Advertisement

Advances in Breast Imaging with Current Screening Recommendations and Controversies

  • Cimmie L. Shahan
    Correspondence
    Corresponding author.
    Affiliations
    WVU Department of Radiology, West Virginia University School of Medicine, PO Box 9235, Morgantown, WV 26506, USA

    Medical Director of the Betty Puskar Breast Care Center; Section Chief of Breast Imaging WVU Department of Radiology; Assistant Professor of Radiology, West Virginia University School of Medicine
    Search for articles by this author
  • Ginger P. Layne
    Affiliations
    WVU Department of Radiology, West Virginia University School of Medicine, PO Box 9235, Morgantown, WV 26506, USA

    Breast Imaging Fellowship Director, WVU Department of Radiology; Associate Professor of Radiology, West Virginia University School of Medicine
    Search for articles by this author

      Keywords

      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'

      Subscribers receive full online access to your subscription and archive of back issues up to and including 2002.

      Content published before 2002 is available via pay-per-view purchase only.

      Subscribe:

      Subscribe to Obstetrics and Gynecology Clinics
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

        • Hendrick R.E.
        • Baker J.A.
        • Helvie M.A.
        Breast cancer deaths averted over 3 decades.
        Cancer. 2019; 125: 1482-1488
        • Miller M.G.
        Breast cancer screening: can we talk?.
        J Gen Intern Med. 2001; 16: 206-207
        • IARC Working Group on the Evaluation of Cancer-Preventive Interventions
        Breast cancer screening.
        IARC, Lyon (France)2016: 2 (Screening Techniques)
      1. Digital compared with screen-film mammography: performance measures in concurrent cohorts within an organized breast screening program.
        Radiology. 2013; 268: 684-693
        • Haygood T.
        • Wang J.
        • Atkinson N.
        • et al.
        Timed efficiency of interpretation of digital and film-screening mammograms.
        AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2009; 192: 216-220
        • Pisano E.D.
        • Gatsonis C.
        • Hendrick E.
        • et al.
        • for DMISTInvestigatorsGroup
        Diagnostic performance of digital versus film mammography.
        N Engl J Med. 2005; 353: 1773-1783
        • Obenauer S.
        • Luftner-Nagel S.
        • von Heyden D.
        • et al.
        Screen film vs full-field digital mammography: image quality, detectability and characterization of lesions.
        Eur Radiol. 2002; 12: 1697-1702
        • Brnić Z.
        • Hebrang A.
        Breast compression and radiation dose in two different mammographic oblique projections: 45 and 60 degrees.
        Eur J Radiol. 2001; 40: 10-15
      2. Calculate Your Radiation Dose. EPA.
        (Available at:)
      3. Radiation Dose to Adults from Common Imaging Examinations. ACR.
        (Available at:)
        • Gennaro G.
        • di Maggio C.
        Dose comparison between screen/film and full-field digital mammography.
        Eur Radiol. 2006; 16: 2559-2566
        • Feng S.S.
        • Sechopoulos I.
        Clinical digital breast tomosynthesis system: dosimetric characterization.
        Radiology. 2012; 263: 35-42
      4. ACR practice guidelines for the performance of screening and diagnostic mammography.
        (Available at:)
        • Garayoa J.
        • Hernandez-Giron I.
        • Castillo M.
        • Valverde J.
        • Chevalier M.
        Digital Breast Tomosynthesis: Image Quality and Dose Saving of the Synthesized Image.
        in: Breast Imaging. IWDM 2014. Lecture Notes in Computer Science. vol 8539. Springer, Cham, 2014https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-07887-8_22
      5. Breast Imaging Center of Excellence. ACR.
        (Available at:)
      6. BCSC Standard Definitions. NCI;2009.[Dec 10, 2015].
        (Available at:)
        • Brant W.E.
        • Helms C.A.
        • Klein J.S.
        • et al.
        Fundamentals of diagnostic radiology.
        3th ed. LWW, Philadelphia2019
        • Oeffinger K.C.
        • Fontham E.T.
        • Etzioni R.
        • et al.
        Breast cancer screening for women at average risk: 2015 guideline update from the ACS.
        JAMA. 2015; 314: 1599-1614
        • Stavros
        Introduction to breast ultrasound. breast ultrasound.
        LWW, Philadelphia2004: 1-15
        • Siu, on behalf of the USPSTF
        Screening for Breast Cancer: USPSTF Recommendation Statement.
        Ann Intern Med. 2016; 164: 279-296
        • Tosteson A.N.A.
        • Fryback D.G.
        • Hammond C.S.
        • et al.
        Consequences of false-positive screening mammograms.
        JAMA Intern Med. 2014; 174: 954-961
        • Monticciolo D.L.
        • Newell M.S.
        • Moy L.
        • et al.
        Breast cancer screening in women at higher-than-average risk: recommendations from the ACR.
        J Am Coll Radiol. 2018; 15: 408-414
      7. Breast Cancer Risk Assessment and Screening in Average Risk Women. ACOG Practice Bulletin. Number179.July2017.

      8. Mammography Screening: Facts and Figures. SBI.
        (Available at:)
        • Kopans
        An open letter to panels that are deciding guidelines for breast cancer screening.
        (Available at:)
        • Carney P.A.
        • Miglioretti D.L.
        • Yankaskas B.C.
        • et al.
        Individual and combined effects of age, breast density, and hormone replacement therapy use on the accuracy of screening mammography.
        Ann Intern Med. 2003; 138: 168-175
        • Brewer N.T.
        • Salz T.
        • Lillie S.E.
        Systematic review: the long-term effects of false-positive mammograms.
        Ann Intern Med. 2007; 146: 502-510
      9. Facility Certification and Inspection (MQSA): Digital Accreditation. USFDA Website.
        (Available at:)
        • Rafferty E.A.
        • Park J.M.
        • LE Philpotts
        • et al.
        Assessing radiologist performance using combined digital mammography and breast tomosynthesis compared with digital mammography alone: results of a multicenter, multireader trial.
        Radiology. 2013; 266: 104-113
        • Skaane P.
        • Bandos A.I.
        • Gullien R.
        • et al.
        Comparison of digital mammography alone and digital mammography plus tomosynthesis in a population-based screening program.
        Radiology. 2013; 267: 47-56
        • Ciatto S.
        • Houssami N.
        • Bernardi D.
        • et al.
        Integration of 3D digital mammography with tomosynthesis for population breast-cancer screening (STORM): a prospective comparison study.
        Lancet Oncol. 2013; 14: 583-589
        • Durand M.A.
        • Haas B.M.
        • Yao X.
        • et al.
        Early clinical experience with digital breast tomosynthesis for screening mammography.
        Radiology. 2015; 274: 85-92
        • Haas B.M.
        • Kalra V.
        • Geisel J.
        • et al.
        Comparison of tomosynthesis plus digital mammography and digital mammography alone for breast cancer screening.
        Radiology. 2013; 269: 694-700
        • Friedewald S.M.
        • Rafferty E.A.
        • Rose S.L.
        • et al.
        Breast cancer screening using tomosynthesis in combination with digital mammography.
        JAMA. 2014; 311: 2499-2507
        • Peppard H.R.
        • Nicholson B.E.
        • Rochman C.M.
        • et al.
        Digital breast tomosynthesis in the diagnostic setting: indications and clinical applications.
        Radiographics. 2015; 35: 975-990
        • Poplack S.P.
        • Tosteson T.D.
        • Kogel C.A.
        • et al.
        Digital breast tomosynthesis: initial experience in 98 women with abnormal digital screening mammography.
        AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2007; 189: 616-623
        • Tagliafico A.
        • Astengo D.
        • Cavagnetto F.
        • et al.
        One-to-one comparison between digital spot compression view and digital breast tomosynthesis.
        Eur Radiol. 2012; 22: 539-544
        • Butler R.
        • Conant E.
        • Philpotts L.
        Digital Breast Tomosynthesis, what we have learned.
        JBI. 2019; 1: 9-22
        • D’Orsi C.J.
        • Sickles E.A.
        • Mendelson E.B.
        • et al.
        ACR BI-RADS® atlas, breast imaging reporting and data System.
        ACR, Reston (VA)2013
        • Persson I.
        • Thurfjell E.
        • Holmberg L.
        Effect of estrogen and estrogen-progestin replacement regimens on mammographic breast parenchymal density.
        J Clin Oncol. 1997; 15: 3201-3207
        • Freer P.E.
        Mammographic breast density: Impact on breast cancer risk and implications for screening.
        Radiographics. 2015; 35: 302-315
        • Boyd N.F.
        • Guo H.
        • Martin L.J.
        • et al.
        Mammographic density and the risk and detection of breast cancer.
        N Engl J Med. 2007; 356: 227-236
      10. DenseBreast-Info. Legislation and regulation.
        (Available at:)
      11. DenseBreast-Info. Is there a national reporting standard? 2019March 28.
        (Available at:)
        • Rose S.L.
        • Shisler J.L.
        Tomosynthesis impact on breast cancer screening in patients younger than 50 years old.
        AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2018; 210: 1401-1404
        • Hooley R.J.
        • Scoutt L.M.
        • Philpotts L.E.
        Breast ultrasonography: state of the art.
        Radiology. 2013; 268: 642-659
        • Berg W.A.
        • Blume J.D.
        • Cormack J.B.
        • et al.
        Combined screening with ultrasound and mammography vs mammography alone in women at elevated risk of breast cancer.
        JAMA. 2008; 299: 2151-2163
        • Brem R.F.
        • Tabár L.
        • Duffy S.W.
        • et al.
        Assessing improvement in detection of breast cancer with three-dimensional automated breast US in women with dense breast tissue:the SomoInsight Study.
        Radiology. 2015; 274: 663-673
        • van Zelst J.C.M.
        • Mann R.M.
        Automated three-dimensional breast US for screening: technique, artifacts, and lesion characterization.
        Radiographics. 2018; 38: 663-683
      12. Mainiero,et al. ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Breast Cancer Screening.
        (Available at:)
        • Chesebro A.L.
        • Winkler N.S.
        • Birdwell R.L.
        • et al.
        Developing asymmetries at mammography: A multimodality approach to assessment and management.
        Radiographics. 2016; 36: 322-344
        • Kopans
        Chapter 10: mammographic positioning. Breast imaging.
        3rd edition. LWW, Philadephia2007: 281-322
        • Lei J.
        • Yang P.
        • Zhang L.
        • et al.
        Diagnostic accuracy of digital breast tomosynthesis versus digital mammography for benign and malignant lesions in breasts: a meta-analysis.
        Eur Radiol. 2014; 24: 595-602
        • Andersson I.
        • Ikeda D.M.
        • Zackrisson S.
        • et al.
        Breast tomosynthesis and digital mammography: a comparison of breast cancer visibility and BIRADS classification in a population of cancers with subtle mammographic findings.
        Eur Radiol. 2008; 18: 2817-2825
        • Lourenco A.P.
        • Barry-Brooks M.
        • Baird G.L.
        • et al.
        Changes in recall type and patient treatment following implementation of screening digital breast tomosynthesis.
        Radiology. 2015; 274: 337-342
        • Conant E.F.
        Clinical implementation of digital breast tomosynthesis.
        Radiol Clin North Am. 2014; 52: 499-518
      13. ACR practice guideline for the performance of a breast ultrasound examination.
        (Available at:)
      14. ACR Appropriateness Criteria®.
        (Available at:)
      15. diFlorio-Alexander,et al. ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Breast imaging of pregnancy and lactating women.
        (Available at:)
        • Molleran M.
        Setting up and optimizing a breast MRI practice. Breast MRI.
        Elsevier, Philadelphia2014: 1-9
      16. ACR Practice Parameter for the performance of contrast-enhanced MRI of the breast.
        (Available at:)
        • Mann R.M.
        • Cho N.
        • Moy L.
        Breast MRI: state of the art.
        Radiology. 2019; 292: 520-536
        • Ghaderi K.F.
        • Phillips J.
        • Perry H.
        • et al.
        Contrast-enhanced mammography: current applications and future directions.
        Radiographics. 2019; 39: 1907-1920
        • Phillips J.
        • Fein-Zachary V.J.
        • Slanetz P.J.
        Pearls and pitfalls of contrast-enhanced mammography.
        JBI. 2019; 1: 64-72
        • Rechtman L.R.
        • Lenihan M.J.
        • Lieberman J.H.
        • et al.
        Breast-specific gamma imaging for the detection of breast cancer in dense versus nondense breasts.
        AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2014; 202: 293-298
        • Berg W.A.
        • Madsen K.S.
        • Schilling K.
        • et al.
        Breast cancer: comparative effectiveness of positron emission mammography and MR imaging in presurgical planning for the ipsilateral breast.
        Radiology. 2011; 258: 59-72
        • Lewin J.M.
        • Patel B.K.
        • Tanna A.
        Contrast-enhanced mammography: a scientific review.
        JBI. 2020; 2: 7-15
        • Narayanan D.
        • Berg W.A.
        Dedicated breast gamma camera imaging and breast positron emission tomography: current status and future directions.
        PET Clin. 2018; 13: 363-381
      17. ACR Practice Parameter for the performance of MBI using a dedicated gamma camera.
        (Available at:)
        • Dillon M.F.
        • Hill A.D.K.
        • Quinn C.M.
        • et al.
        The accuracy of ultrasound, stereotactic, and clinical core biopsies in the diagnosis of breast cancer, with an analysis of false-negative cases.
        Ann Surg. 2005; 242: 701-707
        • Chesebro A.L.
        • Chikarmane S.A.
        • Ritner J.A.
        • et al.
        Troubleshooting to overcome technical challenges in image-guided breast biopsy.
        Radiographics. 2017; 37: 705-718
        • Sung J.S.
        • Lee C.H.
        • Morris E.A.
        • et al.
        American patient follow-up after concordant histologically benign imaging-guided biopsy of MRI-detected lesions.
        AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2012; 198: 1464-1469
        • Somerville P.
        • Seifert P.J.
        • Destounis S.V.
        • et al.
        Anticoagulation and Bleeding Risk After Core Needle Biopsy.
        AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2008; 191: 1194-1197
        • Oluwaseyi Olayinka
        • Gagandeep Kaur M.D.
        • Ana Rebelo
        Rad-path correlate: concordance and discordance rates in danbury hospital patient population.
        Am J Clin Pathol. 2019; 152: S48