Literature DB >> 30149976

Accuracy of Breast Magnetic Resonance Imaging Compared to Mammography in the Preoperative Detection and Measurement of Pure Ductal Carcinoma In Situ: A Retrospective Analysis.

Heike Preibsch1, Johannes Beckmann2, Johannes Pawlowski3, Christopher Kloth2, Markus Hahn4, Annette Staebler3, Beate M Wietek2, Konstantin Nikolaou2, Benjamin Wiesinger2.   

Abstract

RATIONALE AND
OBJECTIVES: Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) hinders imaging detection due to multifocal appearance and discontinuous growth. Preoperative determination of its extent is therefore challenging. Aim of this study was to investigate the additional benefit of breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to mammography (MG) in the diagnosis of DCIS according to size and grading.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Retrospective analysis of 295 patients with biopsy-proven, pure DCIS. Mean patient age was 57.0 years (27-87 years). All patients obtained MG. Additional MRI was performed in 41.7% (123/295). Mammographic breast density, background parenchymal enhancement (BPE), tumor size and grading were analysed. Tumor size on MG and MRI were compared to histopathological size of the surgical specimen.
RESULTS: Mean tumor size was 39.6 mm. DCIS was occult on MG in 24.4% (30/123) and on MRI in 1.6% (2/123). Size was underestimated by 4.6 mm (mean) mammographically. DCIS was high grade in 54.5% (67/123), intermediate grade in 40.7% (50/123) and low grade in 4.9% (6/123). MG was exact regarding tumor size in low grade DCIS, underestimated intermediate grade DCIS by 1 mm (median) and high grade DCIS by 10.5 mm. MRI overestimated low grade DCIS by 1 mm (median), was exact regarding intermediate grade DCIS and underestimated high grade DCIS by 1 mm. BPE did not influence tumor detection and measurement.
CONCLUSION: MRI outperforms MG in the detection and size estimation of DCIS and can reduce positive margin rates.
Copyright © 2018 The Association of University Radiologists. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  BPE; Breast; DCIS; MR Imaging; Mammography

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 30149976     DOI: 10.1016/j.acra.2018.07.013

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Acad Radiol        ISSN: 1076-6332            Impact factor:   3.173


  5 in total

Review 1.  Background parenchymal enhancement on breast MRI: A comprehensive review.

Authors:  Geraldine J Liao; Leah C Henze Bancroft; Roberta M Strigel; Rhea D Chitalia; Despina Kontos; Linda Moy; Savannah C Partridge; Habib Rahbar
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2019-04-19       Impact factor: 4.813

Review 2.  The accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging in predicting the size of pure ductal carcinoma in situ: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Ricardo Roque; Mariana Robalo Cordeiro; Mónica Armas; Francisco Caramelo; Filipe Caseiro-Alves; Margarida Figueiredo-Dias
Journal:  NPJ Breast Cancer       Date:  2022-06-29

3.  Sensitivity of Contrast-Enhanced Breast MRI vs X-ray Mammography Based on Cancer Histology, Tumor Grading, Receptor Status, and Molecular Subtype: A Supplemental Analysis of 2 Large Phase III Studies.

Authors:  Jan Endrikat; Gilda Schmidt; Daniel Haverstock; Olaf Weber; Zuzana Jirakova Trnkova; Jörg Barkhausen
Journal:  Breast Cancer (Auckl)       Date:  2022-04-19

4.  Radiological Underestimation of Tumor Size as a Relevant Risk Factor for Positive Margin Rate in Breast-Conserving Therapy of Pure Ductal Carcinoma In Situ (DCIS).

Authors:  Gesche Schultek; Bernd Gerber; Toralf Reimer; Johannes Stubert; Steffi Hartmann; Annett Martin; Angrit Stachs
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2022-05-11       Impact factor: 6.575

5.  Could ultrasound-guided cryoablation be used to manage "low-risk" DCIS?: a feasibility case report.

Authors:  Michael J Plaza; Denzel A Cole
Journal:  Radiol Case Rep       Date:  2020-06-20
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.