4.6 Article

A Case Study in Breast Density Evaluation Using Bioimpedance Measurements

期刊

SENSORS
卷 22, 期 7, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/s22072747

关键词

breast density; bioimpedance; breast cancer risk; in vivo evaluation

资金

  1. National Council of Science and Technology (CONACyT) [436304]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study explores a bioimpedance-based method, ATC, to analyze breast density and potentially serve as an objective tool to evaluate breast cancer risk. The results indicate a correlation between ATC variation and breast density, highlighting the potential of this approach as a complementary tool to mammography for precise and objective breast density evaluation.
(1) Background: As breast cancer studies suggest, a high percentage of breast density (PBD) may be related to breast cancer incidence. Although PBD screening is one of the strongest predictors of breast cancer risk, X-ray-based mammography evaluation is subjective. Therefore, new objective PBD measuring techniques are of interest. A case study analyzing the PBD of thirteen female participants using a bioimpedance-based method, the anomalies tracking circle (ATC), is described in this paper. (2) Methods: In the first stage, the breast bioimpedance of each participant was measured. Then, the participant breast density was determined by applying a mammogram just after the breast bioimpedance measurement stage. In the third stage, the ATC algorithm was applied to the measured bioimpedance data for each participant, and a results analysis was done. (3) Results: An ATC variation according to the breast density was observed from the obtained data, this allowed the use of classification techniques to determine the PBD. (4) Conclusions: The described breast density method is a promising approach that might be applied as an auxiliary tool to the mammography in order to obtain precise and objective results for evaluation of breast density and with that determine potential breast cancer risk.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据