Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/10553/69949
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorTravieso-Aja, María del Maren_US
dc.contributor.authorMaldonado-Saluzzi, Danielen_US
dc.contributor.authorNaranjo-Santana, Pedroen_US
dc.contributor.authorFernández-Ruiz, Claudiaen_US
dc.contributor.authorSeverino-Rondón, Wilsaen_US
dc.contributor.authorRodríguez Rodríguez, Marioen_US
dc.contributor.authorVega Benítez, Víctor Manuelen_US
dc.contributor.authorPérez-Luzardo, Octavioen_US
dc.date.accessioned2020-02-05T12:51:30Z-
dc.date.available2020-02-05T12:51:30Z-
dc.date.issued2019en_US
dc.identifier.issn0033-8362en_US
dc.identifier.otherScopus-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10553/69949-
dc.description.abstractObjective: To evaluate the diagnostic performance of contrast-enhanced dual-energy spectral mammography (CESM) in comparison with that of full-field digital mammography (FFDM), either alone or accompanied with breast ultrasound (BUS) in a large series of patients/breast lesions (n = 644). Patients and methods: In this retrospective study, five radiologists evaluated the lesions by three imaging modalities: FFDM, FFDM + BUS, and CESM and compared the imaging to the gold standard (histopathology or clinical follow-up). Diagnostic performance parameters and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves of CESM were calculated and compared to those of FFDM or FFDM + BUS (McNemar’s test). Additionally, the reliability of tumor size measurement by CESM was compared with the histopathological measurement. Results: The study included 218 benign and 426 malignant lesions. 85% of benign and 93% of malignant lesions were adequately identified using CESM. With respect to FFDM and FFDM + BUS, CESM significantly increased sensitivity to 93.2% (+ 10.7% and + 3.4%, respectively); specificity to 84.4% (+ 15.8% and + 1.7%, respectively); PPV to 92.3% (+ 26.8% and + 3.6%, respectively); NPV to 86.0% (+ 1.6% and + 1.8%, respectively); and accuracy to 90.2% (+ 15.8% and + 3.2%, respectively). In the ROC curves analyses, the comparison among the three AUC values was also statistically significant (p < 0.001). Good agreement between tumor diameters measured using CESM and histopathology was observed (Spearman’s rank correlation, r = 0.891, p < 0.0001), although this technique tended to produce an overestimation of the size (+ 7 mm). Conclusions: CESM has high diagnostic accuracy and can be considered as a useful technique for the assessment of breast lesions.en_US
dc.languageengen_US
dc.relation.ispartofRadiologia Medicaen_US
dc.sourceRadiologia Medica [ISSN 0033-8362], v. 124 (10), p. 1006-1017en_US
dc.subject32 Ciencias médicasen_US
dc.subject.otherBreast Canceren_US
dc.subject.otherBreast Ultrasounden_US
dc.subject.otherContrast-Enhanced Dual-Energy Spectral Mammography (Cesm)en_US
dc.subject.otherDigital Mammographyen_US
dc.subject.otherIodinated Contrast Mediumen_US
dc.titleDiagnostic performance of contrast-enhanced dual-energy spectral mammography (CESM): a retrospective study involving 644 breast lesionsen_US
dc.typeinfo:eu-repo/semantics/Articleen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1007/s11547-019-01056-2
dc.identifier.scopus85068351570-
dc.identifier.isi000488930300008
dc.contributor.authorscopusid57188765999-
dc.contributor.authorscopusid6507242518-
dc.contributor.authorscopusid57198777002-
dc.contributor.authorscopusid56685075300-
dc.contributor.authorscopusid57198780135-
dc.contributor.authorscopusid56290598800-
dc.contributor.authorscopusid6507488243-
dc.contributor.authorscopusid57209642729-
dc.description.lastpage1017-
dc.identifier.issue10-
dc.description.firstpage1006-
dc.relation.volume124-
dc.investigacionCiencias de la Saluden_US
dc.type2Artículoen_US
dc.contributor.daisngid13083382
dc.contributor.daisngid19068704
dc.contributor.daisngid21595087
dc.contributor.daisngid28660708
dc.contributor.daisngid15709596
dc.contributor.daisngid8400491
dc.contributor.daisngid4566503
dc.contributor.daisngid418704
dc.utils.revisionen_US
dc.contributor.wosstandardWOS:Travieso-Aja, MD
dc.contributor.wosstandardWOS:Maldonado-Saluzzi, D
dc.contributor.wosstandardWOS:Naranjo-Santana, P
dc.contributor.wosstandardWOS:Fernandez-Ruiz, C
dc.contributor.wosstandardWOS:Severino-Rondon, W
dc.contributor.wosstandardWOS:Rodriguez, MR
dc.contributor.wosstandardWOS:Benitez, VV
dc.contributor.wosstandardWOS:Perez-Luzardo, O
dc.date.coverdateOctubre 2019
dc.identifier.ulpgces
dc.description.sjr0,574
dc.description.jcr2,0
dc.description.sjrqQ2
dc.description.jcrqQ3
dc.description.scieSCIE
item.grantfulltextnone-
item.fulltextSin texto completo-
crisitem.author.deptDepartamento de Ciencias Médicas y Quirúrgicas-
crisitem.author.deptGIR IUIBS: Medio Ambiente y Salud-
crisitem.author.deptIU de Investigaciones Biomédicas y Sanitarias-
crisitem.author.deptDepartamento de Ciencias Clínicas-
crisitem.author.orcid0000-0002-0596-3880-
crisitem.author.orcid0000-0002-4153-3028-
crisitem.author.parentorgIU de Investigaciones Biomédicas y Sanitarias-
crisitem.author.fullNameVega Benítez, Víctor Manuel-
crisitem.author.fullNamePérez Luzardo, Octavio Luis-
Appears in Collections:Artículos
Show simple item record

SCOPUSTM   
Citations

22
checked on Jul 21, 2024

WEB OF SCIENCETM
Citations

20
checked on Jul 21, 2024

Page view(s)

63
checked on Jul 29, 2023

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric


Share



Export metadata



Items in accedaCRIS are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.