Top

Published in:

01-03-2014 | Breast

3-T breast magnetic resonance imaging in patients with suspicious microcalcifications on mammography

Authors: B. L. Stehouwer, L. G. Merckel, H. M. Verkooijen, N. H. G. M. Peters, R. M. Mann, K. M. Duvivier, W. P. Th. M. Mali, P. H. M. Peeters, W. B. Veldhuis, M. A. A. J. van den Bosch

Published in: European Radiology | Issue 3/2014

Abstract

Objective

To investigate the diagnostic value of 3-Tesla (T) breast MRI in patients presenting with microcalcifications on mammography.

Methods

Between January 2006 and May 2009, 123 patients with mammographically detected BI-RADS 3–5 microcalcifications underwent 3-T breast MRI before undergoing breast biopsy. All MRIs of the histopathologically confirmed index lesions were reviewed by two breast radiologists. The detection rate of invasive carcinoma and ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) was evaluated, as well as the added diagnostic value of MRI over mammography and breast ultrasound.

Results

At pathology, 40/123 (33 %) lesions proved malignant; 28 (70 %) DCIS and 12 (30 %) invasive carcinoma. Both observers detected all invasive malignancies at MRI, as well as 79 % (observer 1) and 86 % (observer 2) of in situ lesions. MRI in addition to conventional imaging led to a significant increase in area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve from 0.67 (95 % CI 0.56–0.79) to 0.79 (95 % CI 0.70–0.88, observer 1) and to 0.80 (95 % CI 0.71–0.89, observer 2), respectively.

Conclusions

3-T breast MRI was shown to add significant value to conventional imaging in patients presenting with suspicious microcalcifications on mammography.

Key points

• 3-T MRI is increasingly used for breast imaging in clinical practice.

• On 3-T breast MRI up to 86 % of DCIS lesions are detected.

• 3-T MRI increases the diagnostic value in patients with mammographically detected microcalcifications.

Bluekens AM, Holland R, Karssemeijer N, Broeders MJ, den Heeten GJ (2012) Comparison of digital screening mammography and screen-film mammography in the early detection of clinically relevant cancers: a multicenter study. Radiology 265:707–714PubMedCrossRef

Stomper PC, Connolly JL, Meyer JE, Harris JR (1989) Clinically occult ductal carcinoma in situ detected with mammography: analysis of 100 cases with radiologic-pathologic correlation. Radiology 172:235–241PubMed

Verschuur-Maes AH, van Gils CH, van den Bosch MA, De Bruin PC, van Diest PJ (2011) Digital mammography: more microcalcifications, more columnar cell lesions without atypia. Mod Pathol 24:1191–1197PubMedCrossRef

Feeley L, Kiernan D, Mooney T et al (2011) Digital mammography in a screening programme and its implications for pathology: a comparative study. J Clin Pathol 64:215–219PubMedCrossRef

Kuzmiak CM, Dancel R, Pisano E et al (2006) Consensus review: a method of assessment of calcifications that appropriately undergo a six-month follow-up. Acad Radiol 13:621–629PubMedCrossRef

Bagnall MJ, Evans AJ, Wilson AR et al (2001) Predicting invasion in mammographically detected microcalcification. Clin Radiol 56:828–832PubMedCrossRef

Akita A, Tanimoto A, Jinno H, Kameyama K, Kuribayashi S (2009) The clinical value of bilateral breast MR imaging: is it worth performing on patients showing suspicious microcalcifications on mammography? Eur Radiol 19:2089–2096PubMedCrossRef

Cilotti A, Iacconi C, Marini C et al (2007) Contrast-enhanced MR imaging in patients with BI-RADS 3-5 microcalcifications. Radiol Med 112:272–286PubMedCrossRef

Peters NH, Borel Rinkes IH, Zuithoff NP, Mali WP, Moons KG, Peeters PH (2008) Meta-analysis of MR imaging in the diagnosis of breast lesions. Radiology 246:116–124PubMedCrossRef

10.

Bazzocchi M, Zuiani C, Panizza P et al (2006) Contrast-enhanced breast MRI in patients with suspicious microcalcifications on mammography: results of a multicenter trial. AJR Am J Roentgenol 186:1723–1732PubMedCrossRef

11.

Westerhof JP, Fischer U, Moritz JD, Oestmann JW (1998) MR imaging of mammographically detected clustered microcalcifications: is there any value? Radiology 207:675–681PubMed

12.

Mann RM, Kuhl CK, Kinkel K, Boetes C (2008) Breast MRI: guidelines from the European Society of Breast Imaging. Eur Radiol 18:1307–1318PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

13.

Kuhl CK, Jost P, Morakkabati N, Zivanovic O, Schild HH, Gieseke J (2006) Contrast-enhanced MR imaging of the breast at 3.0 and 1.5 T in the same patients: initial experience. Radiology 239:666–676PubMedCrossRef

14.

Uematsu T, Kasami M, Yuen S, Igarashi T, Nasu H (2012) Comparison of 3- and 1.5-T dynamic breast MRI for visualization of spiculated masses previously identified using mammography. AJR Am J Roentgenol 198:W611–W617PubMedCrossRef

15.

Peters NH, Borel Rinkes IH, Mali WP et al (2007) Breast MRI in nonpalpable breast lesions: a randomized trial with diagnostic and therapeutic outcome – MONET – study. Trials 8:40PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

16.

Peters NH, van Esser S, van den Bosch MA et al (2011) Preoperative MRI and surgical management in patients with nonpalpable breast cancer: the MONET – randomised controlled trial. Eur J Cancer 47:879–886PubMedCrossRef

17.

Molleran V, Mahoney MC (2010) The BI-RADS breast magnetic resonance imaging lexicon. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 18:171–185, viiPubMedCrossRef

18.

Kuhl CK, Mielcareck P, Klaschik S et al (1999) Dynamic breast MR imaging: are signal intensity time course data useful for differential diagnosis of enhancing lesions? Radiology 211:101–110PubMedCrossRef

19.

Peduzzi P, Concato J, Kemper E, Holford TR, Feinstein AR (1996) A simulation study of the number of events per variable in logistic regression analysis. J Clin Epidemiol 49:1373–1379PubMedCrossRef

20.

Hosmer DW, Lemeshow S (1989) Applied logistic regression, 2nd edn. Wiley, New York

21.

Jansen SA, Paunesku T, Fan X et al (2009) Ductal carcinoma in situ: X-ray fluorescence microscopy and dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging reveals gadolinium uptake within neoplastic mammary ducts in a murine model. Radiology 253:399–406PubMedCrossRef

22.

Raza S, Vallejo M, Chikarmane SA, Birdwell RL (2008) Pure ductal carcinoma in situ: a range of MRI features. AJR Am J Roentgenol 191:689–699PubMedCrossRef

23.

Yamada T, Mori N, Watanabe M et al (2010) Radiologic-pathologic correlation of ductal carcinoma in situ. Radiographics 30:1183–1198PubMedCrossRef

24.

Newstead GM (2010) MR imaging of ductal carcinoma in situ. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 18:225–240, viiiPubMedCrossRef

25.

Jansen SA, Newstead GM, Abe H et al (2007) Pure ductal carcinoma in situ: kinetic and morphologic MR characteristics compared with mammographic appearance and nuclear grade. Radiology 245:684–691PubMedCrossRef

26.

Zhu J, Kurihara Y, Kanemaki Y et al (2007) Diagnostic accuracy of high-resolution MRI using a microscopy coil for patients with presumed DCIS following mammography screening. J Magn Reson Imaging 25:96–103PubMedCrossRef

27.

Kuhl CK, Schrading S, Bieling HB et al (2007) MRI for diagnosis of pure ductal carcinoma in situ: a prospective observational study. Lancet 370:485–492PubMedCrossRef

28.

Wang LC, Sullivan M, Du H, Feldman MI, Mendelson EB (2013) US appearance of ductal carcinoma in situ. RadioGraphics 33:213–228PubMedCrossRef

29.

Fatemi-Ardekani A, Boylan C, Noseworthy MD (2009) Identification of breast calcification using magnetic resonance imaging. Med Phys 36:5429–5436PubMedCrossRef

30.

James D, Clymer BD, Schmalbrock P (2001) Texture detection of simulated microcalcification susceptibility effects in magnetic resonance imaging of breasts. J Magn Reson Imaging 13:876–881PubMedCrossRef

31.

Mende J, Wild J, Ulucay D et al (2010) Acoustic radiation force contrast in MRI: detection of calcifications in tissue-mimicking phantoms. Med Phys 37:6347–6356PubMedCrossRef

Title: 3-T breast magnetic resonance imaging in patients with suspicious microcalcifications on mammography
Authors: B. L. Stehouwer
L. G. Merckel
H. M. Verkooijen
N. H. G. M. Peters
R. M. Mann
K. M. Duvivier
W. P. Th. M. Mali
P. H. M. Peeters
W. B. Veldhuis
M. A. A. J. van den Bosch
Publication date: 01-03-2014
Publisher: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in: European Radiology / Issue 3/2014
Print ISSN: 0938-7994
Electronic ISSN: 1432-1084
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-013-3029-1

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

3-T breast magnetic resonance imaging in patients with suspicious microcalcifications on mammography

Abstract

Objective

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Key points

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Objective

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Key points

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 3/2014

Thoracic outlet syndrome in 3T MR neurography—fibrous bands causing discernible lesions of the lower brachial plexus

Can a structured questionnaire identify patients with reduced renal function?

Urinary stone detection and characterisation with dual-energy CT urography after furosemide intravenous injection: preliminary results

Diffusion-weighted MRI for distinguishing non-neoplastic cysts from solid masses in the mediastinum: problem-solving in mediastinal masses of indeterminate internal characteristics on CT

Diffusivity of intraorbital lymphoma vs. IgG4-related DISEASE: 3D turbo field echo with diffusion-sensitised driven-equilibrium preparation technique

Cementoplasty for managing painful bone metastases outside the spine