BACKGROUND: High-resolution positron-emission mammography (PEM) is a new device, which allows the imaging of breast tissue. A prospective study was performed to assess the accuracy of PEM in newly diagnosed breast cancer patients. METHODS: In a prospective multicenter study, 44 women with confirmed breast cancers were imaged with a high-resolution PEM scanner (Naviscan PET Systems, Rockville, MD) with 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose. The images were blindly evaluated and were compared with final pathology. RESULTS: The majority of the index lesions were seen on PEM (89%, 39/44). PEM detected 4 of 5 incidental breast cancers, 3 of which were not seen by any other imaging modalities. Of 19 patients undergoing breast-conserving surgery, PEM correctly predicted 6 of 8 (75%) patients with positive margins and 100% (11/11) with negative margins. CONCLUSION: The current PEM device shows promise in detecting breast malignancies and may assist in the planning of adequate partial mastectomy procedures to better ensure negative margins.
BACKGROUND: High-resolution positron-emission mammography (PEM) is a new device, which allows the imaging of breast tissue. A prospective study was performed to assess the accuracy of PEM in newly diagnosed breast cancerpatients. METHODS: In a prospective multicenter study, 44 women with confirmed breast cancers were imaged with a high-resolution PEM scanner (Naviscan PET Systems, Rockville, MD) with 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose. The images were blindly evaluated and were compared with final pathology. RESULTS: The majority of the index lesions were seen on PEM (89%, 39/44). PEM detected 4 of 5 incidental breast cancers, 3 of which were not seen by any other imaging modalities. Of 19 patients undergoing breast-conserving surgery, PEM correctly predicted 6 of 8 (75%) patients with positive margins and 100% (11/11) with negative margins. CONCLUSION: The current PEM device shows promise in detecting breast malignancies and may assist in the planning of adequate partial mastectomy procedures to better ensure negative margins.
Authors: Katja Pinker; Wolfgang Bogner; Stephan Gruber; Peter Brader; Siegfried Trattnig; Georgios Karanikas; Thomas H Helbich Journal: Breast Care (Basel) Date: 2011-04-29 Impact factor: 2.860
Authors: Yibao Wu; Spencer L Bowen; Kai Yang; Nathan Packard; Lin Fu; George Burkett; Jinyi Qi; John M Boone; Simon R Cherry; Ramsey D Badawi Journal: Phys Med Biol Date: 2009-06-17 Impact factor: 3.609
Authors: Lawrence MacDonald; John Edwards; Thomas Lewellen; David Haseley; James Rogers; Paul Kinahan Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2009-09-16 Impact factor: 10.057