대한영상의학회지 (Journal of the Korean Society of Radiology)

  • 제83권6호
  • /
  • Pages.1327-1341
  • /
  • 2022
  • /
  • 1738-2637(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2288-2928(eISSN)
대한영상의학회 (The Korean Society of Radiology)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

디지털 유방 토모신테시스에 대한 국내 사용 현황과 인식에 관한 설문조사 연구

Patterns in the Use and Perception of Digital Breast Tomosynthesis: A Survey of Korean Breast Radiologists

  • 채은영 (울산대학교 의과대학 서울아산병원 영상의학과) ;
  • 차주희 (울산대학교 의과대학 서울아산병원 영상의학과) ;
  • 신희정 (울산대학교 의과대학 서울아산병원 영상의학과) ;
  • 최우정 (울산대학교 의과대학 서울아산병원 영상의학과) ;
  • 김지혜 (울산대학교 의과대학 서울아산병원 영상의학과) ;
  • 김선미 (서울대학교 의과대학 분당서울대학교병원 영상의학과) ;
  • 김학희 (울산대학교 의과대학 서울아산병원 영상의학과)
  • Eun Young Chae (Department of Radiology, Research Institute of Radiology, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine) ;
  • Joo Hee Cha (Department of Radiology, Research Institute of Radiology, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine) ;
  • Hee Jung Shin (Department of Radiology, Research Institute of Radiology, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine) ;
  • Woo Jung Choi (Department of Radiology, Research Institute of Radiology, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine) ;
  • Jihye Kim (Department of Radiology, Research Institute of Radiology, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine) ;
  • Sun Mi Kim (Department of Radiology, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seoul National University College of Medicine) ;
  • Hak Hee Kim (Department of Radiology, Research Institute of Radiology, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine)
  • 투고 : 2021.10.08
  • 심사 : 2022.02.10
  • 발행 : 2022.11.01
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

목적 국내 디지털 유방 토모신테시스(digital breast tomosynthesis; 이하 DBT) 사용 현황 및 영상의학과 의사들의 DBT에 대한 인식 및 사용자 요구조건에 관해 알아보고자 하였다. 대상과 방법 2021년 3월 대한 유방영상의학회 회원들을 대상으로 DBT와 관련한 26개의 객관식 문항과 1개의 주관식 문항이 포함된 온라인 설문조사를 시행하였다. 설문 문항은 기본 정보, 유방촬영술 및 DBT에 대한 진료 현황, DBT 인식, 관련 연구 경험 및 관심도를 포함하였다. 결과는 로지스틱 회귀분석을 이용하여 분석하였다. 결과 총 257명의 회원 중 120명이 응답하여, 응답률은 46.7%였다. 응답자 중 67명(55.8%)이 현재 DBT를 사용하고 있는 것으로 나타났다. DBT의 전반적인 만족도는 5점 척도를 사용하여 평균 3.31점이었다. DBT 검사의 장점으로 가장 많이 응답한 것은 소환율 감소(55.8%), 병변의 명확도 향상(48.3%), 유방암 발견율 향상(45.8%)이었고, 단점으로 많이 응답한 것은 환자의 추가비용 부담46.7%), 불충분한 미세석회화 검출(43.3%), 불충분한 진단능 향상 효과(39.2%), 방사선량 증가(35.8%)였다. DBT가 더 널리 사용되지 못하는 원인으로는 영상의 저장 용량, 판독 시간 증가를 주요 요인으로 응답하였다. 결론 DBT 사용이 보다 보편화되기 위해서는 사용자 불편사항과 피드백을 반영한 향후 기술개발이 필요하겠다.

Purpose To evaluate the pattern of use and the perception of digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) among Korean breast radiologists. Materials and Methods From March 22 to 29, 2021, an online survey comprising 27 questions was sent to members of the Korean Society of Breast Imaging. Questions related to practice characteristics, utilization and perception of DBT, and research interests. Results were analyzed based on factors using logistic regression. Results Overall, 120 of 257 members responded to the survey (response rate, 46.7%), 67 (55.8%) of whom reported using DBT. The overall satisfaction with DBT was 3.31 (1-5 scale). The most-cited DBT advantages were decreased recall rate (55.8%), increased lesion conspicuity (48.3%), and increased cancer detection (45.8%). The most-cited DBT disadvantages were extra cost for patients (46.7%), insufficient calcification characterization (43.3%), insufficient improvement in diagnostic performance (39.2%), and radiation dose (35.8%). Radiologists reported increased storage requirements and interpretation time for barriers to implementing DBT. Conclusion Further improvement of DBT techniques reflecting feedback from the user's perspective will help increase the acceptance of DBT in Korea.

키워드

과제정보

This work was supported by the Korea Medical Device Development Fund grant funded by the Korea government (the Ministry of Science and ICT, the Ministry of Trade, Industry and Energy, the Ministry of Health & Welfare, the Ministry of Food and Drug Safety) (Project Number: 1711137887, KMDF_PR_20200901_0012)

참고문헌

  1. Andersson I, Ikeda DM, Zackrisson S, Ruschin M, Svahn T, Timberg P, et al. Breast tomosynthesis and digital mammography: a comparison of breast cancer visibility and BIRADS classification in a population of cancers with subtle mammographic findings. Eur Radiol 2008;18:2817-2825
  2. Chong A, Weinstein SP, McDonald ES, Conant EF. Digital breast tomosynthesis: concepts and clinical practice. Radiology 2019;292:1-14
  3. Friedewald SM, Rafferty EA, Rose SL, Durand MA, Plecha DM, Greenberg JS, et al. Breast cancer screening using tomosynthesis in combination with digital mammography. JAMA 2014;311:2499-2507
  4. Niklason LT, Christian BT, Niklason LE, Kopans DB, Castleberry DE, Opsahl-Ong BH, et al. Digital tomosynthesis in breast imaging. Radiology 1997;205:399-406
  5. Ciatto S, Houssami N, Bernardi D, Caumo F, Pellegrini M, Brunelli S, et al. Integration of 3D digital mammography with tomosynthesis for population breast-cancer screening (STORM): a prospective comparison study. Lancet Oncol 2013;14:583-589
  6. Skaane P, Bandos AI, Gullien R, Eben EB, Ekseth U, Haakenaasen U, et al. Comparison of digital mammography alone and digital mammography plus tomosynthesis in a population-based screening program. Radiology 2013;267:47-56
  7. Zackrisson S, Lang K, Rosso A, Johnson K, Dustler M, Fornvik D, et al. One-view breast tomosynthesis versus two-view mammography in the Malmo breast tomosynthesis screening trial (MBTST): a prospective, population-based, diagnostic accuracy study. Lancet Oncol 2018;19:1493-1503
  8. Pattacini P, Nitrosi A, Giorgi Rossi P, Iotti V, Ginocchi V, Ravaioli S, et al. Digital mammography versus digital mammography plus tomosynthesis for breast cancer screening: the Reggio Emilia tomosynthesis randomized trial. Radiology 2018;288:375-385
  9. Chiu K, Tirada N, Vachhani P, Robinson L, Khorjekar G. Why patients decline digital breast tomosynthesis? Results from a patient survey in an urban academic breast center. Curr Probl Diagn Radiol 2020;49:412-416
  10. Gao Y, Babb JS, Toth HK, Moy L, Heller SL. Digital breast tomosynthesis practice patterns following 2011 FDA approval: a survey of breast imaging radiologists. Acad Radiol 2017;24:947-953
  11. Hardesty LA, Kreidler SM, Glueck DH. Digital breast tomosynthesis utilization in the United States: a survey of physician members of the Society of Breast Imaging. J Am Coll Radiol 2016;13:R67-R73
  12. Zuckerman SP, Sprague BL, Weaver DL, Herschorn SD, Conant EF. Survey results regarding uptake and impact of synthetic digital mammography with tomosynthesis in the screening setting. J Am Coll Radiol 2020;17:31-37
  13. Conant EF, Zuckerman SP, McDonald ES, Weinstein SP, Korhonen KE, Birnbaum JA, et al. Five consecutive years of screening with digital breast tomosynthesis: outcomes by screening year and round. Radiology 2020;295:285-293
  14. American College of Radiology. ACR statement on breast tomosynthesis, 2014. Available at: https://www.acr.org/Advocacy-and-Economics/ACR-Position-Statements/Breast-Tomosynthesis. Accessed June 15, 2021
  15. Lee CI, Lehman CD. Digital breast tomosynthesis and the challenges of implementing an emerging breast cancer screening technology into clinical practice. J Am Coll Radiol 2016;13:R61-R66
  16. Gilbert FJ, Tucker L, Young KC. Digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT): a review of the evidence for use as a screening tool. Clin Radiol 2016;71:141-150
  17. Chae EY, Kim HH. Digital breast tomosynthesis screening. J Korean Soc Radiol 2019;80:19-31
  18. Aujero MP, Gavenonis SC, Benjamin R, Zhang Z, Holt JS. Clinical performance of synthesized two-dimensional mammography combined with tomosynthesis in a large screening population. Radiology 2017;283:70-76
  19. Skaane P, Bandos AI, Eben EB, Jebsen IN, Krager M, Haakenaasen U, et al. Two-view digital breast tomosynthesis screening with synthetically reconstructed projection images: comparison with digital breast tomosynthesis with full-field digital mammographic images. Radiology 2014;271:655-663
  20. Zuckerman SP, Conant EF, Keller BM, Maidment AD, Barufaldi B, Weinstein SP, et al. Implementation of synthesized two-dimensional mammography in a population-based digital breast tomosynthesis screening program. Radiology 2016;281:730-736
  21. Vedantham S, Karellas A, Vijayaraghavan GR, Kopans DB. Digital breast tomosynthesis: state of the art. Radiology 2015;277:663-684