Discover a Better Way to Screen for Breast Cancer

Automated 3D Breast Ultrasound with SOFIA®

Reimagine In-Office Breast Imaging

SOFIA is an innovative, FDA-cleared ultrasound screening technology specifically designed for early detection of cancer in dense breast patients.

Effective: Up to 2x more accurate diagnosis results for patients with dense breast tissue1
Efficient: Cost-effective and profitable in-office procedure performed by your existing team
Comfortable: A better patient experience, without compression, injections, or radiation

Discover if SOFIA is right for your practice by scheduling a virtual or in-person consultation - just complete the form to get started.

Schedule a Demo

Discover if SOFIA 3D breast ultrasound is right for your OBGYN practice by scheduling a demo.

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.

Revolutionizing 3D Breast Ultrasound with SOFIA

SOFIA combines speed, accuracy, and patient comfort in one seamless 3D breast ultrasound system for earlier detection of cancer for all patients, including those with mammographically dense breasts. Discover why more OBGYN practices are expanding their in-office breast imaging capabilities with SOFIA.

SCHEDULE DEMO

Is Mammography Putting Your Current Patients at Risk?

Dense breast tissue can obscure early-stage cancers on a mammogram, leading to a 50% missed diagnosis rate compared to mammogram plus 3D ABUS.2

Research shows that women with mammographically dense breasts (about 40% of the patient population3) are at higher risk of developing breast cancer - up to 6x more likely than other patients. While mammography is well-known as the first line of defense for breast health screening, it’s significantly less sensitive in patients with dense breasts.

EXPLORE OPTIONS

Mammography Sensitivity Comparison4:

Dense breast tissue and cancer both present as white on mammograms, hiding small or early-stage cancers. As a result, mammography’s sensitivity and ability to detect cancer is significantly reduced for dense breast patients.

Early cancer detection rates are significantly increased with supplemental 3D ultrasound like SOFIA. Find out how your patients and practice can benefit.

SCHEDULE DEMO
CLINICAL INSIGHTS

Comparing Mammography vs Mammography + 3D Breast Ultrasound for Cancer Detection

“Integrating full-field digital mammography (FFDM) with 3D prone ABUS in women with high breast density increases and improves breast cancer detection rates in a significant manner, including small and invasive cancers, and it has a tolerable impact on recall rate. Moreover, 3D prone ABUS performance results are comparable with the performance results of the supine 3D ABUS system.1

Journal of Personalized Medicine, 2021
Second-Generation 3D Automated Breast Ultrasonography (Prone ABUS) for Dense Breast Cancer Screening Integrated to Mammography: Effectiveness, Performance and Detection Rates

Cancer Detection Rate:
Mammography + ABUS


In a 2021 clinical study, 3D breast ultrasound identified cancer at twice the rate of mammogram only for dense breast patients.1
How It Works:

SOFIA 3D ABUS

SOFIA’s unique scanning surface is recessed into a comfortable scan bed with a linear probe. The patient lies in the prone position placing her breast with the nipple in the center. In just a single 30-second radial sweep, a 3D volume dataset is collected of the entire breast.

Thirty-second, per-breast scan time allows the scheduling of patients as often as every fifteen minutes.
The procedure requires only a thin layer of ultrasound lotion – no additional disposables required
An intuitive touch-screen interface automates the scanning process for in-office imaging teams
Results quickly readable by local radiologist or breast teleradiologist

Discover how SOFIA can transform breast cancer imaging for your practice.

SCHEDULE DEMO
  1.  Journal of Personalized Medicine, 2021: Second-Generation 3D Automated Breast Ultrasonography (Prone ABUS) for Dense Breast Cancer Screening Integrated to Mammography: Effectiveness, Performance and Detection Rates
  2. Comparison of the Performance of Screening Mammography, Physical Examination, and Breast US and Evaluation of Factors that Influence Them: An Analysis of 27,825 Patient Evaluations Thomas M. Kolb, Jacob Lichy, Jeffrey H.
  3. Pisano et al. NEJM 2005; 353: 1773
  4. https://www.breastcancer.org/research-news/breast-density-affects-contralateral-bc-risk