Screening Digital Mammography Recall Rate: Does It Change with                    Digital Breast Tomosynthesis Experience?

DiPrete, Olivia; Lourenço, Ana P.; Baird, Grayson L.; Mainiero, Martha B.

doi:10.1148/radiol.2017170517

Cited by 8 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…With the supplemental screening modalities, the performance of screening may be influenced. For example, one study showed an average recall rate of 7.9% (range from 5.5% to 9.5%) after applying DBT and 6.8% (range from 3.6% to 9.7%) before DBT ( p = 0.0316) [ 31 ]. Compared to the current study, the recall rate after DBT is similar to that of our overall value; however, it is higher than that of our follow-up visit group.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Effects of Prior Mammography Screening on the Performance of Breast Cancer Detection in Taiwan

Chang

Lien

et al. 2022

Healthcare

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this study was to investigate the influence of previous mammography screening on the performance of breast cancer detection. The screened women were divided into first-visit and follow-up groups for breast cancer screening. The positive predictive value (PPV), cancer detection rate (CDR), and recall rate were used to evaluate and analyze the overall screening performance among the two groups. Among them, 10,040 screenings (67.2%) were first visits and 4895 screenings (32.8%) were follow-up visits. The proportion of positive screening results for first-visit participants was higher than that for their follow-up counterparts (9.3% vs. 4.0%). A total of 98 participants (74 first-visit and 24 follow-up visit) were confirmed to have breast cancer. The PPV for positive mammography for women who underwent biopsy confirmation was 28.7% overall, reaching 35.8% for the follow-up visit group and 27.0% for the first-visit group. The CDR was 6.6 per 1000 overall, reaching 7.4 per 1000 for first-visit group and 4.9 per 1000 for the follow-up group. The overall recall rate was 7.9%, reaching 9.7% for the first-visit group and 4.2% for the follow-up group. The PPV is improved and the recall rate is decreased if prior mammography images are available for comparison when conducting mammography screening for breast cancer. By this study, we concluded that prior mammography plays an important role for breast cancer screening, while follow-up mammography may increase the diagnostic rate when compared to the prior mammography. We suggest that the public health authority can encourage subjects to undergo screenings in the same health institute where they regularly visit.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Effects of Prior Mammography Screening on the Performance of Breast Cancer Detection in Taiwan

Chang

Lien

et al. 2022

Healthcare

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…We are aware of only 1 study examining DM performance after DBT experience, which reported increased recall and cancer detection rates for DM after vs before DBT use in a single practice . Notably, the 6 radiologists in that study had very low DM recall rates (mean, 6.8%) and very low cancer detection rates (mean, 2.5 per 1000 examinations) before DBT use.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 93%

Assessment of Radiologist Performance in Breast Cancer Screening Using Digital Breast Tomosynthesis vs Digital Mammography

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IMPORTANCE Many US radiologists have screening mammography recall rates above the expertrecommended threshold of 12%. The influence of digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) on the distribution of radiologist recall rates is uncertain. OBJECTIVE To evaluate radiologists' recall and cancer detection rates before and after beginning interpretation of DBT examinations. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS This cohort study included 198 radiologists from 104 radiology facilities in the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium who interpreted 251 384 DBT and 2 000 681 digital mammography (DM) screening examinations from 2009 to 2017, including 126 radiologists (63.6%) who interpreted DBT examinations during the study period and 72 (36.4%) who exclusively interpreted DM examinations (to adjust for secular trends). Data were analyzed from April 2018 to July 2019. EXPOSURES Digital breast tomosynthesis and DM screening examinations. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Recall rate and cancer detection rate. RESULTS A total of 198 radiologists interpreted 2 252 065 DM and DBT examinations (2 000 681 [88.8%] DM examinations; 251 384 [11.2%] DBT examinations; 710 934 patients [31.6%] aged 50-59 years; 1 448 981 [64.3%] non-Hispanic white). Among the 126 radiologists (63.6%) who interpreted DBT examinations, 83 (65.9%) had unadjusted DM recall rates of no more than 12% before using DBT, with a median (interquartile range) recall rate of 10.0% (7.5%-13.0%). On DBT examinations, 96 (76.2%) had an unadjusted recall rate of no more than 12%, with a median (interquartile range) recall rate of 8.8% (6.3%-11.3%). A secular trend in recall rate was observed, with the multivariableadjusted risk of recall on screening examinations declining by 1.2% (95% CI, 0.9%-1.5%) per year. After adjusting for examination characteristics and secular trends, recall rates were 15% lower on DBT examinations compared with DM examinations interpreted before DBT use (relative risk, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.83-0.87). Adjusted recall rates were significantly lower on DBT examinations compared with DM examinations interpreted before DBT use for 45 radiologists (35.7%) and significantly higher for 18 (14.3%); 63 (50.0%) had no statistically significant change. The unadjusted cancer detection rate on DBT was 5.3 per 1000 examinations (95% CI, 5.0-5.7 per 1000 examinations) compared with 4.7 per 1000 examinations (95% CI, 4.6-4.8 per 1000 examinations) on DM examinations interpreted before DM use (multivariable-adjusted risk ratio, 1.21; 95% CI, 1.11-1.33). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE In this study, DBT was associated with an overall decrease in recall rate and an increase in cancer detection rate. However, our results indicated that there is wide variability among radiologists, including a subset of radiologists who experienced increased recall (continued) Key Points Question Is digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) associated with improved radiologist-level breast cancer screening performance? Findings In this cohort study of 198 radiologists from 104 radiology facilities in the Breast Canc...

show abstract

“…Furthermore, there is scant information on the effect of comparison DM/DBT on DM interpretation. DiPrete et al reported performance metrics in two DM cohorts, before and after DM/DBT implementation, 23 demonstrating increases in recall rate, cancer detection rate, and PPV 2,3 in the post‐DM/DBT cohort. It is quite possible that the nature of the comparison examination may be a driver of performance metrics for which we have not accounted.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The impact of adjunctive tomosynthesis on screening mammography outcomes in two widely diverse radiology practices

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Screening Digital Mammography Recall Rate: Does It Change with Digital Breast Tomosynthesis Experience?

Cited by 8 publications

References 23 publications

The Effects of Prior Mammography Screening on the Performance of Breast Cancer Detection in Taiwan

The Effects of Prior Mammography Screening on the Performance of Breast Cancer Detection in Taiwan

Assessment of Radiologist Performance in Breast Cancer Screening Using Digital Breast Tomosynthesis vs Digital Mammography

The impact of adjunctive tomosynthesis on screening mammography outcomes in two widely diverse radiology practices

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About