PURPOSE: To establish the value of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the breast in comparison to x-ray mammography and ultrasound for breast cancer evaluation in women with dense breast parenchyma. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two hundred thirty-eight women with dense breast parenchyma who were suspicious for breast cancer or inconclusive for the presence of breast lesions based on clinical examination, ultrasound or x-ray mammography, and who underwent breast MRI at 1.5 T before and after administration of 0.1 mmol/kg gadobenate dimeglumine were evaluated. Lesions considered malignant (Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) 4 or 5) on x-ray mammography and/or ultrasound and as BI-RADS 3, 4, or 5 on MRI were evaluated histologically. Other lesions were followed up at 6 and/or 18 months. The diagnostic performance (sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, and positive and negative predictive values) of each technique was determined and compared using a general linear mixed model with appropriate correction for multiplicity. RESULTS: At final diagnosis 121 of 238 (50.8%) women had one or more confirmed malignant lesions, whereas 117 (49.2%) had benign lesions or no lesions. Among 97 women who underwent all 3 techniques more lesions (malignant and benign) were detected with breast MRI (n = 135) than with x-ray mammography (n = 85) or ultrasound (n = 107) and diagnostic confidence was greater. In terms of patient-based diagnostic accuracy breast MRI was significantly (P[r] < 0.0001) superior to both x-ray mammography and ultrasound (96.9% accuracy for MRI vs. 60.8% for mammography and 66.0% for US). Malignant lesions were histologically confirmed in 55 of 97 women who underwent all 3 techniques. Breast MRI detected more cases of multifocal, multicentric, and contralateral disease and fewer misdiagnoses occurred. Overall, breast MRI led to a modification of the surgical approach for 28 (23.1%) of the 121 women with diagnosed malignant disease. CONCLUSION: Breast MRI should be considered for routine breast cancer evaluation in women with dense breast parenchyma.
PURPOSE: To establish the value of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the breast in comparison to x-ray mammography and ultrasound for breast cancer evaluation in women with dense breast parenchyma. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two hundred thirty-eight women with dense breast parenchyma who were suspicious for breast cancer or inconclusive for the presence of breast lesions based on clinical examination, ultrasound or x-ray mammography, and who underwent breast MRI at 1.5 T before and after administration of 0.1 mmol/kg gadobenate dimeglumine were evaluated. Lesions considered malignant (Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) 4 or 5) on x-ray mammography and/or ultrasound and as BI-RADS 3, 4, or 5 on MRI were evaluated histologically. Other lesions were followed up at 6 and/or 18 months. The diagnostic performance (sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, and positive and negative predictive values) of each technique was determined and compared using a general linear mixed model with appropriate correction for multiplicity. RESULTS: At final diagnosis 121 of 238 (50.8%) women had one or more confirmed malignant lesions, whereas 117 (49.2%) had benign lesions or no lesions. Among 97 women who underwent all 3 techniques more lesions (malignant and benign) were detected with breast MRI (n = 135) than with x-ray mammography (n = 85) or ultrasound (n = 107) and diagnostic confidence was greater. In terms of patient-based diagnostic accuracy breast MRI was significantly (P[r] < 0.0001) superior to both x-ray mammography and ultrasound (96.9% accuracy for MRI vs. 60.8% for mammography and 66.0% for US). Malignant lesions were histologically confirmed in 55 of 97 women who underwent all 3 techniques. Breast MRI detected more cases of multifocal, multicentric, and contralateral disease and fewer misdiagnoses occurred. Overall, breast MRI led to a modification of the surgical approach for 28 (23.1%) of the 121 women with diagnosed malignant disease. CONCLUSION: Breast MRI should be considered for routine breast cancer evaluation in women with dense breast parenchyma.
Authors: Julian Kirchner; Ole Martin; Lale Umutlu; Ken Herrmann; Ann-Kathrin Bittner; Oliver Hoffmann; Swetlana Mohrmann; Thomas Gauler; Sarah Theurer; Christina Antke; Irene Esposito; Sonja Kinner; Benedikt M Schaarschmidt; Bernd Kowall; Diana Lütke-Brintrup; Andreas Stang; Anton S Becker; Gerald Antoch; Christian Buchbender Journal: Eur J Radiol Date: 2020-04-24 Impact factor: 4.531