Literature DB >> 28108994

Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Directed Ultrasound Imaging of Non-Mass Enhancement in the Breast: Outcomes and Frequency of Malignancy.

Adrienne R Newburg1, Chloe M Chhor2, Leng Leng Young Lin2, Samantha L Heller2, Jennifer Gillman3, Hildegard K Toth2, Linda Moy2,4.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: This study was performed to determine the frequency, predictors, and outcomes of ultrasound (US) correlates for non-mass enhancement.
METHODS: From January 2005 to December 2011, a retrospective review of 5837 consecutive breast magnetic resonance imaging examinations at our institution identified 918 non-mass enhancing lesions for which follow-up or biopsy was recommended. Retrospective review of the images identified 879 of 918 lesions (96%) meeting criteria for non-mass enhancement. Patient demographics, pathologic results, and the presence of an adjacent landmark were recorded. Targeted US examinations were recommended for 331 of 879 cases (38%), and 284 of 331 women (86%) underwent US evaluations.
RESULTS: The US correlate rate for non-mass enhancement was 23% (64 of 284). An adjacent landmark was significantly associated with a US correlate (P < .001). Biopsy was recommended for 43 of 64 correlates (67%). Ultrasound-guided biopsy was performed on 39 of 43 (91%); 7 of 39 (18%) were malignant. No correlate was seen for 220 of 284 lesions (77%). At magnetic resonance imaging-guided biopsy, 14 of 117 (12%) were malignancies. For all biopsied non-mass enhancements, the malignancy rate was 18% (55 of 308) and was significantly more prevalent in the setting of a known index cancer (P < .001), older age (P < .001), the presence of a landmark (P = .002), and larger lesion size (P = .019).
CONCLUSIONS: Non-mass enhancement with an adjacent landmark is more likely to have a US correlate compared to non-mass enhancement without an adjacent landmark. Non-mass enhancement in the setting of a known index cancer, older age, a landmark, and larger lesion size is more likely to be malignant. However, no statistical difference was detected in the rate of malignancy between non-mass enhancement with (18%) or without (12%) a correlate. Absence of a correlate does not obviate the need to biopsy suspicious non-mass enhancement.
© 2017 by the American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine.

Entities:  

Keywords:  breast ultrasound; correlate; magnetic resonance imaging-directed ultrasound; non-mass enhancement

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28108994     DOI: 10.7863/ultra.16.03001

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Ultrasound Med        ISSN: 0278-4297            Impact factor:   2.153


  7 in total

1.  Additional Workups Recommended During Preoperative Breast MRI: Methods to Gain Efficiency and Limit Confusion.

Authors:  Santo Maimone; Andrey P Morozov; Zhuo Li; Emily C Craver; Erin A Elder; Sarah A McLaughlin
Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol       Date:  2022-03-08       Impact factor: 5.344

2.  Dynamic contrast-enhanced breast magnetic resonance imaging findings that affect the magnetic resonance-directed ultrasound correlation of non-mass enhancement lesions: a single-center retrospective study.

Authors:  Almila Coskun Bilge; Pinar Ilhan Demir; Hale Aydin; Isil Esen Bostanci
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2022-01-07       Impact factor: 3.629

3.  Ultrasonographic features of ductal carcinoma in situ: analysis of 219 lesions.

Authors:  Jun Kang Li; Huan Fan Wang; Yan He; Yong Huang; Gang Liu; Zhi Li Wang
Journal:  Gland Surg       Date:  2020-12

4.  Tips for finding magnetic resonance imaging-detected suspicious breast lesions using second-look ultrasonography: a pictorial essay.

Authors:  Taejun Jeon; Young Seon Kim; Hye Min Son; Seung Eun Lee
Journal:  Ultrasonography       Date:  2022-02-28

5.  Utility and Diagnostic Performance of Automated Breast Ultrasound System in Evaluating Pure Non-Mass Enhancement on Breast Magnetic Resonance Imaging.

Authors:  Bo Ra Kwon; Jung Min Chang; Soo Yeon Kim; Su Hyun Lee; Sung Ui Shin; Ann Yi; Nariya Cho; Woo Kyung Moon
Journal:  Korean J Radiol       Date:  2020-07-22       Impact factor: 3.500

6.  Comparison of Diagnostic Efficacy Between Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound and DCE-MRI for Mass- and Non-Mass-Like Enhancement Types in Breast Lesions.

Authors:  Wei Liu; Min Zong; Hai-Yan Gong; Li-Jun Ling; Xin-Hua Ye; Shui Wang; Cui-Ying Li
Journal:  Cancer Manag Res       Date:  2020-12-31       Impact factor: 3.989

7.  Is there a Role for Contrast-enhanced Ultrasound in the Detection and Biopsy of MRI Only Visible Breast Lesions?

Authors:  Aki Nykänen; Otso Arponen; Anna Sutela; Ritva Vanninen; Mazen Sudah
Journal:  Radiol Oncol       Date:  2017-11-29       Impact factor: 2.991

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.