PURPOSE: To evaluate the diagnostic value of breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in small focal lesions using dynamic analysis based on unsupervised vector quantization in combination with a score for morphologic criteria. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We examined 85 mammographically indetermintate lesions (BIRADS 3-4; 47 malignant, mean lesion size 1.2 cm; 38 benign, mean lesion size 1.1 cm). MRI was performed with a dynamic T1-weighted gradient echo sequence (1 precontrast and 5 postcontrast series). Lesions with an initial contrast enhancement >/=50% were selected with semiautomatic segmentation. For conventional dynamic analysis, we calculated the mean initial signal increase and postinitial course of all voxels included in a lesion. Secondly, all voxels within the lesions were assigned to 4 clusters using minimal-free-energy vector quantization. Dynamic and morphologic criteria were summarized in a diagnostic score and evaluated by receiver operating characteristic analysis. RESULTS: In the present collection of small lesions, morphologic criteria [area under the curve (AUC) = 0.610] were inferior to dynamic criteria in the detection of breast cancer. Dynamic analysis with vector quantization (AUC = 0.760) presented slightly better results compared with standard dynamic analysis (AUC = 0.693). There was no benefit for combined morphologic and dynamic analysis. CONCLUSION: In small MR-mammographic lesions, dynamic analysis with vector quantization alone tends to result in a higher diagnostic accuracy compared with combined morphologic and dynamic analysis.
PURPOSE: To evaluate the diagnostic value of breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in small focal lesions using dynamic analysis based on unsupervised vector quantization in combination with a score for morphologic criteria. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We examined 85 mammographically indetermintate lesions (BIRADS 3-4; 47 malignant, mean lesion size 1.2 cm; 38 benign, mean lesion size 1.1 cm). MRI was performed with a dynamic T1-weighted gradient echo sequence (1 precontrast and 5 postcontrast series). Lesions with an initial contrast enhancement >/=50% were selected with semiautomatic segmentation. For conventional dynamic analysis, we calculated the mean initial signal increase and postinitial course of all voxels included in a lesion. Secondly, all voxels within the lesions were assigned to 4 clusters using minimal-free-energy vector quantization. Dynamic and morphologic criteria were summarized in a diagnostic score and evaluated by receiver operating characteristic analysis. RESULTS: In the present collection of small lesions, morphologic criteria [area under the curve (AUC) = 0.610] were inferior to dynamic criteria in the detection of breast cancer. Dynamic analysis with vector quantization (AUC = 0.760) presented slightly better results compared with standard dynamic analysis (AUC = 0.693). There was no benefit for combined morphologic and dynamic analysis. CONCLUSION: In small MR-mammographic lesions, dynamic analysis with vector quantization alone tends to result in a higher diagnostic accuracy compared with combined morphologic and dynamic analysis.
Authors: T W Vomweg; M Buscema; H U Kauczor; A Teifke; M Intraligi; S Terzi; C P Heussel; T Achenbach; O Rieker; D Mayer; M Thelen Journal: Med Phys Date: 2003-09 Impact factor: 4.071
Authors: Laura Liberman; Elizabeth A Morris; Melissa Joo-Young Lee; Jennifer B Kaplan; Linda R LaTrenta; Jennifer H Menell; Andrea F Abramson; Stephen M Dashnaw; Douglas J Ballon; D David Dershaw Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2002-07 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: S G Orel; M D Schnall; C M Powell; M G Hochman; L J Solin; B L Fowble; M H Torosian; E F Rosato Journal: Radiology Date: 1995-07 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Chien-Chun Yang; Mahesh B Nagarajan; Markus B Huber; Julio Carballido-Gamio; Jan S Bauer; Thomas Baum; Felix Eckstein; Eva Lochmüller; Sharmila Majumdar; Thomas M Link; Axel Wismüller Journal: Proc SPIE Int Soc Opt Eng Date: 2013-03
Authors: Mahesh B Nagarajan; Paola Coan; Markus B Huber; Paul C Diemoz; Christian Glaser; Axel Wismüller Journal: Proc SPIE Int Soc Opt Eng Date: 2013-03-29
Authors: Mahesh B Nagarajan; Walter A Checefsky; Anas Z Abidin; Halley Tsai; Xixi Wang; Susan K Hobbs; Jan S Bauer; Thomas Baum; Axel Wismüller Journal: Proc SPIE Int Soc Opt Eng Date: 2015-03-17
Authors: Axel Wismüller; Anas Z Abidin; Adora M DSouza; Xixi Wang; Susan K Hobbs; Lutz Leistritz; Mahesh B Nagarajan Journal: Proc SPIE Int Soc Opt Eng Date: 2015-03-17
Authors: Mahesh B Nagarajan; Markus B Huber; Thomas Schlossbauer; Gerda Leinsinger; Andrzej Krol; Axel Wismüller Journal: Artif Intell Med Date: 2013-11-23 Impact factor: 5.326