BACKGROUND: Although magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has been shown to be a sensitive imaging tool for invasive breast cancers, its utility in ductal carcinoma-in-situ (DCIS) of the breast remains controversial. We studied the performance of MRI in patients with known DCIS for assessment of residual disease, occult invasion, and multicentricity to determine the clinical role of MRI in this setting. METHODS: Fifty-one patients with biopsy-proven DCIS underwent contrast-enhanced MRI before surgical treatment. Pre-, early post-, and late postcontrast three-dimensional gradient echo images were obtained and MRI findings were correlated with histopathology. When possible, the performance of MRI and mammography was compared. RESULTS: The accuracy of MRI was 88% in predicting residual disease, 82% in predicting invasive disease, and 90% in predicting multicentricity. The performance of MRI was equivalent in the core biopsy group when compared with the surgical biopsy group. For occult invasion only, MRI and mammography were equivalent. However, overall, MRI was more sensitive and had a higher negative predictive value than mammography. CONCLUSIONS: MRI of DCIS can serve as a useful adjunct to mammography by providing a more accurate assessment of the extent of residual or multicentric disease. The performance of MRI is not significantly affected by antecedent surgical excision. MRI may be particularly valuable if preoperatively negative.
BACKGROUND: Although magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has been shown to be a sensitive imaging tool for invasive breast cancers, its utility in ductal carcinoma-in-situ (DCIS) of the breast remains controversial. We studied the performance of MRI in patients with known DCIS for assessment of residual disease, occult invasion, and multicentricity to determine the clinical role of MRI in this setting. METHODS: Fifty-one patients with biopsy-proven DCIS underwent contrast-enhanced MRI before surgical treatment. Pre-, early post-, and late postcontrast three-dimensional gradient echo images were obtained and MRI findings were correlated with histopathology. When possible, the performance of MRI and mammography was compared. RESULTS: The accuracy of MRI was 88% in predicting residual disease, 82% in predicting invasive disease, and 90% in predicting multicentricity. The performance of MRI was equivalent in the core biopsy group when compared with the surgical biopsy group. For occult invasion only, MRI and mammography were equivalent. However, overall, MRI was more sensitive and had a higher negative predictive value than mammography. CONCLUSIONS: MRI of DCIS can serve as a useful adjunct to mammography by providing a more accurate assessment of the extent of residual or multicentric disease. The performance of MRI is not significantly affected by antecedent surgical excision. MRI may be particularly valuable if preoperatively negative.
Authors: Eline E Deurloo; Jincey D Sriram; Hendrik J Teertstra; Claudette E Loo; Jelle Wesseling; Emiel J Th Rutgers; Kenneth G A Gilhuijs Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2012-02-26 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Kaoru Itakura; Juan Lessing; Theadora Sakata; Amy Heinzerling; Eline Vriens; Dorota Wisner; Michael Alvarado; Laura Esserman; Cheryl Ewing; Nola Hylton; E Shelley Hwang Journal: Clin Breast Cancer Date: 2011-03 Impact factor: 3.225
Authors: Anjali S Kumar; Daniel F Chen; Alfred Au; Yunn-Yi Chen; Jessica Leung; Elisabeth R Garwood; Jessica Gibbs; Nola Hylton; Laura J Esserman Journal: Am J Surg Date: 2006-10 Impact factor: 2.565
Authors: F Sardanelli; L Bacigalupo; L Carbonaro; A Esseridou; G M Giuseppetti; P Panizza; V Lattanzio; A Del Maschio Journal: Radiol Med Date: 2008-07-09 Impact factor: 3.469
Authors: Habib Rahbar; Savannah C Partridge; Peter R Eby; Wendy B Demartini; Robert L Gutierrez; Sue Peacock; Constance D Lehman Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2011-05-12 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Rick G Pleijhuis; Maurits Graafland; Jakob de Vries; Joost Bart; Johannes S de Jong; Gooitzen M van Dam Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2009-07-17 Impact factor: 5.344