A comparison of image interpretation times in full field digital mammography and digital breast tomosynthesis

Digital Breast Tomosynthesis (DBT) provides three-dimensional images of the breast that enable radiologists to discern whether densities are due to overlapping structures or lesions. To aid assessment of the cost-effectiveness of DBT for screening, we have compared the time taken to interpret DBT images and the corresponding two-dimensional Full Field Digital Mammography (FFDM) images. Four Consultant Radiologists experienced in reading FFDM images (4 years 8 months to 8 years) with training in DBT interpretation but more limited experience (137-407 cases in the past 6 months) were timed reading between 24 and 32 two view FFDM and DBT cases. The images were of women recalled from screening for further assessment and women under surveillance because of a family history of breast cancer. FFDM images were read before DBT, according to local practice. The median time for readers to interpret FFDM images was 17.0 seconds, with an interquartile range of 12.3-23.6 seconds. For DBT, the median time was 66.0 seconds, and the interquartile range was 51.1-80.5 seconds. The difference was statistically significant (p<0.001). Reading times were significantly longer in family history clinics (p<0.01). Although it took approximately four times as long to interpret DBT than FFDM images, the cases were more complex than would be expected for routine screening, and with higher mammographic density. The readers were relatively inexperienced in DBT interpretation and may increase their speed over time. The difference in times between clinics may be due to increased throughput at assessment, or decreased density.

[1]  Rachel F Brem,et al.  Full-field digital mammographic interpretation with prior analog versus prior digitized analog mammography: time for interpretation. , 2011, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[2]  R. Hendrick,et al.  Digital and screen-film mammography: comparison of image acquisition and interpretation times. , 2006, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[3]  Robert M. Nishikawa,et al.  A new approach to digital breast tomosynthesis for breast cancer screening , 2007, SPIE Medical Imaging.

[4]  D. Kopans,et al.  Digital tomosynthesis in breast imaging. , 1997, Radiology.

[5]  Mary Wilson,et al.  Assessing Individual Breast Cancer Risk within the U.K. National Health Service Breast Screening Program: A New Paradigm for Cancer Prevention , 2012, Cancer Prevention Research.

[6]  David Gur,et al.  Digital breast tomosynthesis: observer performance study. , 2009, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[7]  Nico Karssemeijer,et al.  Effect of recall rate on earlier screen detection of breast cancers based on the Dutch performance indicators. , 2005, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[8]  R. L. Birdwell Digital Breast Tomosynthesis: A Pilot Observer Study , 2009 .

[9]  J Isola,et al.  The visibility of cancer on earlier mammograms in a population-based screening programme. , 1999, European journal of cancer.

[10]  Ellen Warner,et al.  Surveillance of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers with magnetic resonance imaging, ultrasound, mammography, and clinical breast examination , 2004, JAMA.

[11]  David Gur,et al.  Time to diagnosis and performance levels during repeat interpretations of digital breast tomosynthesis: preliminary observations. , 2010, Academic radiology.

[12]  E. Denton,et al.  Can radiographers read screening mammograms? , 2003, Clinical radiology.

[13]  C. Waldherr,et al.  Value of one-view breast tomosynthesis versus two-view mammography in diagnostic workup of women with clinical signs and symptoms and in women recalled from screening. , 2013, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[14]  Eugenio Paci,et al.  A pooled analysis of interval cancer rates in six European countries , 2010, European journal of cancer prevention : the official journal of the European Cancer Prevention Organisation.

[15]  Jihong Wang,et al.  Why Does It Take Longer to Read Digital Than Film-Screen Screening Mammograms? A Partial Explanation , 2010, Journal of Digital Imaging.