Abstract
BACKGROUND: The aim of the study was to compare the performance of full-field digital mammography (FFDM), digital breast tomosynthesis and a dedicated digital specimen radiography system (SRS) in consecutive patients, and to compare the margin status of resected lesions versus pathological assessment. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Resected tissue specimens from consecutive patients who underwent intraoperative breast specimen assessment following wide local excision or oncoplastic breast conservative surgery were examined by FFDM, tomosynthesis and SRS. Two independent observers retrospectively evaluated the visibility of lesions, size, margins, spiculations, calcifications and diagnostic certainty, and chose the best performing method in a blinded manner. RESULTS: We evaluated 216 specimens from 204 patients. All target malignant lesions were removed with no tumouron-ink. One papilloma had positive microscopic margins and one patient underwent reoperation owing to extensive in situ components. There were no significant differences in measured lesion size among the three methods. However, tomosynthesis was the most accurate modality when compared with the final pathological report. Both observers reported that tomosynthesis had significantly better lesion visibility than SRS and FFDM, which translated into a significantly greater diagnostic certainty. Tomosynthesis was superior to the other two methods in identifying spiculations and calcifications. Both observers reported that tomosynthesis was the best performing method in 76.9% of cases. The interobserver reproducibilities of lesion visibility and diagnostic certainty were high for all three methods. CONCLUSIONS: Tomosynthesis was superior to SRS and FFDM for detecting and evaluating the target lesions, spiculations and calcifications, and was therefore more reliable for assessing complete excision of breast lesions.