Top

Published in:

01-07-2005 | Breast

Low-field versus high-field MRI in diagnosing breast disorders

Authors: Eija Pääkkö, Heli Reinikainen, Eija-Leena Lindholm, Tarja Rissanen

Published in: European Radiology | Issue 7/2005

Abstract

We evaluated the performance of low-field MRI in breast disorders by comparing it with high-field MRI and biopsy results. Twenty-eight consecutive patients who were able to undergo two magnetic resonance examinations on following days were examined by high-field and low-field MRI. After T1-weighted sagittal images had been obtained a dynamic 3D axial study was performed followed by the acquisition of contrast-enhanced T1-weighted sagittal images. The images were analyzed separately by two radiologists paying attention to lesion morphology and enhancement kinetics. Six patients had problems in both breasts (34 breasts studied). The results were compared with biopsy results of 27 breasts. There were 16 malignant lesions, two fibroadenomas and nine other benign lesions. The inter-magnetic-resonance-scanner κ value was 0.77 (substantial agreement), while the interobserver κ value was 0.86 and 0.81 at low and high field, respectively (excellent agreement). The sensitivity was 100 and 100%, the specificity was 82 and 73% and the accuracy was 93 and 89% at low and high field, respectively. The mean lesion size was 2 cm and the smallest malignant lesion was 8 mm in diameter. Low-field MRI is a promising tool for breast imaging. Larger materials and smaller lesions are needed to evaluate its true sensitivity and specificity.

Heywang SH, Wolf A, Pruss E, Hilbertz T, Eiermann W, Permanetter W (1989) MR imaging of the breast with Gd-DTPA: use and limitations. Radiology 171:95–103

Kaiser WA, Zeitler E (1989) MR imaging of the breast: fast imaging sequences with and without Gd-DTPA. Preliminary observations. Radiology 170:681–686PubMed

Stomper PC, Herman S, Klippenstein DL et al (1995) Suspect breast lesions: findings at dynamic gadolinium-enhanced MR imaging correlated with mammographic and pathologic features. Radiology 197:387–395PubMed

Nunes LW, Schnall MD, Orel SG et al (1997) Breast MR imaging: interpretation model. Radiology 202:833–841

Liu PF, Debatin JF, Caduff RF, Kacl G, Garzoli E, Krestin GP (1998) Improved diagnostic accuracy in dynamic contrast enhanced MRI of the breast by combined quantitative and qualitative analysis. Br J Radiol 71:501–509

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 211:101–110PubMed

Baum F, Fischer U, Vosshenrich R, Grabbe E (2002) Classification of hypervascularized lesions in CE MR imaging of the breast. Eur Radiol 12:1087–1092CrossRefPubMed

Obdeijn IM, Kuijpers TJ, van Dijk P, Wiggers T, Oudkerk M (1996) MR lesion detection in a breast cancer population. J Magn Reson Imaging 6:849–854

Lee CH, Smith RC, Levine JA, Troiano RN, Tocino I (1999) Clinical usefulness of MR imaging of the breast in the evaluation of the problematic mammogram. Am J Roentgenol 173:1323–1329

10.

Weinstein SP, Orel SG, Heller R et al (2001) MR imaging of the breast in patients with invasive lobular carcinoma. Am J Roentgenol 176:399–406

11.

Orel SG, Schnall MD, Powell CM et al (1995) Staging of suspected breast cancer: effect of MR imaging and MR-guided biopsy. Radiology 196:115–122PubMed

12.

Fischer U, Kopka L, Grabbe E (1999) Breast carcinoma: effect of preoperative contrast-enhanced MR imaging on the therapeutic approach. Radiology 213:881–888PubMed

13.

Muuller RD, Barkhausen J, Sauerwein W, Langer R (1998) Assessment of local recurrence after breast-conserving therapy with MRI. J Comput Assist Tomogr 22:408–412CrossRef

14.

Viehweg P, Heinig A, Lampe D, Buchmann J, Heywang-Kobrunner SH (1998) Retrospective analysis for evaluation of the value of contrast-enhanced MRI in patients treated with breast conservative therapy. Magma 7:141–152

15.

Morris EA, Schwartz LH, Dershaw DD, van Zee KJ, Abramson AF, Liberman L (1997) MR imaging of the breast in patients with occult primary breast carcinoma. Radiology 205:437–440

16.

Heywang-Kobrunner SH, Huynh AT, Viehweg P, Hanke W, Requardt H, Paprosch I (1994) Prototype breast coil for MR-guided needle localization. J Comput Assist Tomogr 18:876–881

17.

Orel SG, Schnall MD, Newman RW, Powell CM, Torosian MH, Rosato EF (1994) MR imaging-guided localization and biopsy of breast lesions: initial experience. Radiology 193:97–102

18.

Kuhl CK, Morakkabati N, Leutner CC, Schmiedel A, Wardelmann E, Schild HH (2001) MR imaging-guided large-core (14-gauge) needle biopsy of small lesions visible at breast MR imaging alone. Radiology 220:31–39

19.

Ojala R, Sequeiros RB, Klemola R, Vanhala E, Jyrkinen L, Tervonen O (2002) MR-guided bone biopsy—preliminary report of a new guiding method. J Magn Reson Imaging 15:82–86CrossRefPubMed

20.

Sittek H, Perlet C, Herrman K, Linsmeier E, Kolem H, Untch M, Kessler M, Reiser M (1997) MR mammography. Preoperative marking of non-palpable breast lesions with the magnetom open at 0.2 T. Radiologe 37:685–691CrossRef

21.

Palosaari K, Tervonen O (2002) Post-processing water-fat imaging technique for fat suppression in a low-field MR imaging system, evaluation in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Magma 15:1–9

22.

Landis JR, Koch GG (1977) The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 33:159–174PubMed

23.

Orel SG, Schnall MD (2001) MR imaging of the breast for the detection, diagnosis and staging of breast cancer. Radiology 220:13–30

24.

Sardanelli F, Iozelli A, Fausto A (2003) MR imaging of the breast: indications, established technique and new directions. Eur Radiol 13(Suppl 3):N28–N36

25.

Vomweg TW, Teifke A, Kunz RP, Hintze C, Hlawatsch A, Kern A, Kreitner KF, Thelen M (2004) Combination of low and high resolution sequences in two orientations for dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI of the breast: more than a compromise. Eur Radiol 14:1732–1742CrossRef

26.

Reinikainen H, Paakko E, Suramo I, Paivansalo M, Jauhiainen J, Rissanen T (2002) Dynamics of contrast enhancement in MR imaging and power Doppler ultrasonography of solid breast lesions. Acta Radiol 43:492–500CrossRef

27.

Hittmair K, Turetschek K, Gomiscek G, Stiglblauer R, Schurawitzki H (1996) Field strength dependence of MRI contrast enhancement: phantom measurements and application to dynamic breast imaging. Br J Radiol 69:215–220

Title: Low-field versus high-field MRI in diagnosing breast disorders
Authors: Eija Pääkkö
Heli Reinikainen
Eija-Leena Lindholm
Tarja Rissanen
Publication date: 01-07-2005
Publisher: Springer-Verlag
Published in: European Radiology / Issue 7/2005
Print ISSN: 0938-7994
Electronic ISSN: 1432-1084
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-005-2664-6

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Low-field versus high-field MRI in diagnosing breast disorders

Abstract

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 7/2005

Functional MR imaging of submandibular herniation of sublingual tissues through a gap of the mylohyoid muscle in two cases of submandibular “masses”

Transient partial amnesia following coronary and peripheral arteriography

Hysterosalpingography with gadolinium

A left iliac fossa mass with iliac venous thrombosis (2005:7a)

Evaluation of tumoral enhancement by superparamagnetic iron oxide particles: comparative studies with ferumoxtran and anionic iron oxide nanoparticles

Is there a need for contrast-enhanced T1-weighted MRI of the spine after inconspicuous short τ inversion recovery imaging?