Literature DB >> 12034606

MR imaging-detected breast lesions: histopathologic correlation of lesion characteristics and signal intensity data.

Katja C Siegmann1, Markus Müller-Schimpfle, Fritz Schick, Christopher T Remy, Nikos Fersis, Peter Ruck, Corinna Gorriz, Claus D Claussen.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The aim of our study was to differentiate benign from malignant breast lesions that had been detected exclusively on MR imaging by analyzing qualitative and quantitative lesion characteristics.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed 51 MR imaging-guided breast interventions (41 preoperative lesion localizations and 10 large-core needle biopsies) in 45 patients with exclusively MR imaging-detected lesions. All patients had previously undergone diagnostic dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging of the breast with a double breast coil at 1.0 T (n = 36) or 1.5 T (n = 15). The diagnostic MR images were evaluated on a workstation. Lesion morphology (size, shape, margin type, enhancement pattern), signal intensity parameters (time to peak enhancement, maximum slope of enhancement curve, washout, relative water content), and scores analogous to the Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) categories were correlated with histology.
RESULTS: Histology revealed malignancy in 37.3% (19/51) of the lesions. The positive predictive value for malignancy of exclusively MR imaging-detectable lesions increased as the analogous BI-RADS category increased. Late inhomogeneous contrast enhancement was the only morphologic criterion that was statistically significantly correlated with malignancy. Malignant and benign lesions did not differ significantly in any of the quantitatively evaluated signal intensity parameters. Carcinomas showed a tendency toward faster and stronger enhancement and stronger washout.
CONCLUSION: The classification of exclusively MR imaging-detectable breast lesions according to a combination of morphologic and perfusion parameters including the late enhancement pattern helps identify the lesions for which interventional MR imaging is required. Quantitative signal intensity data alone do not suffice.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12034606     DOI: 10.2214/ajr.178.6.1781403

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol        ISSN: 0361-803X            Impact factor:   3.959


  11 in total

1.  Diffusion tensor magnetic resonance imaging of the breast: a pilot study.

Authors:  Pascal A T Baltzer; Anja Schäfer; Matthias Dietzel; David Grässel; Mieczyslaw Gajda; Oumar Camara; Werner A Kaiser
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2010-07-29       Impact factor: 5.315

2.  Diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging in focal breast lesions: analysis of 78 cases with pathological correlation.

Authors:  F Fornasa; L Pinali; A Gasparini; E Toniolli; S Montemezzi
Journal:  Radiol Med       Date:  2010-10-06       Impact factor: 3.469

3.  [Modern magnetic resonance procedures for assessing tumor response].

Authors:  T Persigehl; W Heindel; C Bremer
Journal:  Radiologe       Date:  2008-09       Impact factor: 0.635

4.  FDG PET/CT and diffusion-weighted imaging for breast cancer: prognostic value of maximum standardized uptake values and apparent diffusion coefficient values of the primary lesion.

Authors:  Masatoyo Nakajo; Yoriko Kajiya; Tomoyo Kaneko; Youichi Kaneko; Takashi Takasaki; Atsushi Tani; Masako Ueno; Chihaya Koriyama; Masayuki Nakajo
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2010-07-07       Impact factor: 9.236

5.  Dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging as a predictor of clinical outcome in canine spontaneous soft tissue sarcomas treated with thermoradiotherapy.

Authors:  Benjamin L Viglianti; Michael Lora-Michiels; Jeanie M Poulson; Lan Lan; Daohai Yu; Dahio Yu; Linda Sanders; Oana Craciunescu; Zeljko Vujaskovic; Donald E Thrall; James Macfall; Cecil H Charles; Terence Wong; Mark W Dewhirst
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2009-07-21       Impact factor: 12.531

6.  The role of diffusion-weighted imaging and the apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) values for breast tumors.

Authors:  Mi Jung Park; Eun Suk Cha; Bong Joo Kang; Yon Kwon Ihn; Jun Hyun Baik
Journal:  Korean J Radiol       Date:  2007 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 3.500

Review 7.  [Oncologic screening with whole-body MRI: possibilities and limitations].

Authors:  J F Schäfer; A Fischmann; M Lichy; J Vollmar; M Fenchel; C D Claussen; H-P Schlemmer
Journal:  Radiologe       Date:  2004-09       Impact factor: 0.635

8.  Diagnostic value of MR elastography in addition to contrast-enhanced MR imaging of the breast-initial clinical results.

Authors:  Katja C Siegmann; Tanja Xydeas; Ralph Sinkus; Bernhard Kraemer; Ulrich Vogel; Claus D Claussen
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2009-09-01       Impact factor: 5.315

9.  Quantitative analysis of 3-Tesla magnetic resonance imaging in the differential diagnosis of breast lesions.

Authors:  Zhen-Shen Ma; DA-Wei Wang; Xiu-Bin Sun; Hao Shi; Tao Pang; Gui-Qing Dong; Cheng-Qi Zhang
Journal:  Exp Ther Med       Date:  2014-12-22       Impact factor: 2.447

10.  Magnetic Resonance Imaging Features of Adenosis in the Breast.

Authors:  Masoumeh Gity; Ali Arabkheradmand; Elham Taheri; Madjid Shakiba; Yassaman Khademi; Bijan Bijan; Mohammad Salehi Sadaghiani; Amir Hossein Jalali
Journal:  J Breast Cancer       Date:  2015-06-26       Impact factor: 3.588

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.