CONTRAST-ENHANCED MAMMOGRAPHY AS THE NEW STANDARD IN BREAST HEALTH CARE
Abstract
Contrast-enhanced mammography (CEM) has become a ubiquitous method in breast diagnostics over the last few decades, especially in recent years. There is an increasing body of strong evidence regarding the high diagnostic efficiency and sensitivity of CEM in detecting breast cancer. There is more and more evidence about the high diagnostic effectiveness and sensitivity of CEM in detecting breast cancer. Also, new research has shown similarity in the efficiency and sensitivity of CEM compared to magnetic resonance, with fewer cases of false positive results. As the application of CEM expands from potential use in screening for women with dense breast tissue to the staging of known breast malignancy, it becomes increasingly important to become well-versed in this method and its implementation. This review article will perceive the importance of CEM both for screening and in the diagnostic procedure, with a special emphasis placed on the advantages and disadvantages compared to ultrasound, standard mammography and MRI.
References
Patel BK, Lobbes MBI, Lewin J. Contrast Enhanced Spectral Mammography: A Review.Semin Ultrasound CT MR 2018;39(1):70–79. doi.org/10.1053/j.sult.2017.08.005
Funke M. Diagnostic Imaging of Breast Cancer: An Update. Radiologe. 2016;56:921–938. doi: 10.1007/s00117-016-0134-6
Luczynska E, Piegza T, Szpor J, Heinze S, Popiela T, Kargol J, et al. Contrast-Enhanced Mammography (CEM) Capability to Distinguish Molecular Breast Cancer Subtypes. Biomedicines. 2022;10(10):2384. doi: 10.3390/biomedicines10102384
Sung H, Ferlay J, Siegel R.L, Laversanne M, Soerjomataram I, Jemal A, et al.. Global Cancer Statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN Estimates of Incidence and Mortality Worldwide for 36 Cancers in 185 Countries. CA Cancer J. Clin. 2021;71:209–249. doi: 10.3322/caac.21660
Grigoryants NF, Sass S, Alexander J. Novel Technologies in Breast Imaging: A Scoping Review. Cureus. 2023;15(8):e44061. doi: 10.7759/cureus.44061
Steyerova P, Burgetova A. Current imaging techniques and impact on diagnosis and survival —a narrative review. Annals of Breast Sur. 2022; 6: 25. doi: 10.21037/abs-21-2
Dibden A, Offman J, Duffy SW, Gabe R. Worldwide Review and Meta-Analysis of Cohort Studies Measuring the Effect of Mammography Screening Programmes on Incidence-Based Breast Cancer Mortality. Cancers (Basel). 2020; 12(4):976. doi: 10.3390/cancers12040976
Coffey K, Jochelson M. Contrast-enhanced mammography in breast cancer screening. European Journal of Radiology. 2022; 156: 110513. doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2022.110513
Yang M.L, Bhimani C, Roth, R. et al. Contrast enhanced mammography: focus on frequently encountered benign and malignant diagnoses. Cancer Imaging. 2023; 10: 23. doi.org/10.1186/s40644-023-00526-1
Bernardi D, Vatteroni G, Acquaviva A, Valentini M, Sabatino V, Bolengo I. et al. Contrast-enhanced mammography versus MRI in the evaluation of neoadjuvant therapy response in patients with breast cancer: a prospective study. American Journal of Roentgenology, 219(6), 884-894. doi.org/10.2214/AJR.22.27756
Ainakulova A. S, Zholdybay Z. Z, Kaidarova D. R, Inozemtceva N.I, Gabdullina M.O, Zhakenova Z. K. et al. Contrast-enhanced spectral mammography without and with a delayed image for diagnosing malignancy among mass lesions in dense breast. Contemporary Oncology/Współczesna Onkologia. 2021; 25(1): 17-22. doi.org/10.5114/wo.2021.105030
Ackerman LV, Watt AC, Shetty P, Flynn MJ, Burke M, Kambouris A, et al. Breast lesions examined by digital angiography. Work in progress. Radiology 1985;155:65–8. doi.org/10.1097/00004424-198708000-00017
Jong RA, Yaffe MJ, Skarpathiotakis M, Shumak RS, Danjoux NM, Gunesekara A,et al. Contrast-enhanced digital mammography: initial clinical experience. Radiology 2003;228:842–50. doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2283020961
Diekmann F, Freyer M, Diekmann S, Fallenberg EM, Fischer T, Bick U, et al. Evaluation of contrast-enhanced digital mammography. Eur J Radiol. 2011; 78:112–21. doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2009.10.002
Zanardo M, Cozzi A, Trimboli RM, Labaj O, Monti CB, Schiaffino S, et al.. Technique, protocols and adverse reactions for contrast-enhanced spectral mammography (CESM): a systematic review. Insights Imaging 2019; 10: 76. doi.org/10.1186/s13244
Neeter L. M, Raat H. P. J, Alcantara R, Robbe Q, Smidt M. L, Wildberger J. E. et al. Contrast-enhanced mammography: what the radiologist needs to know. BJR| Open. 2021; 3(1), 20210034.doi.org/10.1259/bjro.20210034
Jochelson MS, Lobbes MBI. Contrast-Enhanced mammography: state of the art. Radiology 2021; 299: 36–48. doi: https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2021201948
Sickles E.A, D’Orsi C, Bassett L, Appleton C, Berg W, Burnside E. "Acr bi-rads® mammography." ACR BI-RADS® atlas, breast imaging reporting and data system 5 (2013): 2013.
Amir T, Hogan M , Jacobs S, Sevilimedu V, Sung J, Jochelson M.Comparison of False-Positive Versus True-Positive Findings on Contrast-Enhanced Digital Mammography. American Journal of Roentgenology. 2021; 218 (5):24. https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.21.26847
James J. Contrast-enhanced spectral mammography (CESM)-guided breast biopsy as an alternative to MRI-guided biopsy. Br J Radiol. 2022;95(1132):20211287. doi: 10.1259/bjr.20211287
Hogan MP, Amir T, Sevilimedu V, Sung J, Morris EA, Jochelson MS. Contrast-Enhanced Digital Mammography Screening for Intermediate-Risk Women With a History of Lobular Neoplasia. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2021;216(6):1486-1491. doi: 10.2214/AJR.20.23480
Jochelson MS, Pinker K, Dershaw DD, Hughes M, Gibbons GF, Rahbar K. et al. Comparison of screening CEDM and MRI for women at increased risk for breast cancer:A pilot study.Eur J Radiol.2017;97:37-43. doi: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2017.10.001
Klang E, Krosser A, Amitai MM, Sorin V, Halshtok Neiman O, Shalmon A, et al. Utility of routine use of breast ultrasound following contrast-enhanced spectral mammography. Clin Radiol. 2018;73(10):908.e11-908.e16. doi: 10.1016/j.crad.2018.05.031
Phillips J, Miller MM, Mehta TS, Fein-Zachary V, Nathanson A, Hori W. et al. Contrast-enhanced spectral mammography (CESM) versus MRI in the high-risk screening setting: patient preferences and attitudes. Clin Imaging. 2017;42:193-197. doi: 10.1016/j.clinimag.2016.12.011