View : 403 Download: 0

Accuracy of Digital Breast Tomosynthesis for Detecting Breast Cancer in the Diagnostic Setting: A Systematic Review and Meta

Title
Accuracy of Digital Breast Tomosynthesis for Detecting Breast Cancer in the Diagnostic Setting: A Systematic Review and Meta
Authors
Ko, Min JungPark, Dong A.Kim, Sung HyunKo, Eun SookShin, Kyung HwanLim, WoosungKwak, Beom SeokChang, Jung Min
Ewha Authors
임우성
SCOPUS Author ID
임우성scopus
Issue Date
2021
Journal Title
KOREAN JOURNAL OF RADIOLOGY
ISSN
1229-6929JCR Link

2005-8330JCR Link
Citation
KOREAN JOURNAL OF RADIOLOGY vol. 22, no. 8, pp. 1240 - 1252
Keywords
Breast cancerManmmography&nbspBreast tomosynthesisMeta-analysisPerformance
Publisher
KOREAN RADIOLOGICAL SOC
Indexed
SCIE; SCOPUS; KCI WOS
Document Type
Review
Abstract
Objective: To compare the accuracy for detecting breast cancer in the diagnostic setting between the use of digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT), defined as DBT alone or combined DBT and digital mammography (DM), and the use of DM alone through a systematic review and meta-analysis. Materials and Methods: Ovid-MEDLINE, Ovid-Embase, Cochrane Library and five Korean local databases were searched for articles published until March 25, 2020. We selected studies that reported diagnostic accuracy in women who were recalled after screening or symptomatic. Study quality was assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 tool. A bivariate random effects model was used to estimate pooled sensitivity and specificity. We compared the diagnostic accuracy between DBT and DM alone using meta-regression and subgroup analyses by modality of intervention, country, existence of calcifications, breast density, Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System category threshold, study design, protocol for participant sampling, sample size, reason for diagnostic examination, and number of readers who interpreted the studies. Results: Twenty studies (n = 44513) that compared DBT and DM alone were included. The pooled sensitivity and specificity were 0.90 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.86-0.93) and 0.90 (95% CI 0.84-0.94), respectively, for DBT, which were higher than 0.76 (95% CI 0.68-0.83) and 0.83 (95% CI 0.73-0.89), respectively, for DM alone (p < 0.001). The area under the summary receiver operating characteristics curve was 0.95 (95% CI 0.93-0.97) for DBT and 0.86 (95% CI 0.82-0.88) for DM alone. The higher sensitivity and specificity of DBT than DM alone were consistently noted in most subgroup and meta-regression analyses. Conclusion: Use of DBT was more accurate than DM alone for the diagnosis of breast cancer. Women with clinical symptoms or abnormal screening findings could be more effectively evaluated for breast cancer using DBT, which has a superior diagnostic to DM alone.
DOI
10.3348/kjr.2020.1227
Appears in Collections:
의과대학 > 의학과 > Journal papers
Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.
Export
RIS (EndNote)
XLS (Excel)
XML


qrcode

BROWSE