BJR
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
British Journal of Radiology (1996) 69, 105-108
© 1996 British Institute of Radiology
doi:
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Warren, R. M.
Right arrow Articles by Bashir, S.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Warren, R. M.
Right arrow Articles by Bashir, S.

The British Journal of Radiology, Vol 69, Issue 818 105-108, Copyright © 1996 by British Institute of Radiology

ARTICLES

The value of the second view in screening mammography

RM Warren, SW Duffy and S Bashir
Breast Screening Service, St Margaret's Hospital, Epping, Essex, UK.

A prospective study of 33,734 women was undertaken during the prevalent round of the UK National Breast Screening Programme. The cancer detection rates and recall rates were compared between a one view and a two view technique. In one fifth of the women, only the single oblique view examination was read. To lose the bias that would have been introduced by the prior knowledge that a second view would be available, the radiologists reading the oblique view did not know whether or not a craniocaudal view would subsequently be available. Readings were available from two radiologists in each case. The cancer detection rate increased from 7.6 per thousand to 8.2 per thousand women screened, with 14 more cancers detected with the two view technique. This represents 6.5% of all screen detected cancers (95% CI 3.2-9.8). The recall rate was reduced from 8.8% to 6.6% by the second view (p < 0.001). There was a significantly higher biopsy rate in the two view group (10.6/1000 versus 8.6/1000) (p = 0.004). This higher biopsy rate is part of the price paid for the higher detection rate. The additional tumours included small invasive cancers. The National Health Service (NHS) cost of each additional cancer diagnosed was 4129 pounds and the NHS plus private cost was 2742 pounds. These findings have practical applications for the National Breast Screening Programme. There would be resource implications on routinely applying two view screening to the prevalent round, but even greater costs if applied to the incident screening round.


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 JNCI J Natl Cancer InstHome page
J. G. Elmore, C. Y. Nakano, T. D. Koepsell, L. M. Desnick, C. J. D'Orsi, and D. F. Ransohoff
International Variation in Screening Mammography Interpretations in Community-Based Programs
J Natl Cancer Inst, September 17, 2003; 95(18): 1384 - 1393.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
B. C. Yankaskas, R. J. Cleveland, M. J. Schell, and R. Kozar
Association of Recall Rates with Sensitivity and Positive Predictive Values of Screening Mammography
Am. J. Roentgenol., September 1, 2001; 177(3): 543 - 549.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
BJR DMFR IMAGING  ALL BIR JOURNALS 
Copyright © 1996 by the British Institute of Radiology.