Identificador persistente para citar o vincular este elemento: http://hdl.handle.net/10553/69949
Campo DC Valoridioma
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-
Colección:Artículos
Vista resumida

Citas SCOPUSTM   

23
actualizado el 17-nov-2024

Citas de WEB OF SCIENCETM
Citations

21
actualizado el 17-nov-2024

Visitas

63
actualizado el 29-jul-2023

Google ScholarTM

Verifica

Altmetric


Comparte



Exporta metadatos



Los elementos en ULPGC accedaCRIS están protegidos por derechos de autor con todos los derechos reservados, a menos que se indique lo contrario.