The Usefulness of Spectral Mammography in Surgical Planning of Breast Cancer Treatment—Analysis of 999 Patients with Primary Operable Breast Cancer

Contrast-enhanced spectral mammography (CESM) is a promising, digital breast imaging method for planning surgeries. The study aimed at comparing digital mammography (MG) with CESM as predictive factors in visualizing multifocal-multicentric cancers (MFMCC) before determining the surgery extent. We a...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Lorek, Andrzej, Steinhof-Radwańska, Katarzyna, Barczyk-Gutkowska, Anna, Zarębski, Wojciech, Paleń, Piotr, Szyluk, Karol, Lorek, Joanna, Grażyńska, Anna, Niemiec, Paweł, Gisterek, Iwona
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2021
Materias:
Article
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8293137/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34287253
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/curroncol28040232
Descripción
Sumario:Contrast-enhanced spectral mammography (CESM) is a promising, digital breast imaging method for planning surgeries. The study aimed at comparing digital mammography (MG) with CESM as predictive factors in visualizing multifocal-multicentric cancers (MFMCC) before determining the surgery extent. We analyzed 999 patients after breast cancer surgery to compare MG and CESM in terms of detecting MFMCC. Moreover, these procedures were assessed for their conformity with postoperative histopathology (HP), calculating their sensitivity and specificity. The question was which histopathological types of breast cancer were more frequently characterized by multifocality–multicentrality in comparable techniques as regards the general number of HP-identified cancers. The analysis involved the frequency of post-CESM changes in the extent of planned surgeries. In the present study, MG revealed 48 (4.80%) while CESM 170 (17.02%) MFMCC lesions, subsequently confirmed in HP. MG had MFMCC detecting sensitivity of 38.51%, specificity 99.01%, PPV (positive predictive value) 85.71%, and NPV (negative predictive value) 84.52%. The respective values for CESM were 87.63%, 94.90%, 80.57% and 96.95%. Moreover, no statistically significant differences were found between lobular and NST cancers (27.78% vs. 21.24%) regarding MFMCC. A treatment change was required by 20.00% of the patients from breast-conserving to mastectomy, upon visualizing MFMCC in CESM. In conclusion, mammography offers insufficient diagnostic sensitivity for detecting additional cancer foci. The high diagnostic sensitivity of CESM effectively assesses breast cancer multifocality/multicentrality and significantly changes the extent of planned surgeries. The multifocality/multicentrality concerned carcinoma, lobular and invasive carcinoma of no special type (NST) cancers with similar incidence rates, which requires further confirmation.

Ejemplares similares