Contrast-Enhanced Mammography versus Breast Magnetic Resonance Imaging: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Background: Contrast-enhanced mammography (CEM) and contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (CE-MRI) are commonly used in the screening of breast cancer. The present systematic review aimed to summarize, critically analyse, and meta-analyse the available evidence regarding the role of CE-MRI an...
| Main Authors: | , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
MDPI AG
2022-08-01
|
| Series: | Diagnostics |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://www.mdpi.com/2075-4418/12/8/1890 |
| _version_ | 1797410704977821696 |
|---|---|
| author | Fabrizia Gelardi Elisa Maria Ragaini Martina Sollini Daniela Bernardi Arturo Chiti |
| author_facet | Fabrizia Gelardi Elisa Maria Ragaini Martina Sollini Daniela Bernardi Arturo Chiti |
| author_sort | Fabrizia Gelardi |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Background: Contrast-enhanced mammography (CEM) and contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (CE-MRI) are commonly used in the screening of breast cancer. The present systematic review aimed to summarize, critically analyse, and meta-analyse the available evidence regarding the role of CE-MRI and CEM in the early detection, diagnosis, and preoperative assessment of breast cancer. Methods: The search was performed on PubMed, Google Scholar, and Web of Science on 28 July 2021 using the following terms “breast cancer”, “preoperative staging”, “contrast-enhanced mammography”, “contrast-enhanced spectral mammography”, “contrast enhanced digital mammography”, “contrast-enhanced breast magnetic resonance imaging” “CEM”, “CESM”, “CEDM”, and “CE-MRI”. We selected only those papers comparing the clinical efficacy of CEM and CE-MRI. The study quality was assessed using the QUADAS-2 criteria. The pooled sensitivities and specificity of CEM and CE-MRI were computed using a random-effects model directly from the STATA “metaprop” command. The between-study statistical heterogeneity was tested (I<sup>2</sup>-statistics). Results: Nineteen studies were selected for this systematic review. Fifteen studies (1315 patients) were included in the metanalysis. Both CEM and CE-MRI detect breast lesions with a high sensitivity, without a significant difference in performance (97% and 96%, respectively). Conclusions: Our findings confirm the potential of CEM as a supplemental screening imaging modality, even for intermediate-risk women, including females with dense breasts and a history of breast cancer. |
| first_indexed | 2024-03-09T04:34:15Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-bd9162be2a20492981ce56b72b9d1b4d |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2075-4418 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-03-09T04:34:15Z |
| publishDate | 2022-08-01 |
| publisher | MDPI AG |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Diagnostics |
| spelling | doaj.art-bd9162be2a20492981ce56b72b9d1b4d2023-12-03T13:31:45ZengMDPI AGDiagnostics2075-44182022-08-01128189010.3390/diagnostics12081890Contrast-Enhanced Mammography versus Breast Magnetic Resonance Imaging: A Systematic Review and Meta-AnalysisFabrizia Gelardi0Elisa Maria Ragaini1Martina Sollini2Daniela Bernardi3Arturo Chiti4Department of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, Via Rita Levi Montalcini 4, 20072 Pieve Emanuele, ItalyDepartment of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, Via Rita Levi Montalcini 4, 20072 Pieve Emanuele, ItalyDepartment of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, Via Rita Levi Montalcini 4, 20072 Pieve Emanuele, ItalyDepartment of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, Via Rita Levi Montalcini 4, 20072 Pieve Emanuele, ItalyDepartment of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, Via Rita Levi Montalcini 4, 20072 Pieve Emanuele, ItalyBackground: Contrast-enhanced mammography (CEM) and contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (CE-MRI) are commonly used in the screening of breast cancer. The present systematic review aimed to summarize, critically analyse, and meta-analyse the available evidence regarding the role of CE-MRI and CEM in the early detection, diagnosis, and preoperative assessment of breast cancer. Methods: The search was performed on PubMed, Google Scholar, and Web of Science on 28 July 2021 using the following terms “breast cancer”, “preoperative staging”, “contrast-enhanced mammography”, “contrast-enhanced spectral mammography”, “contrast enhanced digital mammography”, “contrast-enhanced breast magnetic resonance imaging” “CEM”, “CESM”, “CEDM”, and “CE-MRI”. We selected only those papers comparing the clinical efficacy of CEM and CE-MRI. The study quality was assessed using the QUADAS-2 criteria. The pooled sensitivities and specificity of CEM and CE-MRI were computed using a random-effects model directly from the STATA “metaprop” command. The between-study statistical heterogeneity was tested (I<sup>2</sup>-statistics). Results: Nineteen studies were selected for this systematic review. Fifteen studies (1315 patients) were included in the metanalysis. Both CEM and CE-MRI detect breast lesions with a high sensitivity, without a significant difference in performance (97% and 96%, respectively). Conclusions: Our findings confirm the potential of CEM as a supplemental screening imaging modality, even for intermediate-risk women, including females with dense breasts and a history of breast cancer.https://www.mdpi.com/2075-4418/12/8/1890breast cancercontrast-enhanced mammographycontrast-enhanced breast magnetic resonance imagingscreening |
| spellingShingle | Fabrizia Gelardi Elisa Maria Ragaini Martina Sollini Daniela Bernardi Arturo Chiti Contrast-Enhanced Mammography versus Breast Magnetic Resonance Imaging: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Diagnostics breast cancer contrast-enhanced mammography contrast-enhanced breast magnetic resonance imaging screening |
| title | Contrast-Enhanced Mammography versus Breast Magnetic Resonance Imaging: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis |
| title_full | Contrast-Enhanced Mammography versus Breast Magnetic Resonance Imaging: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis |
| title_fullStr | Contrast-Enhanced Mammography versus Breast Magnetic Resonance Imaging: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis |
| title_full_unstemmed | Contrast-Enhanced Mammography versus Breast Magnetic Resonance Imaging: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis |
| title_short | Contrast-Enhanced Mammography versus Breast Magnetic Resonance Imaging: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis |
| title_sort | contrast enhanced mammography versus breast magnetic resonance imaging a systematic review and meta analysis |
| topic | breast cancer contrast-enhanced mammography contrast-enhanced breast magnetic resonance imaging screening |
| url | https://www.mdpi.com/2075-4418/12/8/1890 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT fabriziagelardi contrastenhancedmammographyversusbreastmagneticresonanceimagingasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT elisamariaragaini contrastenhancedmammographyversusbreastmagneticresonanceimagingasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT martinasollini contrastenhancedmammographyversusbreastmagneticresonanceimagingasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT danielabernardi contrastenhancedmammographyversusbreastmagneticresonanceimagingasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT arturochiti contrastenhancedmammographyversusbreastmagneticresonanceimagingasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis |