OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the accuracy of MRI of the breast (DCE-MRI) in a stand-alone setting with extended indications. MATERIALS AND METHODS: According to the inclusion criteria, breast specialists were invited to refer patients to our institution for DCE-MRI. Depending on the MR findings, patients received either a follow-up or biopsy. Between 04/2006 and 12/2011 a consecutive total of 1,488 women were prospectively examined. RESULTS: Of 1,488 included patients, 393 patients were lost to follow-up, 1,095 patients were evaluated. 124 patients were diagnosed with malignancy by DCE-MRI (76 TP, 48 FP, 971 TN, 0 FN cases). Positive cases were confirmed by histology, negative cases by MR follow-ups or patient questionnaires over the next 5 years in 1,737 cases (sensitivity 100 %; specificity 95.2 %; PPV 61.3 %; NPV 100 %; accuracy 95.5 %). For invasive cancers only (DCIS excluded), the results were 63 TP; 27 FP; 971 TP and 0 FN (sensitivity 100 %; specificity 97.2 %; PPV 70 %; NPV 100 %; accuracy 97.5 %). CONCLUSION: The DCE-MRI indications tested imply that negative results in DCE-MRI reliably exclude cancer. The results were achieved in a stand-alone setting (single modality diagnosis). However, these results are strongly dependent on reader experience and adequate technical standards as prerequisites for optimal diagnoses. KEY POINTS: • DCE-MRI of the breast has a high accuracy in finding breast cancer. • The set of indications for DCE-MRI of the breast is still very limited. • DCE-MRI can achieve a high accuracy in a 'screening-like' setting. • Accuracy of breast DCE-MRI is strongly dependent on technique and reader experience. • A negative DCE-MRI effectively excludes cancer.
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the accuracy of MRI of the breast (DCE-MRI) in a stand-alone setting with extended indications. MATERIALS AND METHODS: According to the inclusion criteria, breast specialists were invited to refer patients to our institution for DCE-MRI. Depending on the MR findings, patients received either a follow-up or biopsy. Between 04/2006 and 12/2011 a consecutive total of 1,488 women were prospectively examined. RESULTS: Of 1,488 included patients, 393 patients were lost to follow-up, 1,095 patients were evaluated. 124 patients were diagnosed with malignancy by DCE-MRI (76 TP, 48 FP, 971 TN, 0 FN cases). Positive cases were confirmed by histology, negative cases by MR follow-ups or patient questionnaires over the next 5 years in 1,737 cases (sensitivity 100 %; specificity 95.2 %; PPV 61.3 %; NPV 100 %; accuracy 95.5 %). For invasive cancers only (DCIS excluded), the results were 63 TP; 27 FP; 971 TP and 0 FN (sensitivity 100 %; specificity 97.2 %; PPV 70 %; NPV 100 %; accuracy 97.5 %). CONCLUSION: The DCE-MRI indications tested imply that negative results in DCE-MRI reliably exclude cancer. The results were achieved in a stand-alone setting (single modality diagnosis). However, these results are strongly dependent on reader experience and adequate technical standards as prerequisites for optimal diagnoses. KEY POINTS: • DCE-MRI of the breast has a high accuracy in finding breast cancer. • The set of indications for DCE-MRI of the breast is still very limited. • DCE-MRI can achieve a high accuracy in a 'screening-like' setting. • Accuracy of breast DCE-MRI is strongly dependent on technique and reader experience. • A negative DCE-MRI effectively excludes cancer.
Authors: K Pinker; W Bogner; P Baltzer; S Trattnig; S Gruber; O Abeyakoon; M Bernathova; O Zaric; P Dubsky; Z Bago-Horvath; M Weber; D Leithner; T H Helbich Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2013-12-05 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Matthias Benndorf; Pascal A T Baltzer; Tibor Vag; Mieczyslaw Gajda; Ingo B Runnebaum; Werner A Kaiser Journal: Acta Radiol Date: 2010-09 Impact factor: 1.990
Authors: Constance D Lehman; Constantine Gatsonis; Christiane K Kuhl; R Edward Hendrick; Etta D Pisano; Lucy Hanna; Sue Peacock; Stanley F Smazal; Daniel D Maki; Thomas B Julian; Elizabeth R DePeri; David A Bluemke; Mitchell D Schnall Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2007-03-28 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Ritse M Mann; Roel D Mus; Jan van Zelst; Christian Geppert; Nico Karssemeijer; Bram Platel Journal: Invest Radiol Date: 2014-09 Impact factor: 6.016
Authors: Clemens G Kaiser; Pascal Baltzer; Anna K Kaiser; Julia Knaudt; Thomas Henzler; Werner A Kaiser; Matthias Dietzel Journal: Eur J Radiol Open Date: 2016-06-10
Authors: Clemens G Kaiser; Pascal Baltzer; Anna K Kaiser; Julia Krammer; Michael Uder; Werner A Kaiser; Matthias Dietzel Journal: Eur J Radiol Open Date: 2016-08-28