Literature DB >> 23720144

Improving outcomes of screening breast MRI with practice evolution: initial clinical experience with 3T compared to 1.5T.

Ana P Lourenco1, Linda Donegan, Hanan Khalil, Martha B Mainiero.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To determine if changing from 1.5T to 3T breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is associated with a change in BI-RADS categories, positive predictive value of biopsy recommendation, or cancer detection rates in high-risk screening breast MRI.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval was obtained for this Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA)-compatible retrospective review. Prior to October 2010, breast MRI was performed at 1.5T and after October 2010 breast MRI was performed at 3T. Reports of 495 consecutive screening 3T breast MRI exams from October 2010 through October 2011 were reviewed. Comparison was made to previously collected data on 650 screening breast MRI exams at 1.5T. Data were analyzed for statistical significance using the two-sample test of proportions.
RESULTS: There were 495 screening breast MRI exams. There were 419 (84.6%) BI-RADS 1/2 results, 35 (7.1%) BI-RADS 3 results, and 41 (8.3%) BI-RADS 4/5 results. BI-RADS 4/5 results increased at 3T (P=0.04). The positive predictive value for BI-RADS 4/5 was 29.3% (12/41) at 3T, compared with 17.6% at 1.5T (P<0.001). Cancer detection rate was 2.6% at 3T, compared with 0.9% at 1.5T (P=0.02).
CONCLUSION: Transition to 3T breast MRI in a screening population resulted in increased BI-RADS 4/5 interpretations, positive predictive value of biopsy recommendations, and cancer detection rate.
Copyright © 2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Entities:  

Keywords:  MRI; breast; screening

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23720144     DOI: 10.1002/jmri.24198

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging        ISSN: 1053-1807            Impact factor:   4.813


  11 in total

1.  Fat suppression techniques (STIR vs. SPAIR) on diffusion-weighted imaging of breast lesions at 3.0 T: preliminary experience.

Authors:  Sofia Brandão; Luísa Nogueira; Eduarda Matos; Rita Gouveia Nunes; Hugo Alexandre Ferreira; Joana Loureiro; Isabel Ramos
Journal:  Radiol Med       Date:  2015-02-10       Impact factor: 3.469

2.  Accuracy of 3 T versus 1.5 T breast MRI for pre-operative assessment of extent of disease in newly diagnosed DCIS.

Authors:  Habib Rahbar; Wendy B DeMartini; Amie Y Lee; Savannah C Partridge; Sue Peacock; Constance D Lehman
Journal:  Eur J Radiol       Date:  2015-01-08       Impact factor: 3.528

3.  Prevalent versus incident breast cancers: benefits of clinical and radiological monitoring in women with pathogenic BRCA1/2 variants.

Authors:  Claire Saule; Solveig Menu-Hespel; Matthieu Carton; Caroline Malhaire; Pascal Cherel; Fabien Reyal; Marine Le Mentec; Eugénie Guillot; Anne Donnadieu; Nasrine Callet; Sophie Frank; Florence Coussy; Dominique Stoppa-Lyonnet; Emmanuelle Mouret-Fourme
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2022-02-25       Impact factor: 5.351

4.  Diffusion-weighted imaging of breast lesions: Region-of-interest placement and different ADC parameters influence apparent diffusion coefficient values.

Authors:  Hubert Bickel; Katja Pinker; Stephan Polanec; Heinrich Magometschnigg; Georg Wengert; Claudio Spick; Wolfgang Bogner; Zsuzsanna Bago-Horvath; Thomas H Helbich; Pascal Baltzer
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2016-08-30       Impact factor: 5.315

5.  A urologist's perspective on prostate cancer imaging: past, present, and future.

Authors:  Arvin K George; Baris Turkbey; Subin G Valayil; Akhil Muthigi; Francesca Mertan; Michael Kongnyuy; Peter A Pinto
Journal:  Abdom Radiol (NY)       Date:  2016-05

6.  Apparent diffusion coefficient mapping using diffusion-weighted MRI: impact of background parenchymal enhancement, amount of fibroglandular tissue and menopausal status on breast cancer diagnosis.

Authors:  Joao V Horvat; Manuela Durando; Soledad Milans; Sujata Patil; Jessica Massler; Girard Gibbons; Dilip Giri; Katja Pinker; Elizabeth A Morris; Sunitha B Thakur
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2018-01-12       Impact factor: 5.315

7.  Comparison of dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI parameters of breast lesions at 1.5 and 3.0 T: a pilot study.

Authors:  F D Pineda; M Medved; X Fan; M K Ivancevic; H Abe; A Shimauchi; G M Newstead; G S Karczmar
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2015-03-18       Impact factor: 3.039

8.  Breast 3 T-MR imaging: indication for stereotactic vacuum-assisted breast biopsy.

Authors:  Nobuko Yamamoto; Takeshi Yoshizako; Kazuaki Yoshikawa; Masayuki Itakura; Riruke Maruyama; Hajime Kitagaki
Journal:  Springerplus       Date:  2014-08-28

Review 9.  Current and Emerging Magnetic Resonance-Based Techniques for Breast Cancer.

Authors:  Apekshya Chhetri; Xin Li; Joseph V Rispoli
Journal:  Front Med (Lausanne)       Date:  2020-05-12

10.  Diffusion weighted imaging of the breast: Performance of standardized breast tumor tissue selection methods in clinical decision making.

Authors:  M Wielema; P E Sijens; H Dijkstra; G H De Bock; I G van Bruggen; J E Siegersma; E Langius; R M Pijnappel; M D Dorrius; M Oudkerk
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2021-01-25       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.