, an emerging addendum in breast imaging

“…are not visible in standard mammography and serves as a promising means of follow-up of cases. In our study, only one patient had oedematous breast; post-treatment, in that case, response to treatment was better demonstrated on CEDM in line with the study performed by ElSaid et al18 …”

Diagnostic accuracy of contrast-enhanced spectral mammography for breast lesions: A systematic review and meta-analysis

“…1 ). Since in the final selection there were multiple publications by the same authors [ 27 , 30 , [34] , [35] , [36] ] or the same institutions [ [37] , [38] , [39] , [40] ] with close publication dates, we contacted the corresponding authors for those papers, to enquire if there were any overlap in patients between different publications. As a cautionary measure, given the absence of a response from the corresponding authors, we decided to include only the most recent and numerous paper from each group of suspected duplicates.…”

Technique, protocols and adverse reactions for contrast-enhanced spectral mammography (CESM): a systematic review

“…Of the 69 studies including a specification of the contrast injection modality, 59 (85%) utilised an automated power injector (10584/11725 patients, 90%) while manual contrast injection was carried out in the remaining 10 (15%) [7, 9, 17, 25, 28, 51, 57, 73, 95, 99] for a total of 1141/11725 patients (10%).…”