INTRODUCTION: The purpose of this study was to compare the diagnostic accuracy of dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) as a single parameter to multiparametric (MP) MRI with 2 (DCE MRI and diffusion-weighted imaging [DWI]) and 3 (DCE MRI, DWI, and 3-dimensional proton magnetic resonance spectroscopic imaging [3D H-MRSI]) parameters in breast cancer diagnosis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This prospective study was approved by the institutional review board. Written informed consent was obtained in all patients. One hundred thirteen female patients (mean age, 52 years; range, 22-86 years) with an imaging abnormality (Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System 0, 4-5) were included in this study. Multiparametric MRI of the breast at 3 T with DCE MRI, DWI, and 3D H-MRSI was performed. The likelihood of malignancy was assessed for DCE MRI and MP MRI with 2 (DCE MRI and DWI) and 3 (DCE MRI, DWI, and 3D H-MRSI) parameters separately. Histopathology was used as the standard of reference. Appropriate statistical tests were used to assess sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic accuracy for each assessment combination. RESULTS: There were 74 malignant and 39 benign breast lesions. Multiparametric MRI with 3 MRI parameters yielded significantly higher areas under the curve (0.936) in comparison with DCE MRI alone (0.814) (P<0.001). Multiparametric MRI with just 2 parameters at 3 T did not yield higher areas under the curve (0.808) than did DCE MRI alone (0.814). Multiparametric MRI with 3 parameters resulted in elimination of false-negative lesions and significantly reduced the false-positives ones (P=0.002). CONCLUSIONS: Multiparametric MRI with 3 parameters increases the diagnostic accuracy of breast cancer in comparison with DCE-MRI alone and MP MRI with 2 parameters.
INTRODUCTION: The purpose of this study was to compare the diagnostic accuracy of dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) as a single parameter to multiparametric (MP) MRI with 2 (DCE MRI and diffusion-weighted imaging [DWI]) and 3 (DCE MRI, DWI, and 3-dimensional proton magnetic resonance spectroscopic imaging [3D H-MRSI]) parameters in breast cancer diagnosis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This prospective study was approved by the institutional review board. Written informed consent was obtained in all patients. One hundred thirteen female patients (mean age, 52 years; range, 22-86 years) with an imaging abnormality (Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System 0, 4-5) were included in this study. Multiparametric MRI of the breast at 3 T with DCE MRI, DWI, and 3D H-MRSI was performed. The likelihood of malignancy was assessed for DCE MRI and MP MRI with 2 (DCE MRI and DWI) and 3 (DCE MRI, DWI, and 3D H-MRSI) parameters separately. Histopathology was used as the standard of reference. Appropriate statistical tests were used to assess sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic accuracy for each assessment combination. RESULTS: There were 74 malignant and 39 benign breast lesions. Multiparametric MRI with 3 MRI parameters yielded significantly higher areas under the curve (0.936) in comparison with DCE MRI alone (0.814) (P<0.001). Multiparametric MRI with just 2 parameters at 3 T did not yield higher areas under the curve (0.808) than did DCE MRI alone (0.814). Multiparametric MRI with 3 parameters resulted in elimination of false-negative lesions and significantly reduced the false-positives ones (P=0.002). CONCLUSIONS: Multiparametric MRI with 3 parameters increases the diagnostic accuracy of breast cancer in comparison with DCE-MRI alone and MP MRI with 2 parameters.
Authors: Maria Adele Marino; Paola Clauser; Ramona Woitek; Georg J Wengert; Panagiotis Kapetas; Maria Bernathova; Katja Pinker-Domenig; Thomas H Helbich; Klaus Preidler; Pascal A T Baltzer Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2015-10-29 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: S Gruber; L Minarikova; K Pinker; O Zaric; M Chmelik; B Strasser; P Baltzer; T Helbich; S Trattnig; W Bogner Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2015-08-27 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Monique D Dorrius; Erik F J de Vries; Riemer H J A Slart; Andor W J M Glaudemans Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2015-03-12 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Wen Li; David C Newitt; Lisa J Wilmes; Ella F Jones; Vignesh Arasu; Jessica Gibbs; Bo La Yun; Elizabeth Li; Savannah C Partridge; John Kornak; Laura J Esserman; Nola M Hylton Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2019-04-26 Impact factor: 4.813
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