4.7 Review

Clinical usefulness of breast-specific gamma imaging as an adjunct modality to mammography for diagnosis of breast cancer: a systemic review and meta-analysis

Journal

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00259-012-2279-5

Keywords

Breast neoplasm; Breast-specific gamma imaging; Mammography; Meta-analysis

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The purpose of this study was to assess the diagnostic performance of breast-specific gamma imaging (BSGI) as an adjunct modality to mammography for detecting breast cancer. Comprehensive searches of MEDLINE (1984 to August 2012) and EMBASE (1994 to August 2012) were performed. A summary receiver operating characteristic curve (SROC) was constructed to summarize the overall test performance of BSGI. The sensitivities for detecting subcentimetre cancer and ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) were pooled. The potential of BSGI to complement mammography was also evaluated by identifying mammography-occult breast cancer. Analysis of the studies revealed that the overall validity estimates of BSGI in detecting breast cancer were as follows: sensitivity 95 % (95 % CI 93-96 %), specificity 80 % (95 % CI 78-82 %), positive likelihood ratio 4.63 (95 % CI 3.13-6.85), negative likelihood ratio 0.08 (95 % CI 0.05-0.14), and diagnostic odds ratio 56.67 (95 % CI 26.68-120.34). The area under the SROC was 0.9552 and the Q* point was 0.8977. The pooled sensitivities for detecting subcentimetre cancer and DCIS were 84 % (95 % CI 80-88 %) and 88 % (95 % CI 81-92 %), respectively. Among patients with normal mammography, 4 % were diagnosed with breast cancer by BSGI, and among those with mammography suggestive of malignancy or new biopsy-proven breast cancer, 6 % were diagnosed with additional cancers in the breast by BSGI. BSGI had a high diagnostic performance as an excellent adjunct modality to mammography for detecting breast cancer. The ability to identify subcentimetre cancer and DCIS was also high.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available