乳房植入成像监测实践:乳腺成像学会乳腺成像放射医师调查。

IF 4.6 Q2 MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS ACS Applied Bio Materials Pub Date : 2024-04-16 DOI:10.1093/jbi/wbae017
Ali Moosavi, Jason Ha, Brianna Papoutsis, Erik Lehman, Alison L. Chetlen, Angela I. Choe
{"title":"乳房植入成像监测实践:乳腺成像学会乳腺成像放射医师调查。","authors":"Ali Moosavi, Jason Ha, Brianna Papoutsis, Erik Lehman, Alison L. Chetlen, Angela I. Choe","doi":"10.1093/jbi/wbae017","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"OBJECTIVE\nThe objectives of this Society of Breast Imaging (SBI)-member survey study were to assess the current imaging patterns for evaluation of symptomatic and asymptomatic breast implant integrity, including modalities used and imaging intervals.\n\n\nMETHODS\nA 12-question survey assessing the frequency of imaging modalities used to evaluate implant integrity, approximate number of breast implant integrity studies requested per month, intervals of integrity studies, and referring provider and radiology practice characteristics was distributed to members of the SBI.\n\n\nRESULTS\nThe survey response rate was 7.6% (143/1890). Of responding radiologists, 54.2% (77/142) were in private, 29.6% (42/142) in academic, and 16.2% (23/142) in hybrid practice. Among respondents, the most common initial examination for evaluating implant integrity was MRI without contrast at 53.1% (76/143), followed by handheld US at 46.9% (67/143). Of respondents using US, 67.4% (91/135) also evaluated the breast tissue for abnormalities. Among respondents, 34.1% (46/135) reported being very confident or confident in US for diagnosing implant rupture. There was a range of reported intervals for performing implant integrity studies: 39.1% (43/110) every 2-3 years, 26.4% (29/110) every 4-5 years, 15.5% (17/110) every 6-10 years, and 19.1% (21/110) every 10 years.\n\n\nCONCLUSION\nFor assessment of implant integrity, the majority of respondents (53.2%, 76/143) reported MRI as initial imaging test. US is less costly, but the minority of respondents (34.1%, 46/135) had confidence in US performance. Also, the minority of respondents (39.1%, 43/110) performed implant integrity evaluations every 2-3 years per the FDA recommendations for asymptomatic surveillance.","PeriodicalId":2,"journal":{"name":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Breast Implant Imaging Surveillance Practice: Survey of Breast Imaging Radiologists in the Society of Breast Imaging.\",\"authors\":\"Ali Moosavi, Jason Ha, Brianna Papoutsis, Erik Lehman, Alison L. Chetlen, Angela I. Choe\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/jbi/wbae017\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"OBJECTIVE\\nThe objectives of this Society of Breast Imaging (SBI)-member survey study were to assess the current imaging patterns for evaluation of symptomatic and asymptomatic breast implant integrity, including modalities used and imaging intervals.\\n\\n\\nMETHODS\\nA 12-question survey assessing the frequency of imaging modalities used to evaluate implant integrity, approximate number of breast implant integrity studies requested per month, intervals of integrity studies, and referring provider and radiology practice characteristics was distributed to members of the SBI.\\n\\n\\nRESULTS\\nThe survey response rate was 7.6% (143/1890). Of responding radiologists, 54.2% (77/142) were in private, 29.6% (42/142) in academic, and 16.2% (23/142) in hybrid practice. Among respondents, the most common initial examination for evaluating implant integrity was MRI without contrast at 53.1% (76/143), followed by handheld US at 46.9% (67/143). Of respondents using US, 67.4% (91/135) also evaluated the breast tissue for abnormalities. Among respondents, 34.1% (46/135) reported being very confident or confident in US for diagnosing implant rupture. There was a range of reported intervals for performing implant integrity studies: 39.1% (43/110) every 2-3 years, 26.4% (29/110) every 4-5 years, 15.5% (17/110) every 6-10 years, and 19.1% (21/110) every 10 years.\\n\\n\\nCONCLUSION\\nFor assessment of implant integrity, the majority of respondents (53.2%, 76/143) reported MRI as initial imaging test. US is less costly, but the minority of respondents (34.1%, 46/135) had confidence in US performance. Also, the minority of respondents (39.1%, 43/110) performed implant integrity evaluations every 2-3 years per the FDA recommendations for asymptomatic surveillance.\",\"PeriodicalId\":2,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ACS Applied Bio Materials\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ACS Applied Bio Materials\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/jbi/wbae017\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jbi/wbae017","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

乳房成像学会 (SBI) 会员调查研究的目的是评估目前用于评估有症状和无症状乳房植入物完整性的成像模式,包括使用的模式和成像间隔。方法向 SBI 会员分发了一份 12 个问题的调查表,评估用于评估植入物完整性的成像模式的频率、每月要求进行的乳房植入物完整性检查的大致数量、完整性检查的间隔以及转诊提供者和放射科的执业特点。在回复的放射科医生中,54.2%(77/142)为私人放射科医生,29.6%(42/142)为学术放射科医生,16.2%(23/142)为混合放射科医生。在受访者中,评估种植体完整性最常见的初始检查是无对比剂核磁共振成像,占 53.1%(76/143),其次是手持 US,占 46.9%(67/143)。在使用 US 的受访者中,67.4%(91/135)还对乳腺组织进行了异常评估。在受访者中,34.1%(46/135)表示对 US 诊断假体破裂非常有信心或有信心。受访者报告的假体完整性检查间隔时间不一:39.1%(43/110)每 2-3 年进行一次,26.4%(29/110)每 4-5 年进行一次,15.5%(17/110)每 6-10 年进行一次,19.1%(21/110)每 10 年进行一次。US 的成本较低,但少数受访者(34.1%,46/135)对 US 的性能有信心。此外,少数受访者(39.1%,43/110)根据 FDA 关于无症状监测的建议,每 2-3 年进行一次植入物完整性评估。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Breast Implant Imaging Surveillance Practice: Survey of Breast Imaging Radiologists in the Society of Breast Imaging.
OBJECTIVE The objectives of this Society of Breast Imaging (SBI)-member survey study were to assess the current imaging patterns for evaluation of symptomatic and asymptomatic breast implant integrity, including modalities used and imaging intervals. METHODS A 12-question survey assessing the frequency of imaging modalities used to evaluate implant integrity, approximate number of breast implant integrity studies requested per month, intervals of integrity studies, and referring provider and radiology practice characteristics was distributed to members of the SBI. RESULTS The survey response rate was 7.6% (143/1890). Of responding radiologists, 54.2% (77/142) were in private, 29.6% (42/142) in academic, and 16.2% (23/142) in hybrid practice. Among respondents, the most common initial examination for evaluating implant integrity was MRI without contrast at 53.1% (76/143), followed by handheld US at 46.9% (67/143). Of respondents using US, 67.4% (91/135) also evaluated the breast tissue for abnormalities. Among respondents, 34.1% (46/135) reported being very confident or confident in US for diagnosing implant rupture. There was a range of reported intervals for performing implant integrity studies: 39.1% (43/110) every 2-3 years, 26.4% (29/110) every 4-5 years, 15.5% (17/110) every 6-10 years, and 19.1% (21/110) every 10 years. CONCLUSION For assessment of implant integrity, the majority of respondents (53.2%, 76/143) reported MRI as initial imaging test. US is less costly, but the minority of respondents (34.1%, 46/135) had confidence in US performance. Also, the minority of respondents (39.1%, 43/110) performed implant integrity evaluations every 2-3 years per the FDA recommendations for asymptomatic surveillance.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
ACS Applied Bio Materials
ACS Applied Bio Materials Chemistry-Chemistry (all)
CiteScore
9.40
自引率
2.10%
发文量
464
期刊最新文献
A Systematic Review of Sleep Disturbance in Idiopathic Intracranial Hypertension. Advancing Patient Education in Idiopathic Intracranial Hypertension: The Promise of Large Language Models. Anti-Myelin-Associated Glycoprotein Neuropathy: Recent Developments. Approach to Managing the Initial Presentation of Multiple Sclerosis: A Worldwide Practice Survey. Association Between LACE+ Index Risk Category and 90-Day Mortality After Stroke.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1