Does Reader Performance with Digital Breast Tomosynthesis Vary according to Experience with Two-dimensional Mammography?

Purpose To assess whether individual reader performance with digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) and two-dimensional (2D) mammography varies with number of years of experience or volume of 2D mammograms read. Materials and Methods After written informed consent was obtained, 8869 women (age range, 29-85 years; mean age, 56 years) were recruited into the TOMMY trial (A Comparison of Tomosynthesis with Digital Mammography in the UK National Health Service Breast Screening Program), an ethically approved, multicenter, multireader, retrospective reading study, between July 2011 and March 2013. Each case was read prospectively for clinical assessment and to establish ground truth. A retrospective reading data set of 7060 cases was created and randomly allocated for independent blinded review of (a) 2D mammograms, (b) DBT images and 2D mammograms, and (c) synthetic 2D mammograms and DBT images, without access to previous examinations. Readers (19 radiologists, three advanced practitioner radiographers, and two breast clinicians) who had 3-25 (median, 10) years of experience in the U.K. National Health Service Breast Screening Program and read 5000-13 000 (median, 8000) cases per annum were included in this study. Specificity was analyzed according to reader type and years and volume of experience, and then both specificity and sensitivity were analyzed by matched inference. The median duration of experience (10 years) was used as the cutoff point for comparison of reader performance. Results Specificity improved with the addition of DBT for all readers. This was significant for all staff groups (56% vs 68% and 49% vs 67% [P < .0001] for radiologists and advanced practitioner radiographers, respectively; 46% vs 55% [P = .02] for breast clinicians). Sensitivity was improved for 19 of 24 (79%) readers and was significantly higher for those with less than 10 years of experience (91% vs 86%; P = .03) and those with total mammographic experience of fewer than 80 000 cases (88% vs 86%; P = .03). Conclusion The addition of DBT to conventional 2D screening mammography improved specificity for all readers, but the gain in sensitivity was greater for readers with less than 10 years of experience.

Correlation of age and HRT use with breast density as assessed by Quantra™.

Breast density is a significant predictor in the risk of developing breast cancer. Several methods are available for assessing breast density, but most are subject to intra-observer variability and are unable to assess the breast as a three-dimensional structure. Using Quantra(™) to quantify breast density, we have correlated this with risk factors to determine what impact these variables have on breast density. Women attending for full field digital mammography at the South West London Breast Screening Unit between December 2008 and March 2009 were invited to participate in the study by questionnaire. Consenting women returned the questionnaire allowing further data collection including demographics, menopausal status and hormone replacement therapy (HRT) use. Data were correlated against breast density measurements to determine the degree of association. Mammograms were assessed on a Hologic(™) workstation and breast density calculated using Quantra(™). Quantra(™) is an automated algorithm for volumetric assessment of breast tissue composition from digital mammograms. Six-hundred and eighty-three women were invited to participate. Those with implants or mastectomy were excluded. Three-hundred and twenty questionnaires were fully completed and able to be assessed. The mean age of participants was 59 years (range 49-81). Mean density was 19.7% (range 8.5-48.5%). There was a decrease in density with age (Pearson product-moment correlation coefficient -0.17). Correlation between density and HRT use showed a significant positive result (correlation coefficient 0.07). Quantra(™) has shown to be an accurate, reproducible tool for quantifying breast density, demonstrated by its correlation with lifestyle and demographic data. Given its ease of acquisition this may be the future of breast density quantification in the digital age.

Urethral injuries after pelvic trauma: evaluation with urethrography.

Urethral injury is a common complication of pelvic trauma that, if undiagnosed, may lead to significant long-term morbidity. Segments of the urethra that are near the pubic rami and the puboprostatic ligaments are particularly vulnerable. Although computed tomography is commonly used for the initial imaging evaluation of patients with polytrauma, urethral injury is better assessed and classified by using urethrography. Complete urethral imaging is especially important at presentation because the insertion of a transurethral bladder catheter may exacerbate an existing injury (eg, cause a partial urethral tear to become a complete transection). However, even for radiologists who are familiar with standard technique, urethrography after pelvic trauma may be particularly challenging because the patient is immobile or a surgical fixation device or indwelling urethral catheter is present. Various methods may used to overcome these difficulties and ensure that optimal images are obtained so that a correct diagnosis can be made without additional imaging evaluations.