PURPOSE: To determine, in a meta-analysis, the diagnostic performance of contrast material-enhanced magnetic resonance (MR) imaging in patients with breast lesions. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Studies to assess the diagnostic performance of MR imaging in patients suspected of having breast cancer who underwent MR imaging and biopsy from January 1985 through March 2005 were reviewed for inclusion. A summary receiver operating characteristic curve was constructed, and pooled weighted estimates of sensitivity and specificity were calculated by using the recently developed bivariate approach for diagnostic meta-analysis. RESULTS: Of 251 eligible studies, 44 were included in the meta-analysis (sample size range, 14-821; cancer prevalence, 23%-84%). Pooled weighted estimates of sensitivity and specificity were 0.90 (95% confidence interval: 0.88, 0.92) and 0.72 (95% confidence interval: 0.67, 0.77), respectively. The performance of breast MR imaging was influenced by the prevalence of cancer in the studied population (P = .05) and by whether two criteria (ie, morphology, enhancement, and kinetic enhancement pattern)--versus one or three criteria--were used to differentiate benign from malignant lesions (P = .02). CONCLUSION: MR imaging of the breast has high sensitivity and lower specificity in the evaluation of breast lesions. SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL: http://radiology.rsnajnls.org/cgi/content/full/2461061298/DC1. RSNA, 2007
PURPOSE: To determine, in a meta-analysis, the diagnostic performance of contrast material-enhanced magnetic resonance (MR) imaging in patients with breast lesions. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Studies to assess the diagnostic performance of MR imaging in patients suspected of having breast cancer who underwent MR imaging and biopsy from January 1985 through March 2005 were reviewed for inclusion. A summary receiver operating characteristic curve was constructed, and pooled weighted estimates of sensitivity and specificity were calculated by using the recently developed bivariate approach for diagnostic meta-analysis. RESULTS: Of 251 eligible studies, 44 were included in the meta-analysis (sample size range, 14-821; cancer prevalence, 23%-84%). Pooled weighted estimates of sensitivity and specificity were 0.90 (95% confidence interval: 0.88, 0.92) and 0.72 (95% confidence interval: 0.67, 0.77), respectively. The performance of breast MR imaging was influenced by the prevalence of cancer in the studied population (P = .05) and by whether two criteria (ie, morphology, enhancement, and kinetic enhancement pattern)--versus one or three criteria--were used to differentiate benign from malignant lesions (P = .02). CONCLUSION: MR imaging of the breast has high sensitivity and lower specificity in the evaluation of breast lesions. SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL: http://radiology.rsnajnls.org/cgi/content/full/2461061298/DC1. RSNA, 2007
Authors: Stephanie M W Y van de Ven; Niculae Mincu; Jean Brunette; Guobin Ma; Mario Khayat; Debra M Ikeda; Sanjiv S Gambhir Journal: Mol Imaging Biol Date: 2011-04 Impact factor: 3.488
Authors: M D Dorrius; R M Pijnappel; M C van der Weide Jansen; L Jansen; P Kappert; M Oudkerk; P E Sijens Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2011-11-11 Impact factor: 5.315
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
Authors: G Carbognin; V Girardi; C Calciolari; A Brandalise; F Bonetti; A Russo; R Pozzi Mucelli Journal: Radiol Med Date: 2010-06-23 Impact factor: 3.469
Authors: Amy J Lilly; Meredith Johnson; Cherie M Kuzmiak; David W Ollila; Siobhan M O'Connor; Johann D Hertel; Benjamin C Calhoun Journal: Ann Diagn Pathol Date: 2020-07-03 Impact factor: 2.090
Authors: Gustavo Moreno; Mariel Molina; Ruizhe Wu; Julie R Sullivan; Julie M Jorns Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2021-05-27 Impact factor: 4.872