FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W4281855545> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W4281855545 endingPage "103" @default.
• W4281855545 startingPage "94" @default.
• W4281855545 abstract "Background Contrast-enhanced mammography (CEM) is a more accessible alternative to contrast-enhanced MRI (CE-MRI) in breast imaging, but a summary comparison of published studies is lacking. Purpose To directly compare the performance of CEM and CE-MRI regarding sensitivity, specificity, and negative predictive value in detecting breast cancer, involving all publicly available studies in the English language. Materials and Methods Two readers extracted characteristics of studies investigating the comparative diagnostic performance of CEM and CE-MRI in detecting breast cancer. Studies published until April 2021 were eligible. Sensitivity, specificity, negative predictive value, and positive and negative likelihood ratios were calculated using bivariate random effects models. A Fagan nomogram was used to identify the maximum pretest probability at which posttest probabilities of a negative CEM or CE-MRI examination were in line with the 2% malignancy rate benchmark for downgrading a Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) category 4 to a BI-RADS category 3 result. I 2 statistics, Deeks funnel plot asymmetry test for publication bias, and meta-regression were used. Results Seven studies investigating 1137 lesions (654 malignant, 483 benign) with an average cancer prevalence of 65.3% (range: 47.3%-82.2%) were included. No publication bias was found (P = .57). While the positive likelihood ratio was equal at a value of 3.1 for CE-MRI and 3.6 for CEM, the negative likelihood ratio of CE-MRI (0.04) was lower than that with CEM (0.12). CE-MRI had higher sensitivity for breast cancer than CEM (97% [95% CI: 86, 99] vs 91% [95% CI: 77, 97], respectively; P < .001) but lower specificity (69% [95% CI: 46, 85] vs 74% [95% CI: 52, 89]; P = .09). A Fagan nomogram demonstrated that the maximum pretest probability at which both tests could rule out breast cancer was 33% for CE-MRI and 14% for CEM. Furthermore, iodine concentration was positively associated with CEM sensitivity and negatively associated with its specificity (P = .04 and P < .001, respectively). Conclusion Contrast-enhanced MRI had superior sensitivity and negative likelihood ratios with higher pretest probabilities to rule out malignancy compared with contrast-enhanced mammography. © RSNA, 2022 Online supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorial by Mann and Veldhuis in this issue." @default.
• W4281855545 created "2022-06-13" @default.
• W4281855545 creator A5000944221 @default.
• W4281855545 creator A5001013723 @default.
• W4281855545 creator A5005480071 @default.
• W4281855545 creator A5015268976 @default.
• W4281855545 creator A5079172955 @default.
• W4281855545 date "2022-10-01" @default.
• W4281855545 modified "2023-10-14" @default.
• W4281855545 title "Contrast-enhanced Mammography versus Contrast-enhanced Breast MRI: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis" @default.
• W4281855545 cites W1559820277 @default.
• W4281855545 cites W1602103836 @default.
• W4281855545 cites W1918479694 @default.
• W4281855545 cites W201551164 @default.
• W4281855545 cites W2035560235 @default.
• W4281855545 cites W2038309048 @default.
• W4281855545 cites W2100159406 @default.
• W4281855545 cites W2107638293 @default.
• W4281855545 cites W2155329254 @default.
• W4281855545 cites W2346938039 @default.
• W4281855545 cites W2414754511 @default.
• W4281855545 cites W2439805801 @default.
• W4281855545 cites W2559659900 @default.
• W4281855545 cites W2560438049 @default.
• W4281855545 cites W2567186731 @default.
• W4281855545 cites W2604463737 @default.
• W4281855545 cites W2795360301 @default.
• W4281855545 cites W2909275205 @default.
• W4281855545 cites W2918601053 @default.
• W4281855545 cites W2970344339 @default.
• W4281855545 cites W2974162898 @default.
• W4281855545 cites W2975109835 @default.
• W4281855545 cites W2991330623 @default.
• W4281855545 cites W3005944094 @default.
• W4281855545 cites W3013228923 @default.
• W4281855545 cites W3032345187 @default.
• W4281855545 cites W3032838561 @default.
• W4281855545 cites W3035435463 @default.
• W4281855545 cites W3084311172 @default.
• W4281855545 cites W3116771951 @default.
• W4281855545 cites W3118615836 @default.
• W4281855545 cites W3134701770 @default.
• W4281855545 cites W3137095879 @default.
• W4281855545 cites W4294215472 @default.
• W4281855545 doi "https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.212530" @default.
• W4281855545 hasPubMedId "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36154284" @default.
• W4281855545 hasPublicationYear "2022" @default.
• W4281855545 type Work @default.
• W4281855545 citedByCount "23" @default.
• W4281855545 countsByYear W42818555452022 @default.
• W4281855545 countsByYear W42818555452023 @default.
• W4281855545 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W4281855545 hasAuthorship W4281855545A5000944221 @default.
• W4281855545 hasAuthorship W4281855545A5001013723 @default.
• W4281855545 hasAuthorship W4281855545A5005480071 @default.
• W4281855545 hasAuthorship W4281855545A5015268976 @default.
• W4281855545 hasAuthorship W4281855545A5079172955 @default.
• W4281855545 hasConcept C121608353 @default.
• W4281855545 hasConcept C126322002 @default.
• W4281855545 hasConcept C126838900 @default.
• W4281855545 hasConcept C142724271 @default.
• W4281855545 hasConcept C143409427 @default.
• W4281855545 hasConcept C144494922 @default.
• W4281855545 hasConcept C154945302 @default.
• W4281855545 hasConcept C2776502983 @default.
• W4281855545 hasConcept C2777111374 @default.
• W4281855545 hasConcept C2780439572 @default.
• W4281855545 hasConcept C2780472235 @default.
• W4281855545 hasConcept C2989005 @default.
• W4281855545 hasConcept C41008148 @default.
• W4281855545 hasConcept C530470458 @default.
• W4281855545 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W4281855545 hasConcept C82605166 @default.
• W4281855545 hasConcept C95190672 @default.
• W4281855545 hasConceptScore W4281855545C121608353 @default.
• W4281855545 hasConceptScore W4281855545C126322002 @default.
• W4281855545 hasConceptScore W4281855545C126838900 @default.
• W4281855545 hasConceptScore W4281855545C142724271 @default.
• W4281855545 hasConceptScore W4281855545C143409427 @default.
• W4281855545 hasConceptScore W4281855545C144494922 @default.
• W4281855545 hasConceptScore W4281855545C154945302 @default.
• W4281855545 hasConceptScore W4281855545C2776502983 @default.
• W4281855545 hasConceptScore W4281855545C2777111374 @default.
• W4281855545 hasConceptScore W4281855545C2780439572 @default.
• W4281855545 hasConceptScore W4281855545C2780472235 @default.
• W4281855545 hasConceptScore W4281855545C2989005 @default.
• W4281855545 hasConceptScore W4281855545C41008148 @default.
• W4281855545 hasConceptScore W4281855545C530470458 @default.
• W4281855545 hasConceptScore W4281855545C71924100 @default.
• W4281855545 hasConceptScore W4281855545C82605166 @default.
• W4281855545 hasConceptScore W4281855545C95190672 @default.
• W4281855545 hasIssue "1" @default.
• W4281855545 hasLocation W42818555451 @default.
• W4281855545 hasLocation W42818555452 @default.
• W4281855545 hasOpenAccess W4281855545 @default.
• W4281855545 hasPrimaryLocation W42818555451 @default.
• W4281855545 hasRelatedWork W2011992630 @default.
• W4281855545 hasRelatedWork W2022927888 @default.

• next