Consensus about image quality assessment criteria of breast implants mammography using Delphi method with radiographers and radiologists

• Autor(a) principal: Sá dos Reis, Cláudia
• Data de Publicação: 2020
• Outros Autores: Gremion, Isabelle, Richli Meystre, Nicole
• Tipo de documento: Artigo
• Idioma: eng
• Título da fonte: Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
• Texto Completo: http://hdl.handle.net/10362/100496
• topic: Breast positioning; Eklund; Mammography practice; Protheses; Technique; Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging

Aims: To identify image quality criteria that can be applied to assess breast implant (BI) mammograms according to radiologists and radiographers’ perspectives and to explore the level of agreement about criteria priority. Methods: A two-round Delphi method using a questionnaire was applied to identify the level of agreement between experts, asking them to rank each image criteria available for mammography according to 4 possible answers (1 = need to have, 2 = nice to have, 3 = not pertinent/appropriate, 4 = do not know). Criteria for craniocaudal (CC), mediolateral-oblique (MLO) and lateral (ML), with and without Eklund manoeuvre, were included. This process was repeated after removing the less relevant criteria. Results: Between first and second rounds, different results were obtained regarding the criteria to assess CC and MLO images. Details for anatomic areas were considered the most relevant by radiographers during the first round, while general criteria were prioritised during the second round. Radiologists focused more on analysis of the spread of the breast tissue, if the breast was aligned with detector’s centre and level of contrast. The analysis of implant flow, the BI anterior edge and the maximum retropulsion of BI when Eklund manoeuvre is performed were the specific aspects of BI imaging considered as relevant for assessment. Conclusions: The importance of each criterion used to assess BI mammograms was not the same between radiographers and radiologists, suggesting the two groups of experts are looking for different requirements from the image. Further education and training is necessary to align strategies for assessing BI mammograms, and some criteria need to be adapted to reduce subjectivity.