Avaliação comparativa entre a mamografia digital e mamografia em filme

revisão sistemática e metanálise

Autores

  • Wagner Iared Centro Cochrane do Brasil, Universidade Federal de São Paulo
  • David Carlos Shigueoka Centro Cochrane do Brasil, Universidade Federal de São Paulo
  • Maria Regina Torloni Centro Cochrane do Brasil, Universidade Federal de São Paulo
  • Fernanda Garozzo Velloni Centro Cochrane do Brasil, Universidade Federal de São Paulo
  • Sérgio Aron Ajzen Centro Cochrane do Brasil, Universidade Federal de São Paulo
  • Álvaro Nagib Atallah Centro Cochrane do Brasil, Universidade Federal de São Paulo
  • Orsine Valente Centro Cochrane do Brasil, Universidade Federal de São Paulo

Palavras-chave:

Mamografia, Neoplasias da mama, Programas de rastreamento, Revisão [tipo de publicação], Metanálise [tipo de publicação]

Resumo

CONTEXTO E OBJETIVO: A mamografia é o melhor método para rastreamento do câncer de mama, capaz de reduzir a mortalidade. Os estudos que avaliam seu impacto clínico foram realizados com mamografia em filme. A mamografia digital é proposta para substituir a mamografia em filme com benefícios inerentes à tecnologia digital. O objetivo do estudo foi comparar o desempenho da mamografia digital com a mamografia em filme. TIPO DE ESTUDO: Revisão sistemática e metanálise. MÉTODO: Foram pesquisadas as bases Medline, Scopus, Embase e Lilacs, buscando-se por estudos pareados, coortes e ensaios clínicos randomizados comparando a mamografia digital e a mamografia em filme, quanto à taxa de detecção de câncer, de reconvocação e características dos tumores, publicados até 2009. As referências dos estudos incluídos foram verificadas em busca de citações relevantes. RESULTADOS: Foi incluído um total de 11 estudos, somando 190.322 mamografias digitais e 638.348 em filme. A taxa de detecção do câncer pela mamografia digital foi significantemente maior (risco relativo, RR: 1,17 [95% intervalo de confiança, IC = 1,06-1,29 I² = 19%]) do que pela mamografia em filme. A vantagem da mamografia digital parece maior em pacientes entre 50 e 60 anos. Não houve diferenças significantes nas taxas de reconvocação de pacientes e nas características dos tumores encontrados. CONCLUSÃO: A mamografia digital apresenta taxa de detecção de câncer pouco maior que a mamografia em filme. Não há diferenças significantes nas taxas de reconvocação entre a mamografia digital e a em filme. As características dos tumores são semelhantes em pacientes em ambos os métodos.

Downloads

Não há dados estatísticos.

Biografia do Autor

Wagner Iared, Centro Cochrane do Brasil, Universidade Federal de São Paulo

MD, PhD. Affiliated Researcher at the Brazilian Cochrane Center and radiologist in the Department of Diagnostic Imaging, Universidade Federal de São Paulo (Unifesp), São Paulo, Brazil.

David Carlos Shigueoka, Centro Cochrane do Brasil, Universidade Federal de São Paulo

MD, PhD. Professor in the Department of Diagnostic Imaging, Universidade Federal de São Paulo (Unifesp), São Paulo, Brazil.

Maria Regina Torloni, Centro Cochrane do Brasil, Universidade Federal de São Paulo

MD, PhD. Gynecologist. Affiliated researcher at the Brazilian Cochrane Center, Universidade Federal de São Paulo (Unifesp), São Paulo, Brazil.

Fernanda Garozzo Velloni, Centro Cochrane do Brasil, Universidade Federal de São Paulo

MD. Resident in the Department of Diagnostic Imaging, Universidade Federal de São Paulo, Universidade Federal de São Paulo (Unifesp), São Paulo, Brazil.

Sérgio Aron Ajzen, Centro Cochrane do Brasil, Universidade Federal de São Paulo

MD, PhD. Full Professor of the Department of Diagnostic Imaging, Universidade Federal de São Paulo (Unifesp), São Paulo, Brazil.

Álvaro Nagib Atallah, Centro Cochrane do Brasil, Universidade Federal de São Paulo

MD, PhD. Full Professor of the Discipline of Emergency Medicine and EvidenceBased Medicine, Department of Medicine, Universidade Federal de São Paulo (Unifesp), São Paulo, Brazil.

Orsine Valente, Centro Cochrane do Brasil, Universidade Federal de São Paulo

MD, PhD. Professor of the Discipline of Emergency Medicine and EvidenceBased Medicine, Department of Medicine, Universidade Federal de São Paulo (Unifesp), São Paulo, Brazil.

Referências

Parkin DM, Bray F, Ferlay J, Pisani P. Global cancer statistics, 2002. CA Cancer J Clin. 2005;55(2):74-108.

Brasil. Ministério da Saúde. Indicadores e Dados Básicos - Brasil - 2008. IDB-2008. Available from: http://tabnet.datasus.gov.br/cgi/idb2008/ matriz.htm#mort<http://tabnet.datasus.gov.br/cgi/idb2008/matriz. htm. Accessed in 2011 (Mar 10).

Humphrey LL, Helfand M, Chan BK, Woolf SH. Breast cancer screening: a summary of the evidence for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Ann Intern Med. 2002;137(5 Part 1):347-60.

Nyström L, Andersson I, Bjurstam N, et al. Long-term effects of mammography screening: updated overview of the Swedish randomised trials. Lancet. 2002;359(9310):909-19.

Freedman DA, Petitti DB, Robins JM. On the efficacy of screening for breast cancer. Int J Epidemiol. 2004;33(1):43-55.

Gøtzsche PC, Nielsen M. Screening for breast cancer with mammography. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2006;(4):CD001877.

Food and Drug Administration. Radiation-Emitting Products. Digital accreditation. Available from: http://www.fda.gov/Radiation- EmittingProducts/MammographyQualityStandardsActandProgram/ FacilityCertificationandInspection/ucm114148.htm. Accessed in 2011 (Mar 10).

Magalhães LAG, Azevedo ACP, Carvalho ACP. A importância do controle de qualidade de processadoras automáticas [The importance of quality control of automatic processors]. Radiol Bras. 2002;35(6):357-63.

Vedantham S, Karellas A, Suryanarayanan S, et al. Full breast digital mammography with an amorphous silicon-based flat panel detector: physical characteristics of a clinical prototype. Med Phys. 2000;27(3):558-67.

Vedantham S, Karellas A, Suryanarayanan S, D’Orsi CJ, Hendrick RE. Breast imaging using an amorphous silicon-based full-field digital mammographic system: stability of a clinical prototype. J Digit Imaging. 2000;13(4):191-9.

Suryanarayanan S, Karellas A, Vedantham S, et al. Flat-panel digital mammography system: contrast-detail comparison between screen-film radiographs and hard-copy images. Radiology. 2002;225(3):801-7.

Skaane P, Young K, Skjennald A. Population-based mammography screening: comparison of screen-film and full-field digital mammography with soft-copy reading--Oslo I study. Radiology. 2003;229(3):877-84.

Skaane P, Skjennald A. Screen-film mammography versus full-field digital mammography with soft-copy reading: randomized trial in a population-based screening program--the Oslo II Study. Radiology. 2004;232(1):197-204.

Pisano ED, Gatsonis C, Hendrick E, et al. Diagnostic performance of digital versus film mammography for breast-cancer screening. N Engl J Med. 2005;353(17):1773-83.

Cole E, Pisano ED, Brown M, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of Fischer Senoscan Digital Mammography versus screen-film mammography in a diagnostic mammography population. Acad Radiol. 2004;11(8):879- 86.

Pisano ED, Hendrick RE, Yaffe MJ, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of digital versus film mammography: exploratory analysis of selected population subgroups in DMIST. Radiology. 2008;246(2):376-83.

Venta LA, Hendrick RE, Adler YT, et al. Rates and causes of disagreement in interpretation of full-field digital mammography and film-screen mammography in a diagnostic setting. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2001;176(5):1241-8.

Lewin JM, Hendrick RE, D’Orsi CJ, et al. Comparison of full-field digital mammography with screen-film mammography for cancer detection: results of 4,945 paired examinations. Radiology. 2001;218(3):873-80.

Nishikawa RM, Acharyya S, Gatsonis C, et al. Comparison of soft-copy and hard-copy reading for full-field digital mammography. Radiology. 2009;251(1):41-9.

Onishi H, Masuda N, Takechi K, et al. Computed radiography- based mammography with 50-microm pixel size: intra-individual comparison with film-screen mammography for diagnosis of breast cancers. Acad Radiol. 2009;16(7):836-41.

Ranganathan S, Faridah Y, Ng KH. Moving into the digital era: a novel experience with the first full-field digital mammography system in Malaysia. Singapore Med J. 2007;48(9):804-7.

Seo BK, Pisano ED, Kuzmiak CM, et al. The positive predictive value for diagnosis of breast cancer full-field digital mammography versus film-screen mammography in the diagnostic mammographic population. Acad Radiol. 2006;13(10):1229-35.

Skaane P, Balleyguier C, Diekmann F, et al. Breast lesion detection and classification: comparison of screen-film mammography and full-field digital mammography with soft-copy reading--observer performance study. Radiology. 2005;237(1):37-44.

Skaane P, Diekmann F, Balleyguier C, et al. Observer variability in screen-film mammography versus full-field digital mammography with soft-copy reading. Eur Radiol. 2008;18(6):1134-43.

Tosteson AN, Stout NK, Fryback DG, et al. Cost-effectiveness of digital mammography breast cancer screening. Ann Intern Med. 2008;148(1):1-10.

Yamada T, Ishibashi T, Sato A, et al. Comparison of screen-film and full-field digital mammography: image contrast and lesion characterization. Radiat Med. 2003;21(4):166-71.

Yamada T, Saito M, Ishibashi T, et al. Comparison of screen-film and full-field digital mammography in Japanese population-based screening. Radiat Med. 2004;22(6):408-12.

Hendrick RE, Cole EB, Pisano ED, et al. Accuracy of soft-copy digital mammography versus that of screen-film mammography according to digital manufacturer: ACRIN DMIST retrospective multireader study. Radiology. 2008;247(1):38-48.

Skaane P, Hofvind S, Skjennald A. Randomized trial of screen-film versus full-field digital mammography with soft-copy reading in population-based screening program: follow-up and final results of Oslo II study. Radiology. 2007;244(3):708-17.

Lewin JM, D’Orsi CJ, Hendrick RE, et al. Clinical comparison of full-field digital mammography and screen-film mammography for detection of breast cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2002;179(3):671-7.

Skaane P, Skjennald A, Young K, et al. Follow-up and final results of the Oslo I Study comparing screen-film mammography and full-field digital mammography with soft-copy reading. Acta Radiol. 2005;46(7):679-89.

Del Turco MR, Mantellini P, Ciatto S, et al. Full-field digital versus screen-film mammography: comparative accuracy in concurrent screening cohorts. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2007;189(4):860-6.

Heddson B, Rönnow K, Olsson M, Miller D. Digital versus screen-film mammography: a retrospective comparison in a population-based screening program. Eur J Radiol. 2007;64(3):419-25.

Vigeland E, Klaasen H, Klingen TA, Hofvind S, Skaane P. Full-field digital mammography compared to screen film mammography in the prevalent round of a population-based screening programme: the Vestfold County Study. Eur Radiol. 2008;18(1):183-91.

Vinnicombe S, Pinto Pereira SM, McCormack VA, et al. Full-field digital versus screen-film mammography: comparison within the UK breast screening program and systematic review of published data. Radiology. 2009;251(2):347-58.

Vernacchia FS, Pena ZG. Digital mammography: its impact on recall rates and cancer detection rates in a small community-based radiology practice. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2009;193(2):582-5.

Sala M, Comas M, Macià F, et al. Implementation of digital mammography in a population-based breast cancer screening program: effect of screening round on recall rate and cancer detection. Radiology. 2009;252(1):31-9.

Hambly NM, McNicholas MM, Phelan N, et al. Comparison of digital mammography and screen-film mammography in breast cancer screening: a review in the Irish breast screening program. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2009;193(4):1010-8.

Carreira Gómez C, Martínez Cantarero J, Gómez Santos D, et al. [A review of the scientific evidence concerning the clinical application of digital mammography]. Radiologia. 2007;49(3):145-56.

Bauab SP. Mamografia digital: um caminho sem volta [Digital Mammography]. Radiol Bras. 2005;38(3):iii-iv.

Downloads

Publicado

2011-07-07

Como Citar

1.
Iared W, Shigueoka DC, Torloni MR, Velloni FG, Ajzen SA, Atallah Álvaro N, Valente O. Avaliação comparativa entre a mamografia digital e mamografia em filme: revisão sistemática e metanálise. Sao Paulo Med J [Internet]. 7º de julho de 2011 [citado 10º de março de 2025];129(4):250-6. Disponível em: https://periodicosapm.emnuvens.com.br/spmj/article/view/1604

Edição

Seção

Systematic Review