Jens Hachenberg1, Christian Eichler2,3,4, Lena Steinkasserer5, Wolfram Malter2, Fabinshy Thangarajah2, Mathias Warm2,3, Axel Gossmann6, Markus Brod2, Caroline Pahmeyer2. 1. Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany; Hachenberg.Jens@mh-hannover.de. 2. Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany. 3. Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Frauenklinik Holweide, Kliniken der Stadt Köln, Cologne, Germany. 4. Breast Cancer Center, St. Franziskus-Hospital Münster, Münster, Germany. 5. Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany. 6. Department of Radiology, Cologne Merheim Hospital, Kliniken der Stadt Köln gGmbH, Cologne, Germany.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/AIM: Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is an important diagnostic tool in the detection of breast cancer. The Breast Center of the municipal Hospital Holweide, Cologne, annually cares for and treats patients with changes in the breast. A special problem is posed by Breast Imaging-Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) 4 lesions. If a BI-RADS 4 finding is present, is a vacuum biopsy indicated in every case or, if there is already an indication for surgery due to other findings, can the corresponding finding be removed openly without histological clarification? We require real world data regarding the actual in-center likelihood of a BIRADS 4 lesion to be DCIS (Ductal carcinoma in situ) or invasive disease. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This is a retrospective study of 1,641 patients who received MRI examination in the radiological department of the municipal hospital Holweide in 2012 and 2013. Each BI-RADS 4 finding (or higher) classified by MRI was compared with the final histological result. RESULTS: 347 MRIs showed BI-RADS 4 findings or higher and 280 (80.7%) cases showed benign histology. In 67 (19.3%) cases, histology showed DCIS or invasive carcinoma. CONCLUSION: BI-RADS 4 lesions have a low probability of malignancy based on real-world data from this center. If there is already an indication for surgery due to other lesions, the patient can also be offered a simultaneous open biopsy in the context of the already initiated surgical treatment. Each center should know the sensitivity and specificity of the MRI imaging performed and counsel patients based on that.
BACKGROUND/AIM: Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is an important diagnostic tool in the detection of breast cancer. The Breast Center of the municipal Hospital Holweide, Cologne, annually cares for and treats patients with changes in the breast. A special problem is posed by Breast Imaging-Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) 4 lesions. If a BI-RADS 4 finding is present, is a vacuum biopsy indicated in every case or, if there is already an indication for surgery due to other findings, can the corresponding finding be removed openly without histological clarification? We require real world data regarding the actual in-center likelihood of a BIRADS 4 lesion to be DCIS (Ductal carcinoma in situ) or invasive disease. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This is a retrospective study of 1,641 patients who received MRI examination in the radiological department of the municipal hospital Holweide in 2012 and 2013. Each BI-RADS 4 finding (or higher) classified by MRI was compared with the final histological result. RESULTS: 347 MRIs showed BI-RADS 4 findings or higher and 280 (80.7%) cases showed benign histology. In 67 (19.3%) cases, histology showed DCIS or invasive carcinoma. CONCLUSION: BI-RADS 4 lesions have a low probability of malignancy based on real-world data from this center. If there is already an indication for surgery due to other lesions, the patient can also be offered a simultaneous open biopsy in the context of the already initiated surgical treatment. Each center should know the sensitivity and specificity of the MRI imaging performed and counsel patients based on that.
Authors: Nicky H G M Peters; Inne H M Borel Rinkes; Nicolaas P A Zuithoff; Willem P T M Mali; Karel G M Moons; Petra H M Peeters Journal: Radiology Date: 2007-11-16 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Wendy Bruening; Joann Fontanarosa; Kelley Tipton; Jonathan R Treadwell; Jason Launders; Karen Schoelles Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2009-12-14 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Lars J Grimm; Rebecca A Shelby; Emily E Knippa; Eun L Langman; Lauren S Miller; Beth E Whiteside; Mary Scott C Soo Journal: J Am Coll Radiol Date: 2018-03-30 Impact factor: 5.532
Authors: Flora Zagouri; Theodoros N Sergentanis; Antonia Gounaris; Dimitra Koulocheri; Afroditi Nonni; Philip Domeyer; Constantine Fotiadis; John Bramis; George C Zografos Journal: Breast Date: 2007-09-14 Impact factor: 4.380