Revisión de la evidencia científica sobre la aplicación clínica de la mamografía digital

Gómez, Carmen Carreira; Cantarero, J. Martínez; Santos, D. Gómez; Sánchez, C. Polanco; García, P.; Señarís, J. Del Llano

doi:10.1016/s0033-8338(07)73743-8

Cited by 4 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 43 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…More recently, two systematic reviews on the matter were published. One, in 2007, included data from oral presentations given in congresses, in addition to published studies; 39 and the other, in 2009, also included the results from a cohort study. 35 Before the present review had been completed, other studies not included in earlier reviews were published, including a large cohort study with more than 188,000 women, of whom 35,000 had undergone digital mammography.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparative evaluation of digital mammography and film mammography: systematic review and meta-analysis

Iared¹,

Shigueoka

Torloni

et al. 2011

Sao Paulo Med. J.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

CONTEXT AND OBJECTIVE: Mammography is the best method for breast-cancer screening and is capable of reducing mortality rates. Studies that have assessed the clinical impact of mammography have been carried out using film mammography. Digital mammography has been proposed as a substitute for film mammography given the benefits inherent to digital technology. The aim of this study was to compare the performance of digital and film mammography. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. METHOD: The Medline, Scopus, Embase and Lilacs databases were searched looking for paired studies, cohorts and randomized controlled trials published up to 2009 that compared the performance of digital and film mammography, with regard to cancer detection, recall rates and tumor characteristics. The reference lists of included studies were checked for any relevant citations. RESULTS: A total of 11 studies involving 190,322 digital and 638,348 film mammography images were included. The cancer detection rates were significantly higher for digital mammography than for film mammography (risk relative, RR = 1.17; 95% confidence interval, CI = 1.06-1.29; I² = 19%). The advantage of digital mammography seemed greatest among patients between 50 and 60 years of age. There were no significant differences between the two methods regarding patient recall rates or the characteristics of the tumors detected. CONCLUSION: The cancer detection rates using digital mammography are slightly higher than the rates using film mammography. There are no significant differences in recall rates between film and digital mammography. The characteristics of the tumors are similar in patients undergoing the two methods.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%