Strengths and Weaknesses of Synthetic Mammography in Screening

Architectural distortion on digital breast tomosynthesis mammograms in symptomatic breast clinics: what are the result outcomes?

OBJECTIVES

In April 2020, standard two-dimensional (2D) full-field digital mammograms were replaced with digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) and synthesised 2D views for symptomatic breast clinics. This study aimed to evaluate the positive predictive value (PPV) for malignancy in DBT-detected Architectural distortion (AD).

METHODS

All mammogram reports with the word "distortion" were assessed between April 2020 and October 2022. There were 458 mammograms with the word "distortion." After excluding mammograms with no distortion (n = 128), post-surgical distortion (n = 173), distortion with mass (n = 33), and unchanged distortion (n = 14), there were 111 patients with pure distortion. Correlation with histopathology was obtained where possible. All patients were followed for a minimum of 2 years.

RESULTS

Forty-two out of 111 patients (37.84%) with AD had a normal ultrasound (US) and were discharged. Fifty-five (49.5%) patients had sonographic correlation corresponding to the distortion, leading to US-guided biopsy. Thirteen (23.6%) had tomosynthesis-guided biopsy, and one had a skin biopsy. The PPV for malignancy was 42.34%. Malignancy diagnoses were higher with US-guided biopsies than tomosynthesis-guided biopsies, 78.1% and 30%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

With a total malignancy rate of 42.34%, DBT-detected AD has a high enough PPV for malignancy to justify selective tissue sampling if a sonographic correlate is present or with suspicious mammograms. The chances of malignancy are higher when a sonographic correlate corresponding to AD is present.

ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE

AD on DBT/synthesized mammograms views in symptomatic breast clinic patients justifies selective sampling.

Synthetic Mammography: Benefits, Drawbacks, and Pitfalls

Digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) allows three-dimensional assessment of breast tissue; however, DBT requires a two-dimensional (2D) image for comparison with prior mammograms and accurate interpretation of calcifications. Traditionally, full-field digital mammography (FFDM) has been performed after the DBT image acquisition. Synthetic mammography (SM), the 2D reconstruction of the tomosynthesis slice dataset, has been designed to replace FFDM. Advantages of SM include decreased image acquisition time and decreased radiation exposure, with maintained or improved screening performance metrics. Because SM algorithms give extra weight to lesion-like characteristics (eg, calcifications and architectural distortions), they may enable increased visibility of these characteristics relative to that at FFDM. Although SM algorithms were designed to improve lesion identification, they have led to varied outcomes in studies reported in the literature. Compared with FFDM, SM has been reported to be associated with a higher false-positive rate for calcifications, decreased conspicuity of asymmetries, lower breast density assessments, and imaging artifacts (eg, metallic artifact, bright-band artifact, blurring of the axilla, and truncation artifact). The authors review the literature on SM, including its implementation, benefits, and artifacts. ©RSNA, 2023 Quiz questions for this article are available through the Online Learning Center.

Beyond Breast Density: Risk Measures for Breast Cancer in Multiple Imaging Modalities

Breast density is an independent risk factor for breast cancer. In digital mammography and digital breast tomosynthesis, breast density is assessed visually using the four-category scale developed by the American College of Radiology Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (5th edition as of November 2022). Epidemiologically based risk models, such as the Tyrer-Cuzick model (version 8), demonstrate superior modeling performance when mammographic density is incorporated. Beyond just density, a separate mammographic measure of breast cancer risk is parenchymal textural complexity. With advancements in radiomics and deep learning, mammographic textural patterns can be assessed quantitatively and incorporated into risk models. Other supplemental screening modalities, such as breast US and MRI, offer independent risk measures complementary to those derived from mammography. Breast US allows the two components of fibroglandular tissue (stromal and glandular) to be visualized separately in a manner that is not possible with mammography. A higher glandular component at screening breast US is associated with higher risk. With MRI, a higher background parenchymal enhancement of the fibroglandular tissue has also emerged as an imaging marker for risk assessment. Imaging markers observed at mammography, US, and MRI are powerful tools in refining breast cancer risk prediction, beyond mammographic density alone.

Multi-scale cascaded networks for synthesis of mammogram to decrease intensity distortion and increase model-based perceptual similarity

PURPOSE

Synthetic digital mammogram (SDM) is a 2D image generated from digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) and used as a substitute for a full-field digital mammogram (FFDM) to reduce the radiation dose for breast cancer screening. The previous deep learning-based method used FFDM images as the ground truth, and trained a single neural network to directly generate SDM images with similar appearances (e.g., intensity distribution, textures) to the FFDM images. However, the FFDM image has a different texture pattern from DBT. The difference in texture pattern might make the training of the neural network unstable and result in high-intensity distortion, which makes it hard to decrease intensity distortion and increase perceptual similarity (e.g., generate similar textures) at the same time. Clinically, radiologists want to have a 2D synthesized image that feels like an FFDM image in vision and preserves local structures such as both mass and microcalcifications (MCs) in DBT because radiologists have been trained on reading FFDM images for a long time, while local structures are important for diagnosis. In this study, we proposed to use a deep convolutional neural network to learn the transformation to generate SDM from DBT.

METHOD

To decrease intensity distortion and increase perceptual similarity, a multi-scale cascaded network (MSCN) is proposed to generate low-frequency structures (e.g., intensity distribution) and high-frequency structures (e.g., textures) separately. The MSCN consist of two cascaded sub-networks: the first sub-network is used to predict the low-frequency part of the FFDM image; the second sub-network is used to generate a full SDM image with textures similar to the FFDM image based on the prediction of the first sub-network. The mean-squared error (MSE) objective function is used to train the first sub-network, termed low-frequency network, to generate a low-frequency SDM image. The gradient-guided generative adversarial network's objective function is to train the second sub-network, termed high-frequency network, to generate a full SDM image with textures similar to the FFDM image.

RESULTS

1646 cases with FFDM and DBT were retrospectively collected from the Hologic Selenia system for training and validation dataset, and 145 cases with masses or MC clusters were independently collected from the Hologic Selenia system for testing dataset. For comparison, the baseline network has the same architecture as the high-frequency network and directly generates a full SDM image. Compared to the baseline method, the proposed MSCN improves the peak-to-noise ratio from 25.3 to 27.9 dB and improves the structural similarity from 0.703 to 0.724, and significantly increases the perceptual similarity.

CONCLUSIONS

The proposed method can stabilize the training and generate SDM images with lower intensity distortion and higher perceptual similarity.

Performance evaluation of digital breast tomosynthesis systems: physical methods and experimental data

Digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) has become a well-established breast imaging technique, whose performance has been investigated in many clinical studies, including a number of prospective clinical trials. Results from these studies generally point to non-inferiority in terms of microcalcification detection and superior mass-lesion detection for DBT imaging compared to digital mammography (DM). This modality has become an essential tool in the clinic for assessment and ad-hoc screening but is not yet implemented in most breast screening programmes at a state or national level. While evidence on the clinical utility of DBT has been accumulating, there has also been progress in the development of methods for technical performance assessment and quality control of these imaging systems. DBT is a relatively complicated ‘pseudo-3D’ modality whose technical assessment poses a number of difficulties. This paper reviews methods for the technical performance assessment of DBT devices, starting at the component level in part one and leading up to discussion of system evaluation with physical test objects in part two. We provide some historical and basic theoretical perspective, often starting from methods developed for DM imaging. Data from a multi-vendor comparison are also included, acquired under the medical physics quality control protocol developed by EUREF and currently being consolidated by a European Federation of Organisations for Medical Physics working group. These data and associated methods can serve as a reference for the development of reference data and provide some context for clinical studies.

Prospective Comparison of Synthesized Mammography with DBT and Full-Field Digital Mammography with DBT Uncovers Recall Disagreements That may Impact Cancer Detection

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES

Synthesized mammography with digital breast tomosynthesis (SM+DBT) and full-field digital mammography with DBT were prospectively evaluated for recall rate (RR), cancer detection rate (CDR), positive predictive value 1 (PPV1), lesion recall differences, and disagreements in recall for additional imaging.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

From December 15, 2015 to January 15, 2017, after informed consent was obtained for this Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act compliant study, each enrolled patient's SM+DBT and FFDM+DBT were interpreted sequentially by one of eight radiologists. RR, CDR, PPV1, and imaging findings (asymmetry, focal asymmetry, mass, architectural distortion, and calcifications) recalled were reviewed.

RESULTS

For SM+DBT and FFDM+DBT in 1022 patients, RR was 7.3% and 7.9% (SM+DBT vs. FFDM+DBT: diff= -0.6%; 90% CI= -1.4%, 0.1%); CDR was 6.8 and 7.8 per 1000 (SM+DBT vs. FFDM+DBT: diff= -1.0, 95% CI= -5.5, 2.8, p = 0.317); PPV1 was 9.3% and 9.9% (relative positive predictive value for SM+DBT vs. FFDM+DBT: 0.95, 95% CI: 0.73-1.22, p = 0.669). FFDM+DBT detected eight cancers; SM+DBT detected seven (missed 1 cancer with calcifications). SM+DBT and FFDM+DBT disagreed on patient recall for additional imaging in 19 patients, with majority (68%, 13/19 patients) in the recall of patients for calcifications. For calcifications, SM+DBT recalled six patients that FFDM+DBT did not recall, and FFDM+DBT recalled seven patients that SM+DBT did not recall, even though the total number of calcifications finding recalled was similar overall for both SM+DBT and FFDM+DBT.

CONCLUSION

Disagreement in recall of patients for calcifications may impact cancer detection by SM+DBT, warranting further investigation.

Synthetic Mammography: Review of Benefits and Drawbacks in Clinical Use

Digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) has been widely adopted as a breast cancer screening tool, demonstrating decreased recall rates and other improved screening performance metrics when compared to digital mammography (DM) alone. Drawbacks of DBT when added to 2D DM include the increased radiation dose and longer examination time. Synthetic mammography (SM), a 2D reconstruction from the tomosynthesis slices, has been introduced to eliminate the need for a separate acquisition of 2D DM. Data show that the replacement of 2D DM by SM, when used with DBT, maintains the benefits of DBT, such as decreased recall rates, improved cancer detection rates, and similar positive predictive values. Key differences between SM and 2D DM include how the image is acquired, assessment of breast density, and visualization of mammographic findings, such as calcifications. Although SM is approved by the Food and Drug Administration and has been shown to be non-inferior when used with DBT, concerns surrounding SM include image quality and artifacts. The purpose of this review article is to review the benefits, drawbacks, and screening performance metrics of SM versus DBT.

Comparison of two-view versus single-view digital breast tomosynthesis and 2D-mammography in breast cancer surveillance imaging

PURPOSE

Limited work has been performed for the implementation of digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) in breast cancer surveillance imaging. The aim of this study was to investigate the differences between two different DBT implementations in breast cancer surveillance imaging, for patients with a personal history of breast cancer.

METHOD

The DBT implementations investigated were: (1) 2-view 2D digital mammography and 2-view DBT (2vDM&2vDBT) (2) 1-view (cranial-caudal) DM and 1-view (mediolateral-oblique) DBT (1vDM&1vDBT). Clinical performance of these two implementations was assessed retrospectively using observer studies with 118 sets of real patient images, from a single imaging centre, and six observers. Sensitivity, specificity and area under the curve (AUC) using the Jack-knife alternative free-response receiver operating characteristics (JAFROC) analysis were evaluated.

RESULTS

Results suggest that the two DBT implementations are not significantly different in terms of sensitivity, specificity and AUC. When looking at the two main different lesion types, non-calcifications and calcifications, and two different density levels, no difference in the performance of the two DBT implementations was found.

CONCLUSIONS

Since 1vDM&1vDBT exposes the patient to half the dose of 2vDM&2vDBT, it might be worth considering 1vDM&1vDBT in breast cancer surveillance imaging. However, larger studies are required to conclude on this matter.

Comparison of diagnostic performances in the evaluation of breast microcalcifications: synthetic mammography versus full-field digital mammography

BACKGROUND

Although several studies proved that SM could substitute for FFDM, the efficacy of SM in microcalcification evaluation remains controversial.

AIMS

To investigate the diagnostic performance of synthetic mammography (SM) in the evaluation of microcalcifications in comparison with full-field digital mammography (FFDM).

METHODS

In this retrospective study, 76 mammograms of 76 patients who underwent FFDM and digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) acquisitions concomitantly between 2018 and 2019 and whose final mammography interpretation revealed microcalcifications (28 malignant microcalcifications and 48 benign microcalcifications) were included. All mammograms were reviewed independently by three radiologists with different levels of breast imaging experience. Readers were blinded to patient outcomes and interpreted each case in two separate reading sessions (first FFDM, second SM + DBT), according to the BI-RADS lexicon. The area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve (AUC) was calculated using ROC analysis in all cases for FFDM and SM + DBT sessions. The readers also assigned conspicuity scores to mammograms. The interobserver agreement was calculated using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC).

RESULTS

The overall AUCs for malignant microcalcifications were 0.80 (95% CI: 0.75-0.85) in FFDM and 0.85 (95% CI: 0.80-0.89) in SM, and no significant difference was found between the groups (p = 0.0603). The sensitivity of the readers increased slightly with experience. The ICC values of BI-RADS categorization between readers were 0.93 (95% CI: 0.90-0.95) and 0.94 (95% CI: 0.91-0.96) for FFDM and SM, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

SM had similar diagnostic performance in the evaluation of breast microcalcifications in comparison with FFDM, regardless of reader experience levels.

The impact on lesion detection via a multi-vendor study: A phantom-based comparison of digital mammography, digital breast tomosynthesis, and synthetic mammography

PURPOSE

The aim of this study is to perform a test object-based comparison of the imaging performance of digital mammography (DM), digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT), and synthetic mammography (SM).

METHODS

Two test objects were used, the CDMAM and the L1-structured phantom. Small-detail detectability was assessed using CDMAM and the microcalcification simulating specks in the L1-structured background. Detection of spiculated and non-spiculated mass-like objects was assessed using the L1 phantom. Six different systems were included: Amulet Innovality (Fujifilm), Senographe Pristina (GEHC), 3Dimensions (Hologic), Giotto Class (IMS), Clarity 2D/3D (Planmed), and Mammomat Revelation (Siemens). Images were acquired under automatic exposure control (AEC) and at adjusted levels of AEC/2 and 2 × AEC level. Threshold gold thickness (T_tr ) was established for the 0.13-mm-diameter CDMAM discs. Threshold diameters for the calcifications (d_{tr_c} ), the spiculated masses (d_{tr_sm} ), and for the non-spiculated masses (d_{tr_nsm} ) were established. The threshold condition was defined as the thickness or diameter for a 62.5% correct score.

RESULTS

T_tr for DM was generally superior to DBT, which in turn was superior to SM, but for most systems, these differences between modes were not significant. For L1, no significant differences in d_{tr_c} were found between DM and DBT. The increase in d_{tr_c} from DM to SM at AEC dose was 1%, 19%, 11%, 14%, 46%, and 27% for the Fujifilm, GEHC, Hologic, IMS, Planmed, and Siemens, respectively, indicating significantly poorer performance for all vendors except for Fujifilm, Hologic, and IMS. For both mass types, DBT performed better than SM, while SM showed no significant difference with DM (except for Fujifilm spiculated masses). The dose had an impact on small-detail detectability for both phantoms but did not influence the detection of either mass type.

CONCLUSIONS

Both phantoms indicated potentially reduced small-detail detectability for SM versus DM and DBT and should therefore not be used in stand-alone mode. The L1 phantom demonstrated no significant difference in microcalcification detection between DM and DBT and also demonstrated the superiority of DBT, compared to DM for mass detection, for all six systems.

Synthesis of Mammogram From Digital Breast Tomosynthesis Using Deep Convolutional Neural Network With Gradient Guided cGANs

Synthetic digital mammography (SDM), a 2D image generated from digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT), is used as a potential substitute for full-field digital mammography (FFDM) in clinic to reduce the radiation dose for breast cancer screening. Previous studies exploited projection geometry and fused projection data and DBT volume, with different post-processing techniques applied on re-projection data which may generate different image appearance compared to FFDM. To alleviate this issue, one possible solution to generate an SDM image is using a learning-based method to model the transformation from the DBT volume to the FFDM image using current DBT/FFDM combo images. In this study, we proposed to use a deep convolutional neural network (DCNN) to learn the transformation to generate SDM using current DBT/FFDM combo images. Gradient guided conditional generative adversarial networks (GGGAN) objective function was designed to preserve subtle MCs and the perceptual loss was exploited to improve the performance of the proposed DCNN on perceptual quality. We used various image quality criteria for evaluation, including preserving masses and MCs which are important in mammogram. Experiment results demonstrated progressive performance improvement of network using different objective functions in terms of those image quality criteria. The methodology we exploited in the SDM generation task to analyze and progressively improve image quality by designing objective functions may be helpful to other image generation tasks.

One view or two views for wide-angle tomosynthesis with synthetic mammography in the assessment setting?

Objectives

To evaluate the diagnostic performance in the assessment setting of three protocols: one-view wide-angle digital breast tomosynthesis (WA-DBT) with synthetic mammography (SM), two-view WA-DBT/SM, and two-view digital mammography (DM).

Methods

Included in this retrospective study were patients who underwent bilateral two-view DM and WA-DBT. SM were reconstructed from the WA-DBT data. The standard of reference was histology and/or 2 years follow-up. Included were 205 women with 179 lesions (89 malignant, 90 benign). Four blinded readers randomly evaluated images to assess density, lesion type, and level of suspicion according to BI-RADS. Three protocols were evaluated: two-view DM, one-view (mediolateral oblique) WA-DBT/SM, and two-view WA-DBT/SM. Detection rate, sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy were calculated and compared using multivariate analysis. Reading time was assessed.

Results

The detection rate was higher with two-view WA-DBT/SM (p = 0.063). Sensitivity was higher for two-view WA-DBT/SM compared to two-view DM (p = 0.001) and one-view WA-DBT/SM (p = 0.058). No significant differences in specificity were found. Accuracy was higher with both one-view WA-DBT/SM and two-view WA-DBT/SM compared to DM (p = 0.003 and > 0.001, respectively). Accuracy did not differ between one- and two-view WA-DBT/SM. Two-view WA-DBT/SM performed better for masses and asymmetries. Reading times were significantly longer when WA-DBT was evaluated.

Conclusions

One-view and two-view WA-DBT/SM can achieve a higher diagnostic performance compared to two-view DM. The detection rate and sensitivity were highest with two-view WA-DBT/SM. Two-view WA-DBT/SM appears to be the most appropriate tool for the assessment of breast lesions.

Key Points

• Detection rate with two-view wide-angle digital breast tomosynthesis (WA-DBT) is significantly higher than with two-view digital mammography in the assessment setting.

• Diagnostic accuracy of one-view and two-view WA-DBT with synthetic mammography (SM) in the assessment setting is higher than that of two-view digital mammography.

• Compared to one-view WA-DBT with SM, two-view WA-DBT with SM seems to be the most appropriate tool for the assessment of breast lesions.

Breast cancer screening using synthesized two-dimensional mammography: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Purpose

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the screening performance of synthesized mammography (SM) plus digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) with digital mammography (DM) plus DBT or DM alone.

Methods

Medline, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library databases were searched from January 2010 to January 2021. Eligible population-based studies on breast cancer screening comparing SM/DBT with DM/DBT or DM in asymptomatic women were included. A random-effect model was used in this meta-analysis. Data were summarized as risk differences (RDs), with 95 % confidence intervals (CIs).

Results

Thirteen studies involving 1,370,670 participants were included. Compared with DM/DBT, screening using SM/DBT had similar breast cancer detection rate (CDR) (RD = −0.1/1000 screens, 95 % CI = −0.4 to 0.2, p = 0.557, I² = 0 %), but lower recall rate (RD = −0.56 %, 95 % CI = −1.03 to −0.08, p = 0.022, I² = 90 %) and lower biopsy rate (RD = −0.33 %, 95 % CI = −0.56 to −0.10, p = 0.005, I² = 78 %). Compared with DM, SM/DBT improved CDR (RD = 2.0/1000 screens, 95 % CI = 1.4 to 2.6, p < 0.001, I² = 63 %) and reduced recall rate (RD = −0.95 %, 95 % CI = −1.91 to −0.002, p = 0.049, I² = 99 %). However, SM/DBT and DM had similar interval cancer rate (ICR) (RD = 0.1/1000 screens, 95 % CI = −0.6 to 0.8, p = 0.836, I² = 71 %) and biopsy rate (RD = −0.05 %, 95 % CI = −0.35 to 0.24, p = 0.727, I² = 93 %).

Conclusions

Screening using SM/DBT has similar breast cancer detection but reduces recall and biopsy when compared with DM/DBT. SM/DBT improves CDR when compared with DM, but they have little difference in ICR. SM/DBT could replace DM/DBT in breast cancer screening to reduce radiation dose.

•

Screening using SM/DBT has similar breast cancer detection but reduces recall and biopsy when compared with DM/DBT.

•

Screening using SM/DBT improves cancer detection rate when compared with DM/DBT alone.

•

There was no significant difference in interval cancer rate between SM/DBT and DM.

•

SM/DBT could replace DM/DBT in breast cancer screening to reduce radiation dose.

Digital Breast Tomosynthesis: Potential Benefits in Routine Clinical Practice

Digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) is gradually being implemented in routine clinical breast imaging practice. The technique of image acquisition reduces the confounding effect of overlapping breast tissue, which substantially affects cancer detection, abnormal recall, and interval cancer rates in a screening/ surveillance setting. In a diagnostic setting, tomosynthesis also allows for improved lesion localization and characterization over conventional imaging, which potentially improves the accuracy and improved workflow efficiency. To optimize the utility of tomosynthesis, imagers should be aware of the pertinent aspects of image acquisition as it relates to interpretation, the appearance of benign and malignant pathologies, and sources of possible misinterpretation. This article aims to provide a practical knowledge base of DBT and demonstrate its potential benefits when incorporated into routine clinical practice.

Comparison of Narrow-angle and Wide-angle Digital Breast Tomosynthesis Systems in Clinical Practice

Digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) is a pseudo 3D mammography imaging technique that has become widespread since gaining Food and Drug Administration approval in 2011. With this technology, a variable number of tomosynthesis projection images are obtained over an angular range between 15° and 50° for currently available clinical DBT systems. The angular range impacts various aspects of clinical imaging, such as radiation dose, scan time, and image quality, including visualization of calcifications, masses, and architectural distortion. This review presents an overview of the differences between narrow- and wide-angle DBT systems, with an emphasis on their applications in clinical practice. Comparison examples of patients imaged on both narrow- and wide-angle DBT systems illustrate these differences. Understanding the potential variable appearance of imaging findings with narrow- and wide-angle DBT systems is important for radiologists, particularly when comparison images have been obtained on a different DBT system. Furthermore, knowledge about the comparative strengths and limitations of DBT systems is needed for appropriate equipment selection.

Application of artificial intelligence-based computer-assisted diagnosis on synthetic mammograms from breast tomosynthesis: comparison with digital mammograms

OBJECTIVE

To compare the diagnostic agreement and performances of synthetic and conventional mammograms when artificial intelligence-based computer-assisted diagnosis (AI-CAD) is applied.

MATERIAL AND METHOD

From January 2017 to April 2017, 192 patients (mean age 53.7 ± 11.7 years) diagnosed with 203 breast cancers were enrolled in this retrospective study. All patients underwent digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) with digital mammograms (DM) simultaneously. Commercial AI-CAD was applied to the reconstructed synthetic mammograms (SM) from DBT and DM respectively and abnormality scores were calculated. We compared the median abnormality scores between DM and SM with the Wilcoxon signed-rank test and used the Bland-Altman analysis to evaluate agreements between the two mammograms and to investigate clinicopathological factors which might affect agreement. Diagnostic performances were compared using an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC).

RESULT

The abnormality scores showed a mean difference (bias) of - 3.26 (95% limits of agreement: - 32.69, 26.18) between the two mammograms by the Bland-Altman analysis. The concordance correlation coefficient was 0.934 (95% CI: 0.92, 0.946), suggesting high reproducibility. SM showed higher abnormality scores in cancer with distortion and occult findings, T1 and N0 cancer, and luminal type cancer than DM (all p ≤ 0.001). Diagnostic performance did not differ between the mammograms (AUC 0.945 for conventional mammograms, 0.938 for synthetic mammograms, p = 0.499).

CONCLUSION

AI-CAD can also work well on synthetic mammograms, showing good agreement and comparable diagnostic performance compared to its application to DM.

KEY POINTS

• AI-CAD which was developed based on imaging findings of digital mammograms can also be applied to synthetic mammograms. • AI-CAD showed good agreement and similar diagnostic performance when applied to both synthetic and digital mammograms. • With AI-CAD, synthetic mammograms showed relatively higher abnormality scores in cancer with distortion and occult findings, T1 and N0 cancer, and luminal type cancer than digital mammograms.

Lesion conspicuity on synthetic screening mammography compared to full field digital screening mammography

OBJECTIVE

To compare lesion conspicuity on synthetic screening mammography (SM) plus digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) versus full field digital mammography (FFDM) plus DBT.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Seven breast imagers each prospectively evaluated 107-228 screening mammograms (FFDM, DBT, and SM; total 1206 examinations) over 12 weeks in sets of 10-50 consecutive examinations. Interpretation sessions alternated as follows: SM + DBT, then FFDM, or FFDM + DBT, then SM. Lesion conspicuity on SM versus FFDM (equal/better versus less) was assessed using proportions with 95% confidence intervals. DBT-only findings were excluded.

RESULTS

Overall 1082 of 1206 (89.7%) examinations were assessed BI-RADS 1/2, and 124 of 1206 (10.3%) assessed BI-RADS 0. There were 409 evaluated findings, including 134 masses, 119 calcifications, 72 asymmetries, 49 architectural distortion, and 35 focal asymmetries. SM conspicuity compared to FFDM conspicuity for lesions was rated 1) masses: 77 (57%) equal or more conspicuous, 57 (43%) less conspicuous; 2) asymmetries/focal asymmetries: 61 (57%) equal or more conspicuous, and 46 (43%) less conspicuous; 3) architectural distortion: 46 (94%) equal or more conspicuous, 3 (6%) less conspicuous; 4) calcifications: 115 (97%) equal or more conspicuous, 4 (3%) less conspicuous. SM had better conspicuity than FFDM for calcifications and architectural distortion and similar conspicuity for most masses and asymmetries.

CONCLUSION

Compared to FFDM, SM has better conspicuity for calcifications and architectural distortion and similar conspicuity for most masses and asymmetries.

Technical evaluation of image quality in synthetic mammograms obtained from 15° and 40° digital breast tomosynthesis in a commercial system: a quantitative comparison

Digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) has recently gained interest both for breast cancer screening and diagnosis. Its employment has increased also in conjunction with digital mammography (DM), to improve cancer detection and reduce false positive recall rate. Synthetic mammograms (SMs) reconstructed from DBT data have been introduced to replace DM in the DBT + DM approach, for preserving the benefits of the dual-acquisition modality whilst reducing radiation dose and compression time. Therefore, different DBT models have been commercialized and the effective potential of each system has been investigated. In particular, wide-angle DBT was shown to provide better depth resolution than narrow-angle DBT, while narrow-angle DBT allows better identification of microcalcifications compared to wide-angle DBT. Given the increasing employment of SMs as supplement to DBT, a comparison of image quality between SMs obtained in narrow-angle and wide-angle DBT is of practical interest. Therefore, the aim of this phantom study was to evaluate and compare the image quality of SMs reconstructed from 15° (SM₁₅) and 40° (SM₄₀) DBT in a commercial system. Spatial resolution, noise and contrast properties were evaluated through the modulation transfer function (MTF), noise power spectrum, maps of signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), image contrast, contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) and contrast-detail (CD) thresholds. SM₄₀ expressed higher MTF than SM₁₅, but also lower SNR and CNR levels. SM₁₅ and SM₄₀ were characterized by slight different texture, and a different behavior in terms of contrast was found. SM₁₅ provided better CD performances than SM₄₀. These results suggest that the employment of wide/narrow-angle DBT + SM images should be optimized based on the specific image task.

A synthesizing method for signal-enhanced and artifact-reduced mammogram from digital breast tomosynthesis

In this paper, we propose a method for compositing a synthetic mammogram (SM) from digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) slice images. The method consists of four parts. The first part is image reconstruction of DBT from the acquired projection data by use of backprojection-filtration (BPF) algorithm with a low-frequency boosting scheme and a high-density object reduction technique embedded. Also, a few expectation-maximization (EM) iterations have been additively implemented on top of the BPF algorithm to prepare a separate volume image. The second is generating three kinds of intermediate SMs. A forward projection image and a linear structure weighted forward projection image were computed. A maximum intensity projection of the BPF reconstructed volume image was also generated. The third part is integrating three intermediate SMs. The last is the post-processing of the SM. We scanned two physical phantoms in a prototype DBT scanner, and we have evaluated the performance of the proposed method. We also performed a clinical data study by use of 30 patient data who went through both DBT and digital mammography (DM) scans. Three experienced radiologists have read the SMs generated by several component techniques and also read the DM of each patient, and evaluated the generated SMs. The experimental phantom study and the clinical reader study consistently demonstrated the usefulness of the proposed method.

Is There a Difference in the Diagnostic Outcomes of Calcifications Initially Identified on Synthetic Tomosynthesis Versus Full-Field Digital Mammography Screening?

PURPOSE

To compare the outcomes of microcalcifications recalled on full-field digital (FFDM) and FFDM and combined tomosynthesis (Combo) to synthetic (SM) screening mammograms.

METHOD

We reviewed medical records, radiology, and pathology reports of all patients found to have abnormal calcifications requiring further evaluation on mammography screening at our institution between 11/1/2016-11/1/2018 and collected patient demographics, calcification morphology and distribution, and mammography technique (SM, FFDM, or Combo). We used biopsy pathology or at least 1-year imaging follow-up to establish overall diagnostic outcome (benign or malignant). Fisher's exact test was used to compare validation rates at diagnostic work-up, BI-RADS category, and final outcome of calcifications identified on each screening technique. T-test was used for continuous variables.

RESULTS

Of 699 calcifications in 596 women recalled, 176 (30%) of 596 were from SM and 420 (70%) FFDM/Combo. There was a significantly higher rate of calcifications unvalidated at diagnostic work-up for SM compared to FFDM/Combo (0.8% vs. 10%, p < 0.0001). SM calcifications were more likely to receive BI-RADS 2/3 at diagnostic work-up compared to FFDM/Combo ones (55% vs. 42%, p = 0.003). Of 346 (49%) calcifications that underwent biopsy, 88 (25%) were malignant (36% of SM vs. 22% of FFDM/Combo, OR:0.5 [95% CI: 0.3, 0.8] p = 0.01). Of 622 lesions with established diagnostic outcome, there was no difference between having an overall benign or malignant outcome between SM and FFDM/Combo (17% vs. 13%, OR: 0.8 [95% Cl: 0.5, 1.2] p = 0.27).

CONCLUSIONS

Synthetic tomosynthesis screening results in a higher rate of false positive and unvalidated calcification recalls compared to FFDM/Combo.

Multicenter Evaluation of Breast Cancer Screening with Digital Breast Tomosynthesis in Combination with Synthetic versus Digital Mammography

BackgroundDigital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) combined with digital mammography (DM) is increasingly used in the United States instead of DM alone for breast cancer screening. Early screening outcomes incorporating synthetic mammography (SM) with DBT have suggested that SM is an acceptable non-radiation dose alternative to DM.PurposeTo compare multicenter outcomes from breast cancer screening with SM/DBT versus DM/DBT.Materials and MethodsThis was a retrospective study of consecutive screening mammograms obtained at two institutions. Eligible studies consisted of 34 106 DM/DBT examinations between October 3, 2011, and October 31, 2014, and 34 180 SM/DBT examinations between January 7, 2015, and February 2, 2018, at the University of Pennsylvania and 51 148 DM/DBT examinations between January 1, 2012, and May 31, 2016, and 31 929 SM/DBT examinations between June 1, 2016, and March 30, 2018, at the University of Vermont. Demographics of women who attended screening and results from screening were recorded. Recall rate, biopsy rate, false-negative rate, cancer detection rate, positive predictive value, sensitivity, and specificity were calculated according to modality and institution. Descriptive statistics, χ² tests, and logistic regression were used in analysis.ResultsThe study included 151 363 screening examinations among 151 363 women (mean age, 58.1 years ± 10.9 [standard deviation]). The unadjusted recall rate was lower with SM/DBT than with DM/DBT (7.0% [4630 of 66 109 examinations] for SM/DBT vs 7.9% [6742 of 85 254 examinations] for DM/DBT; P < .01). However, after multivariable adjustment, SM/DBT was associated with a slightly higher recall rate compared with DM/DBT (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 1.06; adjusted 95% CI: 1.01, 1.11; P = .02). Similarly, after multivariable adjustment, SM/DBT was associated with slightly lower specificity compared with DM/DBT (adjusted OR, 0.95; adjusted 95% CI: 0.90, 0.99; P = .02). There was no statistically significant difference in biopsy rate (P = .54), false-negative rate (P = .38), cancer detection rate (P = .55), invasive or in situ cancer detection rate (P = .52 and P = .98, respectively), positive predictive value (P = .78), or sensitivity (P = .33) for SM/DBT versus DM/DBT overall or within either institution (P > .05 for all).ConclusionBreast cancer screening performance is maintained within benchmarks when synthetic mammography replaces digital mammography in digital breast tomosynthesis imaging.© RSNA, 2020Online supplemental material is available for this article.See also the editorial by Lång in this issue.

Digital Breast Tomosynthesis Slab Thickness: Impact on Reader Performance and Interpretation Time

Background Digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) helps reduce recall rates and improve cancer detection compared with two-dimensional (2D) mammography but has a longer interpretation time. Purpose To evaluate the effect of DBT slab thickness and overlap on reader performance and interpretation time in the absence of 1-mm slices. Materials and Methods In this retrospective HIPAA-compliant multireader study of DBT examinations performed between August 2013 and July 2017, four fellowship-trained breast imaging radiologists blinded to final histologic findings interpreted DBT examinations by using a standard protocol (10-mm slabs with 5-mm overlap, 1-mm slices, synthetic 2D mammogram) and an experimental protocol (6-mm slabs with 3-mm overlap, synthetic 2D mammogram) with a crossover design. Among the 122 DBT examinations, 74 mammographic findings had final histologic findings, including 31 masses (26 malignant), 20 groups of calcifications (12 malignant), 18 architectural distortions (15 malignant), and five asymmetries (two malignant). Durations of reader interpretations were recorded. Comparisons were made by using receiver operating characteristic curves for diagnostic performance and paired t tests for continuous variables. Results Among 122 women, mean age was 58.6 years ± 10.1 (standard deviation). For detection of malignancy, areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves were similar between protocols (range, 0.83-0.94 vs 0.84-0.92; P ≥ .63). Mean DBT interpretation time was shorter with the experimental protocol for three of four readers (reader 1, 5.6 minutes ± 1.7 vs 4.7 minutes ± 1.4 [P < .001]; reader 2, 2.8 minutes ± 1.1 vs 2.3 minutes ± 1.0 [P = .001]; reader 3, 3.6 minutes ± 1.4 vs 3.3 minutes ± 1.3 [P = .17]; reader 4, 4.3 minutes ± 1.0 vs 3.8 minutes ± 1.1 [P ≤ .001]), with 72% reduction in both mean number of images and mean file size (P < .001 for both). Conclusion A digital breast tomosynthesis reconstruction protocol that uses 6-mm slabs with 3-mm overlap, without 1-mm slices, had similar diagnostic performance compared with the standard protocol and led to a reduced interpretation time for three of four readers. © RSNA, 2020 See also the editorial by Chang in this issue.

Applying synthetic radiography to intraoral tomosynthesis: a step towards achieving 3D imaging in the dental clinic

OBJECTIVES

A practical approach to three-dimensional (3D) intraoral imaging would have many potential applications in clinical dentistry. Stationary intraoral tomosynthesis (sIOT) is an experimental 3D imaging technology that holds promise. The purpose of this study was to explore synthetic radiography as a tool to improve the clinical utility of the images generated by an sIOT scan.

METHODS

Extracted tooth specimens containing either caries adjacent to restorations (CAR) or vertical root fractures (VRF) were imaged by sIOT and standard dental radiography devices. Qualitative assessments were used to compare the conspicuity of these pathologies in the standard radiographs and in a set of multi-view synthetic radiographs generated from the information collected by sIOT.

RESULTS

The sIOT-based synthetic 2D radiographs contained less artefact than the image slices in the reconstructed 3D stack, which is the conventional approach to displaying information from a tomosynthesis scan. As a single sIOT scan can be used to generate synthetic radiographs from multiple viewing angles, the interproximal space was less likely to be obscured in the synthetic images compared to the standard radiograph. Additionally, the multi-view synthetic radiographs can potentially improve the display of CAR and VRFs as compared to a single standard radiograph.

CONCLUSIONS

This preliminary experience combining synthetic radiography and sIOT in extracted tooth models is encouraging and supports the ongoing study of this promising approach to 3D intraoral imaging with many potential applications.

Conspicuity of Screen-Detected Malignancies on Full Field Digital Mammography vs. Synthetic Mammography

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES

To evaluate conspicuity of screen-detected cancers on two-dimensional synthetic mammography (SM) reconstructed from digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) compared to two-dimensional full field digital mammography (FFDM).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

IRB-approved retrospective review of consecutive screen-detected cancers from October 1, 2015 to June 30, 2017 was performed. All examinations were reviewed by three radiologists in consensus (n = 224); a score of 1-3 was given to each screen-detected cancer on SM vs. FFDM [1 = FFDM more conspicuous than SM, 2 = FFDM equivalent to SM, and 3 = SM more conspicuous than FFDM]. Findings considered only visible on tomosynthesis (n = 40), without medical history (n = 2), and with skin thickening only (n = 1) were excluded, leaving 181 cases as the study population. The longitudinal medical record was reviewed to determine patient demographics and outcomes of imaging surveillance and biopsy.

RESULTS

Mammographic features on SM (n = 181) were calcifications (n = 68, 37.8%), masses (n = 51, 27.8%), asymmetries (n = 50, 27.6% [11 focal asymmetries]), and distortion (n = 12, 6.8%). The majority (76%, 137/181) of findings were equal or more conspicuous on SM vs. FFDM. However, calcifications and distortion greater than 2 cm were more conspicuous on SM and asymmetries were less conspicuous on SM vs. FFDM, controlling for menopausal status, family or personal history of breast cancer, BRCA status, and breast density.

CONCLUSION

Although the majority of screen-detected cancers are equal to more conspicuous on SM when compared to FFDM, calcifications and asymmetries <2cm were less conspicuous on SM than FFDM. When SM + DBT is used as an alternative to FFDM + DBT in breast cancer screening, caution should be taken when assessing one-view asymmetries and findings <2cm on SM.

Performance of 2D Synthetic Mammography Versus Digital Mammography in the Detection of Microcalcifications at Screening

OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this study is to compare the performance of 2D synthetic mammography (SM) to that of full-field digital mammography (FFDM) in the detection of microcalcifications and to evaluate radiologists' preference between the two imaging modalities for assessing calcifications. MATERIALS AND METHODS. A fully crossed, mode-balanced, paired-case (n = 160), retrospective, multireader (n = 3) performance study was implemented to compare screening mammograms acquired with digital breast tomosynthesis and both FFDM and SM between 2015 and 2017. The study cohort included 70 patients with mammograms recalled for microcalcifications (35 with malignant findings and 35 with benign findings) and was supplemented with 90 patients with mammograms with negative findings. In separate sessions, readers interpreted SM or FFDM images by recording a BI-RADS assessment and the probability of malignancy. In a final session that included 70 mammograms with microcalcifications, readers recorded their subjective assessment of microcalcification conspicuity and diagnostic confidence. RESULTS. There was no difference in diagnostic accuracy as assessed by comparing the likelihood of malignancy based on the AUC of plotted ROCs, with AUCs of 91% (95% CI, 83-97%) and 88% (95% CI, 79-95%) observed for SM and FFDM, respectively (p = 0.392), and with noninferiority of SM compared with FFDM (p = 0.011). No significant difference was observed between SM and FFDM in terms of sensitivity (77% vs 73%, respectively; p = 0.366) or negative predictive value (84% vs 82%, respectively; p = 0.598). The specificity and positive predictive value of SM were lower than those of FFDM (91% vs 98%, respectively [p = 0.034], and 87% vs 96%, respectively [p = 0.034]). All readers found calcifications to be more conspicuous on SM (p < 0.0001); however, no significant difference in subjective diagnostic confidence was seen. CONCLUSION. SM is noninferior to FFDM in the detection of microcalcifications. Despite the increased conspicuity of microcalcifications on SM, the subjective diagnostic confidence in the two modalities is comparable.

Comprehensive assessment of image quality in synthetic and digital mammography: a quantitative comparison

Recent advances in digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) technology were focused on the reconstruction of 2D "Synthesized Mammograms" (SMs) from DBT dataset. The introduction of SMs could avoid an additional digital mammography (DM) which is often required in complement to DBT examinations. Therefore, breast absorbed dose and compression time can be significantly reduced in DBT+SM procedures with respect to DBT+DM modality. However, to date, a limited number of studies have objectively characterised the image quality of SMs with respect to DM images. Therefore, the aim of this phantom study was to comprehensively compare SMs and DM images in terms of several image quality parameters. A Selenia Dimensions system (Hologic, Bedford, Mass, USA) was employed in this work. Five different phantoms were adopted to study noise, contrast and spatial resolution properties of the images. Specifically, noise power spectrum (NPS), maps of signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR), modulation transfer function (MTF) and contrast-detail (CD) thresholds were evaluated both for SM and DM modalities. SMs were characterised by different texture, noise and SNR spatial distribution properties with respect to DM images. Additionally, while in some conditions SM provides higher CNR than DM, lower overall performances in terms spatial resolution and CD curves were found in comparison to DM images. Therefore, given the great benefits of SMs in terms of dose and compression time saving, further clinical investigations on SMs image quality properties could be of practical interest to integrate our findings.

The role of digital breast tomosynthesis in breast cancer screening: a manufacturer- and metrics-specific analysis

Aim

Digital Breast Tomosynthesis (DBT), with or without Digital Mammography (DM) or Synthetic Mammography (SM), has been introduced or is under consideration for its introduction in breast cancer screening in several countries, as it has been shown that it has advantages over DM. Despite this there is no agreement on how to implement DBT in screening, and in many cases there is a lack of official guidance on the optimum usage of each commercially available system. The aim of this review is to carry out a manufacturer-specific summary of studies on the implementation of DBT in breast cancer screening.

Methods

An exhaustive literature review was undertaken to identify clinical observer studies that evaluated at least one of five common metrics: sensitivity, specificity, area under the curve (AUC) of the receiver-operating characteristics (ROC) analysis, recall rate and cancer detection rate. Four common DBT implementation methods were discussed in this review: (1) DBT, (2) DM with DBT, (3) 1-view DBT with or without 1-view DM or 2-view DM and (4) DBT with SM.

Results

A summary of 89 studies, selected from a database of 677 studies, on the assessment of the implementation of DBT in breast cancer screening is presented in tables and discussed in a manufacturer- and metric-specific approach. Much more studies were carried out using some DBT systems than others. For one implementation method of DBT by one manufacturer there is a shortage of studies, for another implementation there are conflicting results. In some cases, there is a strong agreement between studies, making the advantages and disadvantages of each system clear.

Conclusion

The optimum implementation method of DBT in breast screening, in terms of diagnostic benefit and patient radiation dose, for one manufacturer does not necessarily apply to other manufacturers.

Lymph Node Imaging in Patients with Primary Breast Cancer: Concurrent Diagnostic Tools

The detection of lymph node metastasis affects the management of patients with primary breast cancer significantly in terms of staging, treatment, and prognosis. The main goal for the radiologist is to determine and detect the presence of metastatic disease in nonpalpable axillary lymph nodes with a positive predictive value that is high enough to initially select patients for upfront axillary lymph node dissection. Features that are suggestive of axillary adenopathy may be seen with different imaging modalities, but ultrasound is the method of choice for evaluating axillary lymph nodes and for performing image-guided lymph node interventions. This review aims to provide a comprehensive overview of the available imaging modalities for lymph node assessment in patients diagnosed with primary breast cancer. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: The detection of lymph node metastasis affects the management of patients with primary breast cancer. The main goal for the radiologist is to detect lymph node metastasis in patients to allow for the selection of patients who should undergo upfront axillary lymph node dissection. Features that are suggestive of axillary adenopathy may be seen with mammography, computed tomography, and magnetic resonance imaging, but ultrasonography is the imaging modality of choice for evaluating axillary lymph nodes. A normal axillary lymph node is characterized by a reniform shape, a maximal cortical thickness of 3 mm without focal bulging, smooth margins, and, depending on size, a discernable central fatty hilum.

Initial Clinical Experience with Stationary Digital Breast Tomosynthesis

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES

A linear array of carbon nanotube-enabled x-ray sources allows for stationary digital breast tomosynthesis (sDBT), during which projection views are collected without the need to move the x-ray tube. This work presents our initial clinical experience with a first-generation sDBT device.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Following informed consent, women with a "suspicious abnormality" (Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System 4), discovered by digital mammography and awaiting biopsy, were also imaged by the first generation sDBT. Four radiologists participated in this paired-image study, completing questionnaires while interpreting the mammograms and sDBT image stacks. Areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve were used to measure reader performance (likelihood of correctly identifying malignancy based on pathology as ground truth), while a multivariate analysis assessed preference, as readers compared one modality to the next when interpreting diagnostically important image features.

RESULTS

Findings from 43 women were available for analysis, in whom 12 cases of malignancy were identified by pathology. The mean areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve was significantly higher (p < 0.05) for sDBT than mammography for all breast density categories and breast thicknesses. Additionally, readers preferred sDBT over mammography when evaluating mass margins and shape, architectural distortion, and asymmetry, but preferred mammography when characterizing microcalcifications.

CONCLUSION

Readers preferred sDBT over mammography when interpreting soft-tissue breast features and were diagnostically more accurate using images generated by sDBT in a Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System 4 population. However, the findings also demonstrated the need to improve microcalcification conspicuity, which is guiding both technological and image-processing design changes in future sDBT devices.

Digital Breast Tomosynthesis: Concepts and Clinical Practice

Digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) is emerging as the standard of care for breast imaging based on improvements in both screening and diagnostic imaging outcomes. The additional information obtained from the tomosynthesis acquisition decreases the confounding effect of overlapping tissue, allowing for improved lesion detection, characterization, and localization. In addition, the quasi three-dimensional information obtained from the reconstructed DBT data set allows a more efficient imaging work-up than imaging with two-dimensional full-field digital mammography alone. Herein, the authors review the benefits of DBT imaging in screening and diagnostic breast imaging.

Effect of Mammographic Screening Modality on Breast Density Assessment: Digital Mammography versus Digital Breast Tomosynthesis

Background Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) breast density categories assigned by interpreting radiologists often influence decisions surrounding supplemental breast cancer screening and risk assessment. The landscape of mammographic screening continuously evolves, and different mammographic screening modalities may result in different perception of density, reflected in different assignment of BI-RADS density categories. Purpose To investigate the effect of screening mammography modality on BI-RADS breast density assessments. Materials and Methods Data were retrospectively analyzed from 24 736 individual women (42.3% [10 455 of 24 736] white women, 57.7% [14 281 of 24 736] black women; mean age, 56.3 years; age range, 40.0-74.9 years) who underwent from one to seven mammographic screening examinations from September 2010 through February 2017 (60 766 examinations). Three screening modalities were used: digital mammography alone (8935 examinations); digital mammography with digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT; 30 779 examinations); and synthetic mammography with DBT (21 052 examinations). Random-effects logistic regression analysis was performed to estimate the likelihood of assignment to high versus low BI-RADS density category according to each modality, adjusted for ethnicity, age, body mass index (BMI), and radiologist. The interactions of modality with ethnicity and BMI on density categorization were also tested with the model. Results Women screened with DBT versus digital mammography alone had lower likelihood regarding categorization of high density breasts (digital mammography and DBT vs digital mammography: odds ratio, 0.69 [95% confidence interval: 0.61, 0.80], P < .001; synthetic mammography and DBT vs digital mammography: odds ratio, 0.43 [95% confidence interval: 0.37, 0.50], P < .001). Lower likelihood of high density was also observed at synthetic mammography and DBT compared with digital mammography and DBT (odds ratio, 0.62; 95% confidence interval: 0.56, 0.69; P < .001). There were interactions of modality with ethnicity (P = .007) and BMI (P = .003) on breast density assessment, with greater differences in density categorization according to modality observed for black women than for white women and groups with higher BMI. Conclusion Breast density categorization may vary by screening mammographic modality, and this effect appears to vary by ethnicity and body mass index. © RSNA, 2019 Online supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorial by Philpotts in this issue.

Digital Breast Tomosynthesis: Physics, Artifacts, and Quality Control Considerations

As digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) becomes widely used, radiologists must understand the basic principles of (a) image acquisition, (b) artifacts, and (c) quality control (QC) that are specific to DBT. Standard acquisition parameters common to both full-field digital mammography (FFDM) and DBT are combinations of x-ray tube voltage, current exposure time, and anode target and filter combinations. Image acquisition parameters specific to DBT include tube motion, sweep angle, and number of projections. Continuous tube motion or x-ray emission decreases imaging time but leads to focal spot blurring when compared with step-and-shoot techniques. The sweep angle and number of projections determines resolution. Wider sweep angles allow greater out-of-plane (z-axis) resolution, improving visualization of masses and architecture distortion. A greater number of projections increases in-plane or x-y axis resolution, improving visualization of microcalcifications. Artifacts related to DBT include blurring-ripple, truncation, and loss of skin and superficial tissue resolution. Motion artifacts are difficult to recognize because of inherent out-of-plane blurring. To maintain optimal image quality and an "as low as reasonably achievable" (ALARA) radiation dose, regular QC must be performed. DBT is considered a new imaging modality; therefore, breast imaging facilities are required to obtain a separate certification in addition to that in FFDM, and all personnel (radiologists, technologists, and medical physicists) are mandated to complete initial DBT training and maintain appropriate continuing medical education credits. ^©RSNA, 2019.

Calcifications at Digital Breast Tomosynthesis: Imaging Features and Biopsy Techniques

Full-field digital mammography (FFDM), the standard of care for breast cancer screening, has some limitations. With the advent of digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT), improvements including decreased recall rates and increased cancer detection rates have been observed. The quasi-three-dimensional capability of DBT reduces breast tissue overlap, a significant limitation of FFDM. However, early studies demonstrate that a few cancers detected at FFDM may not be diagnosed at DBT-only screening, and lesions with calcifications as the dominant feature may look less suspicious at DBT or not be visible at all. These findings support the use of combined FFDM and DBT protocols to optimize screening performance. However, this combination would approximately double the patient's radiation exposure. The development of computer algorithms that generate two-dimensional synthesized mammography (SM) views from DBT has improved calcification conspicuity and sensitivity. Therefore, SM may substitute for FFDM in screening protocols, reducing radiation exposure. DBT plus SM demonstrates significantly better performance than that of FFDM alone, although there are reports of missed malignant calcifications. Thus, some centers continue to perform FFDM with DBT. Use of DBT in breast imaging has also necessitated the development of DBT-guided biopsy. DBT-guided biopsy may have a higher success rate than that of stereotactic biopsy, with a shorter procedure time. While DBT brings substantial improvements to breast cancer imaging, it is important to be aware of its strengths and limitations regarding detection of calcifications. This article reviews the imaging appearance of breast calcifications at DBT, discusses calcification biopsy techniques, and provides an overview of the current literature. Online supplemental material is available for this article. ^©RSNA, 2019 An earlier incorrect version of this article appeared online. This article was corrected on February 13, 2019.

The threshold detectable mass diameter for 2D-mammography and digital breast tomosynthesis

Digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) is currently under consideration for replacement of, or combined use with 2D-mammography in national breast screening programmes. To investigate the potential benefits that DBT can bring to screening, the threshold detectable lesion diameters were measured for different forms of DBT in comparison to 2D-mammography. The aim of this study was to compare the threshold detectable mass diameters obtained with narrow angle (15°/15 projections) and wide angle (50°/25 projections) DBT in comparison to 2D-mammography. Simulated images of 60 mm thick compressed breasts were produced with and without masses using a set of validated image modelling tools for 2D-mammography and DBT. Image processing and reconstruction were performed using commercial software. A series of 4-alternative forced choice (4AFC) experiments was conducted for signal detection with the masses as targets. The threshold detectable mass diameter was found for each imaging modality with a mean glandular dose of 2.5 mGy. The resulting values of the threshold diameter for 2D-mammography (10.2 ± 1.4 mm) were found to be larger (p < 0.001) than those for narrow angle DBT (6.0 ± 1.1 mm) and wide angle DBT (5.6 ± 1.2 mm). There was no significant difference between the threshold diameters for wide and narrow angle DBT. Implications for the introduction of DBT alone or in combination with 2D-mammography in breast cancer screening are discussed.

Microcalcifications Detected at Screening Mammography: Synthetic Mammography and Digital Breast Tomosynthesis versus Digital Mammography

Purpose To compare the performance of two-dimensional synthetic mammography (SM) plus digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) versus conventional full-field digital mammography (FFDM) in the detection of microcalcifications on screening mammograms. Materials and Methods In this retrospective multireader observer study, 72 consecutive screening mammograms recalled for microcalcifications from June 2015 through August 2016 were evaluated with both FFDM and DBT. The data set included 54 mammograms with benign microcalcifications and 18 mammograms with malignant microcalcifications, and 20 additional screening mammograms without microcalcifications used as controls. FFDM alone was compared to synthetic mammography plus DBT. Four readers independently reviewed each data set and microcalcification recalls were tabulated. Sensitivity and specificity for microcalcification detection were calculated for SM plus DBT and for FFDM alone. Interreader agreement was calculated with Fleiss kappa values. Results Reader agreement was kappa value of 0.66 (P < .001) for FFDM and 0.63 (P < .001) for SM plus DBT. For FFDM, the combined reader sensitivity for all microcalcifications was 80% (229 of 288; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 74%, 84%) and for malignant microcalcifications was 92% (66 of 72; 95% CI: 83%, 97%). For SM plus DBT, the combined reader sensitivity for all microcalcifications was 75% (215 of 288; 95% CI: 69%, 80%) and for malignant microcalcifications was 94% (68 of 72; 95% CI: 86%, 98%). For FFDM, the combined reader specificity for all microcalcifications was 98% (78 of 80; 95% CI: 91%, 100%) and for malignant microcalcifications was 98% (78 of 80; 95% CI: 91%, 100%). For SM plus DBT, combined reader specificity for all microcalcifications was 95% (76 of 80; 95% CI: 88%, 99%) and for malignant microcalcifications was 95% (76 of 80; 95% CI: 88%, 99%). Mixed-effects model concluded no differences between modalities (‒0.03; 95% CI: ‒0.08, 0.01; P = .13). Conclusion Relative to full-field digital mammography, synthetic mammography plus digital breast tomosynthesis had similar sensitivity and specificity for the detection of microcalcifications previously identified for recall at screening mammography. © RSNA, 2018 See also the editorial by Bae and Moon in this issue.

Validation of the Textural Realism of a 3D Anthropomorphic Phantom for Digital Breast Tomosynthesis

In this paper, texture calculations are used to validate the realism of a physical anthropomorphic phantom for digital breast tomosynthesis. The texture features were compared against clinical mammography data. Three groups of features (grey-level histogram, co-occurrence, and run-length) were considered. The features were analyzed over a broad range of technique settings (kV and mAs). These calculations were done in the central slice of the reconstruction as well as the synthetic 2D mammogram. For each feature, the clinical data were binned into strata based on the compressed breast thickness. It was demonstrated that the clinical features vary by thickness. To evaluate the realism of the phantom, each feature was compared against clinical data in the same thickness stratum. For the purpose of this paper, a feature was considered to be realistic if it was within the middle 95% of the statistical distribution of clinical values. In the reconstruction, most features were found to exhibit realism; specifically, all 12 grey-level histogram features, four out of seven co-occurrence features, and three out of seven run-length features. The realism of most features was robust to changes in the technique settings. However, in the synthetic 2D mammogram, fewer features were found to exhibit realism. In conclusion, this paper provides a validation of the textural realism of the phantom in the reconstruction, and shows that there is less realism in the synthetic 2D mammogram. We identify the features that should be considered to refine the design of the phantom in future work.

Synthesized Mammography: Clinical Evidence, Appearance, and Implementation

Digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) has improved conventional mammography by increasing cancer detection while reducing recall rates. However, these benefits come at the cost of increased radiation dose. Synthesized mammography (s2D) has been developed to provide the advantages of DBT with nearly half the radiation dose. Since its F.D.A. approval, multiple studies have evaluated the clinical performance of s2D. In clinical practice, s2D images are not identical to conventional 2D images and are designed for interpretation with DBT as a complement. This article reviews the present literature to assess whether s2D is a practical alternative to conventional 2D, addresses the differences in mammographic appearance of findings, and provides suggestions for implementation into clinical practice.