Sebastian Bickelhaupt1, Jana Tesdorff2, Frederik Bernd Laun3, Tristan Anselm Kuder3, Wolfgang Lederer4, Susanne Teiner4, Klaus Maier-Hein5, Heidi Daniel6, Anne Stieber7, Stefan Delorme2, Heinz-Peter Schlemmer2. 1. Department of Radiology, German Cancer Research Center (dkfz), Im Neuenheimer Feld 280, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany. s.bickelhaupt@dkfz.de. 2. Department of Radiology, German Cancer Research Center (dkfz), Im Neuenheimer Feld 280, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany. 3. Medical Physics in Radiology, German Cancer Research Center (dkfz), Im Neuenheimer Feld 280, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany. 4. Radiological Practice at the ATOS Clinic Heidelberg, Bismarckplatz 9-15, 69123, Heidelberg, Germany. 5. Junior Group Medical Image Computing, German Cancer Research Center (dkfz), Im Neuenheimer Feld 280, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany. 6. Radiology Center Mannheim (RZM), Rosengartenplatz 7, 61818, Mannheim, Germany. 7. Department of Clinical and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to evaluate the accuracy and applicability of solitarily reading fused image series of T2-weighted and high-b-value diffusion-weighted sequences for lesion characterization as compared to sequential or combined image analysis of these unenhanced sequences and to contrast- enhanced breast MRI. METHODS: This IRB-approved study included 50 female participants with suspicious breast lesions detected in screening X-ray mammograms, all of which provided written informed consent. Prior to biopsy, all women underwent MRI including diffusion-weighted imaging (DWIBS, b = 1500s/mm2). Images were analyzed as follows: prospective image fusion of DWIBS and T2-weighted images (FU), side-by-side analysis of DWIBS and T2-weighted series (CO), combination of the first two methods (CO+FU), and full contrast-enhanced diagnostic protocol (FDP). Diagnostic indices, confidence, and image quality of the protocols were compared by two blinded readers. RESULTS: Reading the CO+FU (accuracy 0.92; NPV 96.1 %; PPV 87.6 %) and the CO series (0.90; 96.1 %; 83.7 %) provided a diagnostic performance similar to the FDP (0.95; 96.1 %; 91.3 %; p > 0.05). FU reading alone significantly reduced the diagnostic accuracy (0.82; 93.3 %; 73.4 %; p = 0.023). CONCLUSIONS: MR evaluation of suspicious BI-RADS 4 and 5 lesions detected on mammography by using a non-contrast-enhanced T2-weighted and DWIBS sequence protocol is most accurate if MR images were read using the CO+FU protocol. KEY POINTS: • Unenhanced breast MRI with additional DWIBS/T2w-image fusion allows reliable lesion characterization. • Abbreviated reading of fused DWIBS/T2w-images alone decreases diagnostic confidence and accuracy. • Reading fused DWIBS/T2w-images as the sole diagnostic method should be avoided.
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to evaluate the accuracy and applicability of solitarily reading fused image series of T2-weighted and high-b-value diffusion-weighted sequences for lesion characterization as compared to sequential or combined image analysis of these unenhanced sequences and to contrast- enhanced breast MRI. METHODS: This IRB-approved study included 50 female participants with suspicious breast lesions detected in screening X-ray mammograms, all of which provided written informed consent. Prior to biopsy, all women underwent MRI including diffusion-weighted imaging (DWIBS, b = 1500s/mm2). Images were analyzed as follows: prospective image fusion of DWIBS and T2-weighted images (FU), side-by-side analysis of DWIBS and T2-weighted series (CO), combination of the first two methods (CO+FU), and full contrast-enhanced diagnostic protocol (FDP). Diagnostic indices, confidence, and image quality of the protocols were compared by two blinded readers. RESULTS: Reading the CO+FU (accuracy 0.92; NPV 96.1 %; PPV 87.6 %) and the CO series (0.90; 96.1 %; 83.7 %) provided a diagnostic performance similar to the FDP (0.95; 96.1 %; 91.3 %; p > 0.05). FU reading alone significantly reduced the diagnostic accuracy (0.82; 93.3 %; 73.4 %; p = 0.023). CONCLUSIONS: MR evaluation of suspicious BI-RADS 4 and 5 lesions detected on mammography by using a non-contrast-enhanced T2-weighted and DWIBS sequence protocol is most accurate if MR images were read using the CO+FU protocol. KEY POINTS: • Unenhanced breast MRI with additional DWIBS/T2w-image fusion allows reliable lesion characterization. • Abbreviated reading of fused DWIBS/T2w-images alone decreases diagnostic confidence and accuracy. • Reading fused DWIBS/T2w-images as the sole diagnostic method should be avoided.
Authors: I A Nechifor-Boilă; S Bancu; M Buruian; M Charlot; M Decaussin-Petrucci; J-S Krauth; A C Nechifor-Boilă; A Borda Journal: Chirurgia (Bucur) Date: 2013 Mar-Apr
Authors: Katja Pinker; Linda Moy; Elizabeth J Sutton; Ritse M Mann; Michael Weber; Sunitha B Thakur; Maxine S Jochelson; Zsuzsanna Bago-Horvath; Elizabeth A Morris; Pascal At Baltzer; Thomas H Helbich Journal: Invest Radiol Date: 2018-10 Impact factor: 6.016
Authors: Sebastian Bickelhaupt; Franziska Steudle; Daniel Paech; Anna Mlynarska; Tristan Anselm Kuder; Wolfgang Lederer; Heidi Daniel; Martin Freitag; Stefan Delorme; Heinz-Peter Schlemmer; Frederik Bernd Laun Journal: PLoS One Date: 2017-04-28 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Daly Avendano; Maria Adele Marino; Doris Leithner; Sunitha Thakur; Blanca Bernard-Davila; Danny F Martinez; Thomas H Helbich; Elizabeth A Morris; Maxine S Jochelson; Pascal A T Baltzer; Paola Clauser; Panagiotis Kapetas; Katja Pinker Journal: Breast Cancer Res Date: 2019-12-04 Impact factor: 6.466
Authors: Anna Mlynarska-Bujny; Sebastian Bickelhaupt; Frederik Bernd Laun; Franziska König; Wolfgang Lederer; Heidi Daniel; Mark Edward Ladd; Heinz-Peter Schlemmer; Stefan Delorme; Tristan Anselm Kuder Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2020-08-06 Impact factor: 4.379