Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 4, 2026

Detection of Architectural Distortion in Prior Mammograms via Analysis of Oriented Patterns
Published on: August 30, 2013
The accuracy of titanium contrast-enhanced mammography: a retrospective multicentric study
Ignacio González-Huebra1, Patricia Malmierca1, Arlette Elizalde1
1Department of Radiology, Clínica Universidad de Navarra, Pamplona, Navarra, Spain.
Background:
Recently, a new mammography system to perform contrast-enhanced mammography has become available in the market. For the high-energy acquisition, it uses a titanium filter instead of a copper one, reducing the tube load while maintaining image quality.
Purpose:
To retrospectively evaluate the accuracy of contrast-enhanced mammography with a titanium filter (TiCEM) in three readers with different grades of experience.
Material And Methods:
IRB-approved retrospective multicentric lesion by lesion study with 200 lesions, all of them initially classified as BI-RADS categories 0/3/4/5 on mammography and/or ultrasound and with pathological confirmation, in 135 patients. Three readers with different levels of experience (expert, resident, intermediate) blinded to the final diagnosis, retrospectively evaluated the low-energy (LE) images and the combination of LE and recombined (subtracted) images and classified the lesions according to the BI-RADS categories. Reader 1 also categorized the breast density. ROC curves were performed for each reader.
Results:
Out of the 200 lesions, 82 were benign and 118 malignant (20 DCIS, 10 ILC, 88 IDC). The AUCs of LE versus TiCEM for were: Reader 1: 0.7 vs. 0.88, P < 0.001; Reader 2: 0.63 vs. 0.83, P < 0.001; and Reader 3: 0.63 vs. 0.84, P < 0.001. For the three readers, the AUCs of LE versus TiCEM were significantly superior in both dense and non-dense breasts (P < 0.001). Comparing the AUC of LE for Reader 1 (expert) versus the AUC of TiCEM for Reader 2 (resident) there were significant differences (0.7 vs. 0.83, P < 0.001).
Conclusion:
The accuracy of TiCEM was significantly better for all the readers, in both dense and non-dense breasts. The accuracy of a resident reading a TiCEM study was better than the accuracy of an expert radiologist reading LE images.
More Related Videos
15:48Tracking the Mammary Architectural Features and Detecting Breast Cancer with Magnetic Resonance Diffusion Tensor Imaging
Published on: December 15, 2014
08:19Protocol for the Evaluation of MRI Artifacts Caused by Metal Implants to Assess the Suitability of Implants and the Vulnerability of Pulse Sequences
Published on: May 17, 2018