Mammographic Surveillance After Breast-Conserving Therapy: Impact of Digital Breast Tomosynthesis and Artificial Intelligence-Based Computer-Aided Detection

Jung Hyun Yoon, Eun Kyung Kim, Ga Ram Kim, Kyunghwa Han, Hee Jung Moon

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

5 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

BACKGROUND. Postoperative mammograms present interpretive challenges due to postoperative distortion and hematomas. The application of digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) and artificial intelligence-based computer-aided detection (AI-CAD) after breast-conserving therapy (BCT) has not been widely investigated. OBJECTIVE. The purpose of our study was to assess the impact of additional DBT or AI-CAD on recall rate and diagnostic performance in women undergoing mammographic surveillance after BCT. METHODS. This retrospective study included 314 women (mean age, 53.3 ± 10.6 [SD] years; four with bilateral breast cancer) who underwent BCT followed by DBT (mean interval from surgery to DBT, 15.2 ± 15.4 months). Three breast radiologists independently reviewed images in three sessions: Digital mammography (DM), DM with DBT (DM plus DBT), and DM with AI-CAD (DM plus AI-CAD). Recall rates and diagnostic performance were compared between DM, DM plus DBT, and DM plus AI-CAD using the readers' mean results. RESULTS. Of the 314 women, six breast recurrences (three ipsilateral and three contralateral) had developed at the time of surveillance mammography. The ipsilateral breast recall rate was lower for DM plus AI-CAD (1.9%) than for DM (11.2%) or DM plus DBT (4.1%) (p < .001). The contralateral breast recall rate was significantly lower for DM plus AI-CAD (1.5%, p < .001) than for DM (6.6%) but for not DM plus DBT (2.7%, p = .08). In the ipsilateral breast, accuracy was higher for DM plus AI-CAD (97.0%) than for DM (88.5%) or DM plus DBT (94.8%) (p < .05); specificity was higher for DM plus AI-CAD (98.3%) than for DM (89.3%) or DM plus DBT (96.1%) (p < .05); sensitivity was significantly lower for DM plus AI-CAD (22.2%) than for DM (66.7%, p = .03) but not DM plus DBT (22.2%, p < .99). In the contralateral breast, accuracy was significantly higher for DM plus AI-CAD (97.1%) than for DM (92.5%, p < .001) but not DM plus DBT (96.1%, p = .25); specificity was significantly higher for DM plus AI-CAD (98.6%) than for DM (93.7%, p < .001) but not DM plus DBT (97.5%) (p = .09); sensitivity was not different between DM (33.3%), DM plus DBT (22.2%), and DM plus AI-CAD (11.1%) (p < .05). CONCLUSION. After BCT, adjunct DBT or AI-CAD reduced recall rates and improved accuracy in the ipsilateral and contralateral breasts compared with DM. In the ipsilateral breast, the addition of AI-CAD resulted in a lower recall rate and higher accuracy than the addition of DBT. CLINICAL IMPACT. AI-CAD may help address the challenges of interpreting post- BCT surveillance mammograms.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)42-51
Number of pages10
JournalAmerican Journal of Roentgenology
Volume218
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2022 Jan

Bibliographical note

Publisher Copyright:
© 2022 American Roentgen Ray Society. All rights reserved.

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Mammographic Surveillance After Breast-Conserving Therapy: Impact of Digital Breast Tomosynthesis and Artificial Intelligence-Based Computer-Aided Detection'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this