Skip to main content
Top
Published in: European Radiology 5/2015

01-05-2015 | Breast

Lesion morphology on breast MRI affects targeted ultrasound correlation rate

Authors: Lauren Hollowell, Elissa Price, Vignesh Arasu, Dorota Wisner, Nola Hylton, Bonnie Joe

Published in: European Radiology | Issue 5/2015

Login to get access

Abstract

Introduction

Suspicious lesions on breast MRI are often initially evaluated using targeted ultrasound. However, workup varies. Data on the rate of correlate detection by morphology [mass, non-mass enhancement (NME), or focus] would be useful for developing practice guidelines.

Materials and methods

Breast MRI examinations from 1 January 2008 to 31 December 2010 were reviewed. BI-RADS 4 or 5 lesions on MRI evaluated with targeted ultrasound where definitive diagnosis was obtained were included. Statistical analysis was performed on aggregate data and at the lesion level.

Results

A total of 204 lesions were included in the study. A statistically significant difference in ultrasound correlate identification by morphology was found; a correlate was found in 49.3 % of masses, 15 % of NME, and 42.3 % of foci (p = 0.0006). Additional analysis within each morphology demonstrated significantly greater rate of malignancy in masses with an ultrasound correlate than masses without a correlate (p = 0.0062), while the rate of malignancy in NME and foci did not differ with ultrasound correlation.

Conclusions

Morphology of a suspicious lesion on breast MRI affects the probability of identifying an ultrasound correlate. As sonographic correlates are found in nearly half of masses and foci, targeted ultrasound should be the initial step in their workup.

Key Points

• Lesion morphology on breast MRI affects the probability of ultrasound correlate identification.
• An ultrasound correlate is significantly more likely for masses and foci.
• Mass or focus should undergo targeted ultrasound before MRI-guided biopsy.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Bassett LW, Dhaliwal SG, Eradat J et al (2008) National trends and practices in breast MRI. AJR Am J Roentgenol 191:332–339CrossRefPubMed Bassett LW, Dhaliwal SG, Eradat J et al (2008) National trends and practices in breast MRI. AJR Am J Roentgenol 191:332–339CrossRefPubMed
2.
go back to reference D'Orsi CJ, Sickles EA, Mendelson EB, Morris EA et al (2013) Breast imaging reporting and data system: ACR BI-RADS - breast imaging atlas, 5th edn. American College of Radiology, Reston D'Orsi CJ, Sickles EA, Mendelson EB, Morris EA et al (2013) Breast imaging reporting and data system: ACR BI-RADS - breast imaging atlas, 5th edn. American College of Radiology, Reston
3.
go back to reference LaTrenta LR, Menell JH, Morris EA, Abramson AF, Dershaw DD, Liberman L (2003) Breast lesions detected with MR imaging: utility and histopathologic importance of identification with US. Radiology 227:856–861CrossRefPubMed LaTrenta LR, Menell JH, Morris EA, Abramson AF, Dershaw DD, Liberman L (2003) Breast lesions detected with MR imaging: utility and histopathologic importance of identification with US. Radiology 227:856–861CrossRefPubMed
4.
go back to reference Beran L, Liang W, Nims T, Paquelet J, Sickle-Santanello B (2005) Correlation of targeted ultrasound with magnetic resonance imaging abnormalities of the breast. Am J Surg 190:592–594CrossRefPubMed Beran L, Liang W, Nims T, Paquelet J, Sickle-Santanello B (2005) Correlation of targeted ultrasound with magnetic resonance imaging abnormalities of the breast. Am J Surg 190:592–594CrossRefPubMed
5.
go back to reference Sim LS, Hendriks JH, Bult P, Fook-Chong SM (2005) US correlation for MRI-detected breast lesions in women with familial risk of breast cancer. Clin Radiol 60:801–806CrossRefPubMed Sim LS, Hendriks JH, Bult P, Fook-Chong SM (2005) US correlation for MRI-detected breast lesions in women with familial risk of breast cancer. Clin Radiol 60:801–806CrossRefPubMed
6.
go back to reference Wiratkapun C, Duke D, Nordmann AS et al (2008) Indeterminate or suspicious breast lesions detected initially with MR imaging: value of MRI-directed breast ultrasound. Acad Radiol 15:618–625CrossRefPubMed Wiratkapun C, Duke D, Nordmann AS et al (2008) Indeterminate or suspicious breast lesions detected initially with MR imaging: value of MRI-directed breast ultrasound. Acad Radiol 15:618–625CrossRefPubMed
7.
go back to reference Demartini WB, Eby PR, Peacock S, Lehman CD (2009) Utility of targeted sonography for breast lesions that were suspicious on MRI. AJR Am J Roentgenol 192:1128–1134CrossRefPubMed Demartini WB, Eby PR, Peacock S, Lehman CD (2009) Utility of targeted sonography for breast lesions that were suspicious on MRI. AJR Am J Roentgenol 192:1128–1134CrossRefPubMed
8.
go back to reference Destounis S, Arieno A, Somerville PA et al (2009) Community-based practice experience of unsuspected breast magnetic resonance imaging abnormalities evaluated with second-look sonography. J Ultrasound Med 28:1337–1346PubMed Destounis S, Arieno A, Somerville PA et al (2009) Community-based practice experience of unsuspected breast magnetic resonance imaging abnormalities evaluated with second-look sonography. J Ultrasound Med 28:1337–1346PubMed
9.
go back to reference Meissnitzer M, Dershaw DD, Lee CH, Morris EA (2009) Targeted ultrasound of the breast in women with abnormal MRI findings for whom biopsy has been recommended. AJR Am J Roentgenol 193:1025–1029CrossRefPubMed Meissnitzer M, Dershaw DD, Lee CH, Morris EA (2009) Targeted ultrasound of the breast in women with abnormal MRI findings for whom biopsy has been recommended. AJR Am J Roentgenol 193:1025–1029CrossRefPubMed
10.
go back to reference Abe H, Schmidt RA, Shah RN et al (2010) MR-directed (“Second-Look”) ultrasound examination for breast lesions detected initially on MRI: MR and sonographic findings. AJR Am J Roentgenol 194:370–377CrossRefPubMed Abe H, Schmidt RA, Shah RN et al (2010) MR-directed (“Second-Look”) ultrasound examination for breast lesions detected initially on MRI: MR and sonographic findings. AJR Am J Roentgenol 194:370–377CrossRefPubMed
11.
go back to reference Candelaria R, Fornage BD (2011) Second-look US examination of MR-detected breast lesions. J Clin Ultrasound 39:115–121CrossRefPubMed Candelaria R, Fornage BD (2011) Second-look US examination of MR-detected breast lesions. J Clin Ultrasound 39:115–121CrossRefPubMed
12.
go back to reference Gutierrez RL, DeMartini WB, Eby PR, Kurland BF, Peacock S, Lehman CD (2009) BI-RADS lesion characteristics predict likelihood of malignancy in breast MRI for masses but not for nonmasslike enhancement. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 193(4):994–1000 Gutierrez RL, DeMartini WB, Eby PR, Kurland BF, Peacock S, Lehman CD (2009) BI-RADS lesion characteristics predict likelihood of malignancy in breast MRI for masses but not for nonmasslike enhancement. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 193(4):994–1000
13.
go back to reference Liberman L, Mason G, Morris EA, Dershaw DD (2006) Does size matter? Positive predictive value of MRI-detected breast lesions as a function of lesion size. AJR Am J Roentgenol 186:426–430CrossRefPubMed Liberman L, Mason G, Morris EA, Dershaw DD (2006) Does size matter? Positive predictive value of MRI-detected breast lesions as a function of lesion size. AJR Am J Roentgenol 186:426–430CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Lesion morphology on breast MRI affects targeted ultrasound correlation rate
Authors
Lauren Hollowell
Elissa Price
Vignesh Arasu
Dorota Wisner
Nola Hylton
Bonnie Joe
Publication date
01-05-2015
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in
European Radiology / Issue 5/2015
Print ISSN: 0938-7994
Electronic ISSN: 1432-1084
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-014-3517-y

Other articles of this Issue 5/2015

European Radiology 5/2015 Go to the issue