[Second reading of breast imaging at the hospital department of radiology: reasonable or waste of money?].
OBJECTIVE
To assess the effect of a second diagnostic reading of breast imaging at a university department of radiology.


METHODS
The diagnostic reports of first readers from different private radiology practices and the reports of second readers from the university department of radiology were compared with the histological results (n = 214) and outcome of follow-ups for 4 years (n = 74) in 236 patients (mean age 55 years). BI-RADS categories were used for this purpose. The initial examinations had been performed because of symptoms (n = 117), early detection outside an organized screening program (n = 102), evaluations following breast cancer therapy (n = 13) and unknown primary tumors (n = 4). In addition, the number of complementary examinations and the influence of a second reading on patient management were evaluated.


RESULTS
A total of 140 lesions were malignant and 148 were benign. Of the 288 lesions, 49 % were classified identically in the second reading; 36 % (79/217) of the lesions initially classified as BI-RADS 4 and 5 were downgraded to benign; and 41 % (29/71) of the lesions classified as BI-RADS 1 to 3 were upgraded as suspected of being malignant. The kappa value between the first and second readers was 0.34 with respect to each BI-RADS category separately and 0.18 with respect to categories 1 to 3 (benign) versus 4 and 5 (malignant). A second reading increased the sensitivity from 81 % (114/140) to 96 % (135/140) and the specificity from 30 % (45/148) to 78 % (116/148). Second readers detected 23 additional malignant lesions, changed two lesions correctly classified as malignant to benign categories and caused 6 additional false-positive findings. In all, 38 surgical biopsies could be prevented, one biopsy was erroneously delayed and three unnecessary excisional biopsies were initiated. In the study group, 49 MRI examinations revealed 5 additional malignant lesions and positively influenced surgical planning in 28 patients. In addition to these MRI examinations, 221 patients were examined using ultrasonography, 62 patients using complementary mammography, and 7 using galactography.


CONCLUSIONS
The benefit of a second reading outweighs the expenditure.
Teifke
A
A
Klinik und Poliklinik für Diagnostische und Interventionelle Radiologie, Universitätsklinik Mainz. teifke@radiologie.klinik.uni-mainz.de
Vomweg
T W
TW
Hlawatsch
A
A
Nasresfahani
A
A
Kern
A
A
Victor
A
A
Schmidt
M
M
Bittinger
F
F
Düber
C
C
D001706:Biopsy; D001940:Breast / Q000473:pathology; D001943:Breast Neoplasms / Q000175:diagnosis* / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging / Q000191:economics / Q000473:pathology / Q000601:surgery; D018270:Carcinoma, Ductal, Breast / Q000175:diagnosis* / Q000473:pathology; D002285:Carcinoma, Intraductal, Noninfiltrating / Q000175:diagnosis* / Q000473:pathology; D018275:Carcinoma, Lobular / Q000175:diagnosis* / Q000473:pathology; D003362:Cost-Benefit Analysis; D003937:Diagnosis, Differential; D005260:Female; D018226:Fibroadenoma / Q000175:diagnosis* / Q000473:pathology; D005500:Follow-Up Studies; D006801:Humans; D008279:Magnetic Resonance Imaging; D008327:Mammography; D008875:Middle Aged; D010212:Papilloma / Q000175:diagnosis* / Q000473:pathology; D011872:Radiology Department, Hospital; D013997:Time Factors; D016217:Ultrasonography, Mammary