Journal of the American College of Radiology : JACR · 2026
Comparison of Supplemental Breast Cancer Screening Outcomes for Automated Versus Handheld Ultrasound.
СтатьяСравнительное исследованиеНаблюдательное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Rauscher Garth H, Alsheik Nila, Eavey Joanna, Ichikawa Laura, Perry Hannah, Lowry Kathryn, Kerlikowske Karla, Sprague Brian L
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: Supplemental ultrasound as an adjuvant to screening mammography has expanded due in part to the implementation of state laws mandating breast density notification. Automated breast ultrasound (ABUS) is an emerging modality that can potentially improve reproducibility and reduce operator dependency associated with handheld ultrasound (HHUS) in appropriately selected patients. The goals of these analyses were to compare the performance of ABUS versus HHUS for women with dense breasts.
METHODS: We used observational data from 21,110 HHUS and 4,218 ABUS examinations among women with dense breasts conducted during 2017-2020 at 27 radiology facilities within three Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium registries. Differences in abnormal interpretation rate, short-interval follow-up recommendation rate, biopsy recommendation rate, and cancer detection rate, as well as the false-positive initial assessment rate, false-positive biopsy recommendation rate, and positive predictive values for initial assessment and biopsy recommendation were compared.
RESULTS: ABUS was associated with a lower abnormal interpretation rate (14.9% versus 19.2%, P < .0001), a lower short-interval follow-up recommendation rate (3.0% versus 14.6%, P < .0001), and a lower false-positive initial assessment rate (14.6 versus 19.1; P < .0001) compared with HHUS. There were no apparent differences in biopsy recommendation or false-positive biopsy recommendation rate, positive predictive value, or cancer detection rate for ABUS versus HHUS.
CONCLUSION: Compared with HHUS, ABUS was associated with fewer abnormal interpretations and fewer short-interval follow-up recommendations and with a similar cancer detection rate. ABUS should be considered by health care providers as an effective alternative to handheld ultrasound for screening of certain women with dense breasts.
METHODS: We used observational data from 21,110 HHUS and 4,218 ABUS examinations among women with dense breasts conducted during 2017-2020 at 27 radiology facilities within three Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium registries. Differences in abnormal interpretation rate, short-interval follow-up recommendation rate, biopsy recommendation rate, and cancer detection rate, as well as the false-positive initial assessment rate, false-positive biopsy recommendation rate, and positive predictive values for initial assessment and biopsy recommendation were compared.
RESULTS: ABUS was associated with a lower abnormal interpretation rate (14.9% versus 19.2%, P < .0001), a lower short-interval follow-up recommendation rate (3.0% versus 14.6%, P < .0001), and a lower false-positive initial assessment rate (14.6 versus 19.1; P < .0001) compared with HHUS. There were no apparent differences in biopsy recommendation or false-positive biopsy recommendation rate, positive predictive value, or cancer detection rate for ABUS versus HHUS.
CONCLUSION: Compared with HHUS, ABUS was associated with fewer abnormal interpretations and fewer short-interval follow-up recommendations and with a similar cancer detection rate. ABUS should be considered by health care providers as an effective alternative to handheld ultrasound for screening of certain women with dense breasts.