↓ Skip to main content

Preclinical study of diagnostic performances of contrast-enhanced spectral mammography versus MRI for breast diseases in China

Overview of attention for article published in SpringerPlus, June 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
27 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
48 Mendeley
Title
Preclinical study of diagnostic performances of contrast-enhanced spectral mammography versus MRI for breast diseases in China
Published in
SpringerPlus, June 2016
DOI 10.1186/s40064-016-2385-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Qingguo Wang, Kangan Li, Lihui Wang, Jianbing Zhang, Zhiguo Zhou, Yan Feng

Abstract

To evaluate diagnostic performances of CESM for breast diseases with comparison to breast MRI in China. Sixty-eight patients with 77 breast lesions underwent MR and CESM. Two radiologists interpreted either MRI or CESM images, separately and independently. BI-RADS 1-3 and BI-RADS 4-5 were classified into the suspicious benign and suspicious malignant groups. Diagnostic accuracy parameters were calculated. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were constructed for the two modalities. The agreement and correlation between maximum lesion diameter based on CESM and MRI, or CESM and pathology were analyzed. Diagnostic accuracy parameters for CESM were sensitivity 95.8 %, specificity 65.5 %, PPV 82.1 %, NPV 90.5 % and accuracy 84.4 %. The diagnostic accuracy parameters for breast MRI were sensitivity 93.8 %, specificity 82.8 %, PPV 88.2 %, NPV 92.3 %and accuracy 89.6 %. Area under the curve (AUC) of ROC was 0.96 for breast MRI and 0.88 for CESM. The Bland-Altman plots showed a mean difference of 0.7 mm with 95 % limits of agreement of 11.4 mm in tumor diameter measured using CESM and breast MRI. The differences of size measurement between CESM and breast MRI were significant, whereas no difference was observed between CESM and pathology as well as between breast MRI and pathology. The better correlation with pathological results was found in CESM than breast MRI. Our study demonstrates that CESM possesses better diagnostic performances than breast MRI in terms of diagnostic sensitivity and lesion size assessment. And CESM is a good alternative method of screening breast cancer in high-risk people.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 48 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 48 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 8 17%
Researcher 7 15%
Other 4 8%
Student > Postgraduate 4 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 8%
Other 6 13%
Unknown 15 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 17 35%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 10%
Social Sciences 2 4%
Physics and Astronomy 2 4%
Unspecified 1 2%
Other 2 4%
Unknown 19 40%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 08 July 2016.
All research outputs
#22,756,649
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from SpringerPlus
#1,499
of 1,875 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#324,318
of 368,599 outputs
Outputs of similar age from SpringerPlus
#204
of 253 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,875 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.1. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 368,599 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 253 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.