Breast, Radioprotection / Radiation dose, Mammography, Digital radiography, Conventional radiography, Computer Applications-3D, CAD, Cancer, Dosimetric comparison
S. Sethi1, E. Dhamija2, M. yadav2, S. Thulkar3, A. Gupta2; 1delhi, delhi/IN, 2New Delhi/IN, 3NEW DELHI, DELHI/IN
Out of total 59 lesions in 47 patients,
30 lesions were in right breast and 29 in the left breast.
Breast density and lesion density in synthesized views were recorded lesser than the standard views and the difference was statistically significant (p<0.002) [TABLE 1 & 2].
Kappa coefficient was 0.626 and there was 72.6 % agreement between both the sets.
The distribution of the breast density patterns in SM images as compared to SFFDM
- Percentage of patients with ACR a was 13.6% more in SM.
- In ACR b & ACR c, in SM there was decresase of 3.4% and 10.2% patients respectively.
- No difference in ACR d category in both the groups.
There was no statistically significant difference between both the sets for other parameters such as lesion morphology (shape and margin),
microcalcification (presence and its distribution) and architectural distortion in the breast (p value >0.05).
BIRADS classification in both the sets showed 98.3% concordance.
Only in one case,
there was a disagreement where synthesized view classified as BIRADS 4 whereas BIRADS 5 in SFFDM images however this was statically insignificant (p~0.9).Kappa coefficient (k) was 0.97 (SD ~0.97) suggestive of very good agreement between these two 2D modalities.
The AGD and ESD was higher for SFFDM-DBT than synthesized mammography (DBT alone) by 51.4% and 45.8% respectively.