There’s a lot of press about the importance of a 3-D mammogram (breast tomosynthesis) and how much better it is in terms of detecting cancer than the traditional 2-D (standard digital) mammogram.
Here’s a little known secret:
While it is true that there is a difference in the cancer detection rate between the two technologies, what I notice on a daily basis is that the most important consideration for a patient should actually be who interprets their study.
A mammogram is one of the most subjective radiological studies in the field of radiology and there are huge differences in the breast cancer detection rates between radiologists.
I often see breast cancers that were missed (on both 2-D and 3-D mammograms) that would have been detected if a different radiologist had interpreted the study.
Interestingly, most of these statistics are recorded and regularly reported for radiologists. However, they are rarely made public. In part, there is resistance to releasing data such as this because of the potential for misinterpretation by patients and the public in general.
However, today’s patients are increasingly sophisticated and it is my personal opinion that it may be time to bring awareness to this topic.
Fellowship Trained, Breast Imaging Radiologist