Seminars in Roentgenology
Volume 42, Issue 4 , Pages 243-252 , October 2007

Advanced Applications of Digital Mammography: Tomosynthesis and Contrast-Enhanced Digital Mammography

  • John M. Lewin, MD

      Affiliations

    • Diversified Radiology of Colorado, PC, Denver, Colorado.
    • Corresponding Author InformationAddress reprint requests to John M. Lewin, MD, Diversified Radiology of Colorado, PC, 938 Bannock Street, Suite 300, Denver, CO 80204.
    • ,
  • Loren Niklason, PhD

      Affiliations

    • Hologic, Inc., Bedford, Massachusetts.

References 

  1. Fletcher SW, Black W, Harris R, et al. Report of the International Workshop on Screening for Breast Cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1993;85:1644–1656
  2. Nystrom L, Rutqvist LE, Wall S, et al. Breast cancer screening with mammography: overview of Swedish randomised trials. Lancet. 1993;341:973–978
  3. Tabar L, Fagerberg G, Duffy SW. Update of the Swedish two-county program of mammographic screening for breast cancer. Radiol Clin North Am. 1992;30:187–210
  4. Poplack SP, Tosteson AN, Grove MR, et al. Mammography in 53,803 women from the New Hampshire mammography network. Radiology. 2000;217(3):832–840
  5. Linver MN, Paster SB, Rosenberg RD, et al. Improvement in mammography interpretation skills in a community radiology practice after dedicated teaching courses: 2-year medical audit of 38,633 cases. Radiology. 1992;184:39–43
  6. Rosenberg RD, Hunt WC, Williamson MR, et al. Effects of age, breast density, ethnicity, and estrogen replacement therapy on screening mammographic sensitivity and cancer stage at diagnosis: review of 183,134 screening mammograms in Albuquerque. New Mexico Radiol. 1998;209:511–518
  7. Pisano ED, Gatsonis C, Hendrick E, et al. Digital Mammographic Imaging Screening Trial (DMIST) Investigators Group Diagnostic performance of digital versus film mammography for breast-cancer screening. N Engl J Med. 2005;353:1773–1783
  8. Lewin JM, D’Orsi CJ, Hendrick RE, et al. Clinical comparison of full-field digital mammography to screen-film mammography for breast cancer detection. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2002;179:671–677
  9. Skaane P, Young K, Skjennald A. Population-based mammography screening: comparison of screen-film and full-field digital mammography with soft-copy reading—Oslo I Study. Radiology. 2003;229:877–884
  10. Skaane P, Skjennald A. Screen-film mammography versus full-field digital mammography with soft-copy reading: randomized trial in a population-based screening program—the Oslo II Study. Radiology. 2004;232:197–204
  11. Ziedses des Plantes BG. Eine neue methode zur diffenzierung in der rontgenographie (planigraphie). Acta Radiol. 1932;13:182–192
  12. Miller ER, McCurry EM, Hruka B. An infinite number of laminagrams from a finite number of radiographs. Radiology. 1971;98:249–255
  13. Sone S, Kasuga T, Sakai F, et al. Chest imaging with dual-energy subtraction digital tomosynthesis. Acta Radiol. 1993;34:346–349
  14. Kruger RA, Sedaghati M, Roy DG, et al. Tomosynthesis applied to digital subtraction angiography. Radiology. 1984;152:805–808
  15. Chakraborty DP, Yester MV, Barnes GT, et al. Self-masking subtraction tomosynthesis. Radiology. 1984;150:225–229
  16. Niklason LT, Christian BT, Niklason LE, et al. Digital tomosynthesis in breast imaging. Radiology. 1997;205:399–406
  17. Poplack S, Kogel C, Nagy H. Initial experience with digital breast tomosynthesis in 99 breasts of 98 women with abnormal digital mammography. In: RSNA; 2004;p. 317;abstract SSG01-05
  18. Helvie MA, Roubidoux MA, Zhang Y, et al. Tomosynthesis mammography versus conventional mammography: lesion detection and reader preference—initial experience. In: RNSA; 2006;p. 335;abstract SSG01-02
  19. Lo JY, Baker JA: Breast tomosynthesis: assessing patient comparison, comfort, and preference. RSNA, abstract SSG01-06, p. 336
  20. Moore RH, Levy A, Stewart A, et al. Reading behavior for screening digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) compared to conventional 2D mammography (CM). In: RNS; 2006;p. 335;abstract SSG01-05
  21. Raafferty EA, Niklason LT, Jameson-Meehan LA. Breast tomosynthesis: one view or two?. In: RNS; 2006;p. 335;abstract SSG01-04
  22. Perlet C, Heinig A, Prat X, et al. Multicenter study for the evaluation of a dedicated biopsy device for MR-guided vacuum biopsy of the breast. Eur Radiol. 2002;12:1463–1470
  23. Lewin JM, Isaacs PK, Vance V, et al. Dual-energy contrast-enhanced digital subtraction mammography: feasibility. Radiology. 2003;229:261–268
  24. Jong RA, Yaffe MJ, Skarpathiotakis M, et al. Contrast-enhanced digital mammography: initial clinical experience. Radiology. 2003;228:842–850
  25. Diekmann F, Diekmann S, Jeunehomme F, et al. Digital mammography using iodine-based contrast media: initial clinical experience with dynamic contrast medium enhancement. Invest Radiol. 2005;40:397–404
  26. Kuhl CK, Mielcareck P, Klaschik , et al. Dynamic breast MR imaging: are signal intensity time course data useful for differential diagnosis of enhancing lesions?. Radiology. 1999;211:101–110
  27. Liberman L, Morris EA, Lee MJ, et al. Breast lesions detected on MR imaging: features and positive predictive value. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2002;179:171–178
  28. Kinkel K, Helbich TH, Esserman LJ, et al. Dynamic high-spatial-resolution MR imaging of suspicious breast lesions: diagnostic criteria and interobserver variability. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2000;175:35–43
  29. Dromain C, Balleyguier C, Muller S, et al. Evaluation of tumor angiogenesis of breast carcinoma using contrast-enhanced digital mammography. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2006;187:528–537
  30. Su MY, Cheung YC, Fruehauf JP, et al. Correlation of dynamic contrast enhancement MRI parameters with microvessel density and VEGF for assessment of angiogenesis in breast cancer. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2003;18:467–477
  31. Carriero A, Ambrossini R, Mattei PA, et al. Magnetic resonance of the breast: correlation between enhancement patterns and microvessel density in malignant tumors. J Exp Clin Cancer Res. 2002;21(suppl 3):83–87
  32. Teifke A, Behr O, Schmidt M, et al. Dynamic MR imaging of breast lesions: correlation with microvessel distribution pattern and histologic characteristics of prognosis. Radiology. 2006;239:351–360
  33. Zhong Z, Chapman D, Menk R, et al. Monochromatic energy-subtraction radiography using a rotating anode source and a bent Laue monochromator. Phys Med Biol. 1997;42:1751–1762
  34. Manning HL, Shefer RE, Klinkowstein RE, et al. A K alpha dual energy x-ray source for coronary angiography. Med Phys. 1991;18:880–893
  35. Baldelli P, Taibi A, Tuffanelli A, et al. A prototype of a quasi-monochromatic system for mammography applications. Phys Med Biol. 2005;50:2225–2240
  36. Lawaczeck R, Arkadiev V, Diekmann F, et al. Monochromatic x-rays in digital mammography. Invest Radiol. 2005;40:33–39
  37. Bornefalk H, Lewin JM, Danielsson M, et al. Single-shot dual-energy subtraction mammography with electronic spectrum splitting: feasibility. Eur J Radiol. 2006;60:275–278
  38. Meuli R, Hwu Y, Je JH, et al. Synchrotron radiation in radiology: radiology techniques based on synchrotron sources. Eur Radiol. 2004;14:1550–1560
  39. Suortti P, Thomlinson W. Medical applications of synchrotron radiation. Phys Med Biol. 2003;48:R1–R35
  40. Sarnelli A, Elleaume H, Taibi A, et al. K-edge digital subtraction imaging with dichromatic x-ray sources: SNR and dose studies. Phys Med Biol. 2006;51:4311–4328
  41. Lawaczeck R, Diekmann F, Diekmann S, et al. New contrast media designed for x-ray energy subtraction imaging in digital mammography. Invest Radiol. 2003;38:602–608

PII: S0037-198X(07)00040-5

doi: 10.1053/j.ro.2007.06.006

Seminars in Roentgenology
Volume 42, Issue 4 , Pages 243-252 , October 2007

Article Tools

* Image Usage & Resolution