BACKGROUND: Breast-specific gamma imaging (BSGI) has brought scintimammography back to the forefront by using a dedicated small field-of-view system designed to detect and localize lesions down to 2 mm. Initial studies have reported sensitivity equaling that of magnetic resonance imaging, but with improved specificity. We reviewed our initial experience to evaluate the impact of this technology at our community breast center. METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of the initial 176 patients who underwent BSGI. RESULTS: A total of 128 patients underwent BSGI because of suspicious imaging, abnormal physical examination, or high risk with dense breasts. BSGI was positive in 12 of 107 patients with breast imaging reporting and data system (BI-RADS) 1, 2, or 3. Two of these were cancer. Of the 21 patients with BI-RADS 4, 18 were BSGI negative (11 with benign biopsy, 7 observed), and 3 were BSGI positive with 2 being cancer. Forty-eight patients with a new diagnosis of cancer obtained BSGI for further work-up. It was positive at a new location in 6 cases: 2 cases were new cancers in the contralateral breast, 1 was in the ipsilateral breast, and the remaining 3 had benign pathology. Of the 176 initial patients, clinical management was changed significantly in 14.2%, with another 6.3% in whom a negative BSGI could have prevented a biopsy. CONCLUSIONS: BSGI has played an important role in our clinical management of breast patients with complex breast tissue. BSGI is also a good adjunctive imaging tool in the work-up of newly diagnosed breast cancer patients.
BACKGROUND: Breast-specific gamma imaging (BSGI) has brought scintimammography back to the forefront by using a dedicated small field-of-view system designed to detect and localize lesions down to 2 mm. Initial studies have reported sensitivity equaling that of magnetic resonance imaging, but with improved specificity. We reviewed our initial experience to evaluate the impact of this technology at our community breast center. METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of the initial 176 patients who underwent BSGI. RESULTS: A total of 128 patients underwent BSGI because of suspicious imaging, abnormal physical examination, or high risk with dense breasts. BSGI was positive in 12 of 107 patients with breast imaging reporting and data system (BI-RADS) 1, 2, or 3. Two of these were cancer. Of the 21 patients with BI-RADS 4, 18 were BSGI negative (11 with benign biopsy, 7 observed), and 3 were BSGI positive with 2 being cancer. Forty-eight patients with a new diagnosis of cancer obtained BSGI for further work-up. It was positive at a new location in 6 cases: 2 cases were new cancers in the contralateral breast, 1 was in the ipsilateral breast, and the remaining 3 had benign pathology. Of the 176 initial patients, clinical management was changed significantly in 14.2%, with another 6.3% in whom a negative BSGI could have prevented a biopsy. CONCLUSIONS: BSGI has played an important role in our clinical management of breast patients with complex breast tissue. BSGI is also a good adjunctive imaging tool in the work-up of newly diagnosed breast cancerpatients.
Authors: T Meissnitzer; A Seymer; P Keinrath; J Holzmannhofer; C Pirich; K Hergan; M W Meissnitzer Journal: Br J Radiol Date: 2015-04-17 Impact factor: 3.039
Authors: Angela Collarino; Renato A Valdés Olmos; Lotta G A J van Berkel; Peter A Neijenhuis; Lidy M H Wijers; Frederik Smit; Lioe-Fee de Geus-Oei; Lenka M Pereira Arias-Bouda Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2018-02-13 Impact factor: 4.872