BACKGROUND: With the recent rise in mammography (MMG) screenings there has been an increase in the identification of microcalcifications without lump. Therefore, a vacuum-assisted needle biopsy under stereotactic guidance (ST-MTB) is frequently performed for diagnosis. However, ST-MTB is a highly invasive examination. In this study, we investigated the effectiveness of utilizing contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to differentiate between benign and malignant category 3 (C3) calcifications. MATERIALS AND METHODS: One hundred and sixty-eight patients with microcalcifications underwent contrast-enhanced MRI prior to ST-MTB in our hospital. Their MRI scans were reviewed to determine whether the contrast-enhanced MRI findings were consistent. We calculated the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) of contrast-enhanced MRI. RESULTS: No malignancy was not found in the 51 of the 168 cases analyzed by MRI. The calculated sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV of contrast-enhanced MRI were 84%, 82%, 58% and 95%, respectively. CONCLUSION: Contrast-enhanced MRI for Category 3 calcified lesions would be a useful diagnostic tool for identifying ST-MTB-indicated patients. Copyright
BACKGROUND: With the recent rise in mammography (MMG) screenings there has been an increase in the identification of microcalcifications without lump. Therefore, a vacuum-assisted needle biopsy under stereotactic guidance (ST-MTB) is frequently performed for diagnosis. However, ST-MTB is a highly invasive examination. In this study, we investigated the effectiveness of utilizing contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to differentiate between benign and malignant category 3 (C3) calcifications. MATERIALS AND METHODS: One hundred and sixty-eight patients with microcalcifications underwent contrast-enhanced MRI prior to ST-MTB in our hospital. Their MRI scans were reviewed to determine whether the contrast-enhanced MRI findings were consistent. We calculated the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) of contrast-enhanced MRI. RESULTS: No malignancy was not found in the 51 of the 168 cases analyzed by MRI. The calculated sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV of contrast-enhanced MRI were 84%, 82%, 58% and 95%, respectively. CONCLUSION: Contrast-enhanced MRI for Category 3 calcified lesions would be a useful diagnostic tool for identifying ST-MTB-indicated patients. Copyright