UNA MAMOGRAFÍA PUEDE SALVAR LA VIDA DE UNA MUJER, ella puede ser su esposa, su mama, su hija o una hermana.
El Cáncer de Mama se puede curar, solo si se diagnostica tempranamente.
El artículo que adjuntamos muestra el valor diagnóstico de la MAMOGRAFIA DIGITAL sobre la mamografía analógica convencional , en un estudio de 49,528 pacientes en U.S.A. y se comparan hallazgos similares en España , Noruega y Nueva Zelanda.
Muy atentamente, equipo TecniScan Científico.
Artículo de Referencia
Diagnostic Accuracy of Digital versus Film Mammography: Exploratory Analysis of Selected Population Subgroups in DMIST
Radiology: Volume 246: Number 2, February 2008
Purpose
To retrospectively compare the accuracy of digital versus film mammography in population subgroups of the Digital Mammographic Imaging Screening Trial (DMIST) defined by combinations of age, menopausal status, and breast density, by using either biopsy results or follow-up information as the reference standard.
Materials and Methods
DMIST included women who underwent both digital and film screening mammography. Institutional review board approval at all participating sites and informed consent from all participating women in compliance with HIPAA was obtained for DMIST and this retrospective analysis. Areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUCs) for each modality were compared within each subgroup evaluated (age < 50 vs 50–64 vs ≥ 65 years, dense vs nondense breasts at mammography, and pre- or perimenopausal vs postmenopausal status for the two younger age cohorts [10 new subgroups in toto]) while controlling for multiple comparisons (P< .002 indicated a significant difference). All DMIST cancers were evaluated with respect to mammographic detection method (digital vs film vs both vs neither), mammographic lesion type (mass, calcifications, or other), digital machine type, mammographic and pathologic size and diagnosis, existence of prior mammographic study at time of interpretation, months since prior mammographic study, and compressed breast thickness.
Results
Thirty-three centers enrolled 49 528 women. Breast cancer status was determined for 42 760 women, the group included in this study. Pre- or perimenopausal women younger than 50 years who had dense breasts at film mammography comprised the only subgroup for which digital mammography was significantly better than film (AUCs, 0.79 vs 0.54; P= .0015). Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System–based sensitivity in this subgroup was 0.59 for digital and 0.27 for film mammography. AUCs were not significantly different in any of the other subgroups. For women aged 65 years or older with fatty breasts, the AUC showed a nonsignificant tendency toward film being better than digital mammography (AUCs, 0.88 vs 0.70; P= .0025).
Conclusion
Digital mammography performed significantly better than film for pre- and perimenopausal women younger than 50 years with dense breasts, but film tended nonsignificantly to perform better for women aged 65 years or older with fatty breasts.© RSNA, 2008.
Diagnostic Accuracy of Digital versus Film Mammography: Exploratory Analysis of Selected Population Subgroups in DMIST
Radiology: Volume 246: Number 2, February 2008
Purpose
To retrospectively compare the accuracy of digital versus film mammography in population subgroups of the Digital Mammographic Imaging Screening Trial (DMIST) defined by combinations of age, menopausal status, and breast density, by using either biopsy results or follow-up information as the reference standard.
Materials and Methods
DMIST included women who underwent both digital and film screening mammography. Institutional review board approval at all participating sites and informed consent from all participating women in compliance with HIPAA was obtained for DMIST and this retrospective analysis. Areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUCs) for each modality were compared within each subgroup evaluated (age < 50 vs 50–64 vs ≥ 65 years, dense vs nondense breasts at mammography, and pre- or perimenopausal vs postmenopausal status for the two younger age cohorts [10 new subgroups in toto]) while controlling for multiple comparisons (P< .002 indicated a significant difference). All DMIST cancers were evaluated with respect to mammographic detection method (digital vs film vs both vs neither), mammographic lesion type (mass, calcifications, or other), digital machine type, mammographic and pathologic size and diagnosis, existence of prior mammographic study at time of interpretation, months since prior mammographic study, and compressed breast thickness.
Results
Thirty-three centers enrolled 49 528 women. Breast cancer status was determined for 42 760 women, the group included in this study. Pre- or perimenopausal women younger than 50 years who had dense breasts at film mammography comprised the only subgroup for which digital mammography was significantly better than film (AUCs, 0.79 vs 0.54; P= .0015). Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System–based sensitivity in this subgroup was 0.59 for digital and 0.27 for film mammography. AUCs were not significantly different in any of the other subgroups. For women aged 65 years or older with fatty breasts, the AUC showed a nonsignificant tendency toward film being better than digital mammography (AUCs, 0.88 vs 0.70; P= .0025).
Conclusion
Digital mammography performed significantly better than film for pre- and perimenopausal women younger than 50 years with dense breasts, but film tended nonsignificantly to perform better for women aged 65 years or older with fatty breasts.© RSNA, 2008.
Comité Editorial: Grupo de Radiológicos TecniScan.
Solicite el artículo completo a nuestro correo electrónico, especificando el nombre del boletín: tecniscancientifico@tecniscan.com