Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Digital mammography versus digital breast tomosynthesis for detection of breast cancer in the intraoperative specimen during breast-conserving surgery

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Breast Cancer Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

To compare the diagnostic ability of specimen radiography using digital mammography (DM) and digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) for detecting breast cancer and evaluating its extension in the intraoperative specimen.

Methods

Sixty-five specimens from 65 women (median 62 years; range 34–86) obtained during breast-conserving surgery were prospectively investigated. Specimens underwent DM (25–40 kVp, 12–322 mA s) and DBT (25–34 kVp, 13–137 mA) in two orthogonal planes, anteroposterior (AP) and latero-lateral (LL). Images were interpreted by a radiologist to detect invasive lesions and their extensive intraductal components (EIC) or ductal carcinomas in situ (DCIS); afterwards, they were compared with histopathological findings.

Results

In AP views, 96 % of the invasive lesions were detected by both the methods. Of the EICs, 55 and 65 % were detected by DM and DBT, respectively (P = 0.61). Of the DICSs, 31 and 38 % were detected by DM and DBT, respectively (P > 0.99). In LL views, 71 and 13 % of the invasive lesions were detected by DBT and DM, respectively (P < 0.0001). Of the EICs, 42 and 10 % were detected by DBT and DM, respectively (P = 0.0078). Of the 13 DCISs, 42 and 8 % were detected by DBT and DM, respectively (P = 0.32). The whole lesion and contour could be delineated in 45 % by DBT and in 6.2 % by DM (P < 0.0001).

Conclusions

DBT could detect breast cancer more accurately than DM in LL views, indicating its potential to more precisely diagnose vertical invasion.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. McCormick JT, Keleher AJ, Tikhomirov VB, Budway RJ, Caushaj PF. Analysis of the use of specimen mammography in breast conservation therapy. Am J Surg. 2004;188:433–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Weber WP, Engelberger S, Viehl CT, Zanetti-Dallenbach R, Kuster S, Dirnhofer S, et al. Accuracy of frozen section analysis versus specimen radiography during breast-conserving surgery for nonpalpable lesions. World J Surg. 2008;32:2599–606.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Bathla L, Harris A, Davey M, Sharma P, Silva E. High resolution intra-operative two-dimensional specimen mammography and its impact on second operation for re-excision of positive margins at final pathology after breast conservation surgery. Am J Surg. 2011;202:387–94.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Hakim CM, Chough DM, Ganott MA, Sumkin JH, Zuley ML, Gur D. Digital breast tomosynthesis in the diagnostic environment: a subjective side-by-side review. AJR. 2010;195:172–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Baker JA, Lo JY. Breast tomosynthesis: state of the art and review of the literature. Acad Radiol. 2011;18:1298–310.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Urano M, Shiraki N, Hara M, Toyama T, Shibamoto Y (2014) Multi-detector row CT-guided marking technique for breast-conserving therapy of early breast cancer: margin positivity and local control rates. Breast Cancer (ahead of print).

  7. Pleijhuis RG, Graafland M, De Vries J, Bart J, de Jong JS, van Dam GM. Obtaining adequate surgical margins in breast-conserving therapy for patients with early-stage breast cancer: current modalities and future directions. Ann Surg Oncol. 2009;16:2717–30.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Fusco R, Petrillo A, Catalano O, Sansone M, Granata V, Filice S, et al. Procedures for location of non-palpable breast lesions: a systematic review for the radiologist. Breast Cancer. 2014;21:522–31.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Haid A, Knauer M, Dunzinger S, Jasarevic Z, Köberle-Wührer R, Schuster A, et al. Intra-operative sonography: a valuable aid during breast conserving surgery for occult breast cancer. Ann Surg Oncol. 2007;14:3090–101.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Yingbing W, Ebuoma Lilian, Saksena Mansi, Liu B, Specht M, Rafferty E, et al. Clinical evaluation of a mobile digital specimen radiography system for intraoperative specimen verification. AJR. 2014;203:457–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Schulz-Wendtland R, Dilbat G, Bani M, Fasching PA, Heusinger K, Lux MP, et al. Full field digital mammography (FFDM) versus CMOS technology, specimen radiography system (SRS) and tomosynthesis (DBT)—which system can optimise surgical therapy? Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd. 2013;73:422–7.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. Wallace AM, Daniel BL, Jeffrey SS, Birdwell RL, Nowels KW, Dirbas FM, et al. Rates of re-excision for breast cancer after magnetic resonance imaging-guided bracket wire localization. J Am Coll Surg. 2005;200:527–37.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Ahmed M, van Hemelrijck M, Douek M. Systematic review of radioguided versus wire-guided localization in the treatment of non-palpable breast cancers. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2013;140:241–52.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Tang R, Buckley JM, Fernandez L, Coopey S, Aftreth O, Michaelson J, et al. Micro-computed tomography (Micro-CT): a novel approach for intraoperative breast cancer specimen imaging. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2013;139:311–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Uematsu T. The emerging role of breast tomosynthesis. Breast Cancer. 2013;20:204–12.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Tagliafico A, Tagliafico G, Astengo D, Airaldi S, Calabrese M, Houssami N. Comparative estimation of percentage breast tissue density for digital mammography, digital breast tomosynthesis, and magnetic resonance imaging. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2013;138:311–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Takamoto Y, Tsunoda H, Kikuchi M, Hayashi N, Honda S, Koyama T, et al. Role of breast tomosynthesis in diagnosis of breast cancer for Japanese women. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev. 2013;14:3037–40.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Svahn TM, Chakraborty DP, Ikeda D, Zackrisson S, Do Y, Mattsson S, et al. Breast tomosynthesis and digital mammography: a comparison of diagnostic accuracy. Br J Radiol. 2012;85:1074–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Sechopoulos I, Suryanarayanan S, Vedantham S, D’Orsi C, Karellas A. Computation of the glandular radiation dose in digital tomosynthesis of the breast. Med Phys. 2007;34:221–32.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. Wellings SR, Jensen HM, Marcum RG. An atlas of subgross pathology of the human breast with special reference to possible precancerous lesions. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1975;55:231–73.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors wish to thank radiology technologists at Nagoya City University Hospital for taking DM and DBT. No funding exists for this research.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Radiology, Nagoya City University Graduate School of Medical Sciences, Kawasumi 1, Mizuho-ku, Nagoya, Aichi, 467-8601, Japan

    Misugi Urano, Tatsuya Kawai, Taeko Goto & Yuta Shibamoto

  2. Department of Radiology, Nagoya City West Medical Center, Nagoya, Japan

    Norio Shiraki

  3. Department of Oncology, Immunology and Surgery, Nagoya City University Graduate School of Medical Sciences, Nagoya, Japan

    Yumi Endo, Nobuyasu Yoshimoto & Tatsuya Toyama

Authors
  1. Misugi Urano
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Norio Shiraki
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Tatsuya Kawai
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Taeko Goto
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Yumi Endo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Nobuyasu Yoshimoto
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Tatsuya Toyama
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Yuta Shibamoto
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Misugi Urano.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Urano, M., Shiraki, N., Kawai, T. et al. Digital mammography versus digital breast tomosynthesis for detection of breast cancer in the intraoperative specimen during breast-conserving surgery. Breast Cancer 23, 706–711 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12282-015-0628-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12282-015-0628-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation