These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Interpretation of digital breast tomosynthesis: preliminary study on comparison with picture archiving and communication system (PACS) and dedicated workstation.
    Author: Kim YS, Chang JM, Yi A, Shin SU, Lee ME, Kim WH, Cho N, Moon WK.
    Journal: Br J Radiol; 2017 Aug; 90(1077):20170182. PubMed ID: 28707529.
    Abstract:
    OBJECTIVE: To compare the diagnostic accuracy and efficiency in the interpretation of digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) images using a picture archiving and communication system (PACS) and a dedicated workstation. METHODS: 97 DBT images obtained for screening or diagnostic purposes were stored in both a workstation and a PACS and evaluated in combination with digital mammography by three independent radiologists retrospectively. Breast Imaging-Reporting and Data System final assessments and likelihood of malignancy (%) were assigned and the interpretation time when using the workstation and PACS was recorded. Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis, sensitivities and specificities were compared with histopathological examination and follow-up data as a reference standard. RESULTS: Area under the receiver operating characteristic curve values for cancer detection (0.839 vs 0.815, p = 0.6375) and sensitivity (81.8% vs 75.8%, p = 0.2188) showed no statistically significant differences between the workstation and PACS. However, specificity was significantly higher when analysing on the workstation than when using PACS (83.7% vs 76.9%, p = 0.009). When evaluating DBT images using PACS, only one case was deemed necessary to be reanalysed using the workstation. The mean time to interpret DBT images on PACS (1.68 min/case) was significantly longer than that to interpret on the workstation (1.35 min/case) (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: Interpretation of DBT images using PACS showed comparable diagnostic performance to a dedicated workstation, even though it required a longer reading time. Advances in knowledge: Interpretation of DBT images using PACS is an alternative to evaluate the images when a dedicated workstation is not available.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]