فهرست نشریات علمی دسترسی آزاد ایران

Background: Considering the importance and responsibility of reporting mammography and the necessity to notice details with a high degree of precision, double reading mammography has been introduced and recommended. Objectives: This study aimed to assess the performance of double reading of mammograms and its effect on patient outcomes. Results: Readers had consensus on BI-RADS categories in 459 breasts (71%), but diverse categories were used for 183 breasts (29%), including 132 significant and 51 non-significant discrepancies. According to weighted Kappa test, agreement between two readers in positive or negative reports was 0.78 (95% CI=0.73-0.83) and in parenchymal density, it was 0.73 (95% CI=0.7-0.77). Most of the discrepancies were between category zero versus categories 1 and 2 (63.4%). The recall rate was 36% for the first and 44% for the second reader. Among 132 significant discordant results, one case had the final diagnosis of malignancy and the others had benign or negative diagnosis. There was 0.2% increase in cancer detection rate by double reading. Conclusion: This study shows no significant improvement in the cancer detection rate by double reading; however, a lower recall rate could be a more helpful consequence.