Cancers (Nov 2020)

Contrast-Enhanced Mammography for Screening Women after Breast Conserving Surgery

  • Jill Gluskin,
  • Carolina Rossi Saccarelli,
  • Daly Avendano,
  • Maria Adele Marino,
  • Almir G. V. Bitencourt,
  • Melissa Pilewskie,
  • Varadan Sevilimedu,
  • Janice S. Sung,
  • Katja Pinker,
  • Maxine S. Jochelson

DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers12123495
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 12, no. 12
p. 3495

Abstract

Read online

To investigate the value of contrast-enhanced mammography (CEM) compared to full-field digital mammography (FFDM) in screening breast cancer patients after breast-conserving surgery (BCS), this Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act-compliant, institutional review board-approved retrospective, single-institution study included 971 CEM exams in 541 asymptomatic patients treated with BCS who underwent screening CEM between January 2013 and November 2018. Histopathology, or at least a one-year follow-up, was used as the standard of reference. Twenty-one of 541 patients (3.9%) were diagnosed with ipsi- or contralateral breast cancer: six (28.6%) cancers were seen with low-energy images (equivalent to FFDM), an additional nine (42.9%) cancers were detected only on iodine (contrast-enhanced) images, and six interval cancers were identified within 365 days of a negative screening CEM. Of the 10 ipsilateral cancers detected on CEM, four were detected on low-energy images (40%). Of the five contralateral cancers detected on CEM, two were detected on low-energy images (40%). Overall, the cancer detection rate (CDR) for CEM was 15.4/1000 (15/971), and the positive predictive value (PPV3) of the biopsies performed was 42.9% (15/35). For findings seen on low-energy images, with or without contrast, the CDR was 6.2/1000 (6/971), and the PPV3 of the biopsies performed was 37.5% (6/16). In the post-BCS screening setting, CEM has a higher CDR than FFDM.

Keywords