Top

Published in:

01-09-2009 | Breast

The clinical value of bilateral breast MR imaging: is it worth performing on patients showing suspicious microcalcifications on mammography?

Authors: Ayano Akita, Akihiro Tanimoto, Hiromitsu Jinno, Kaori Kameyama, Sachio Kuribayashi

Published in: European Radiology | Issue 9/2009

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the clinical value of bilateral breast magnetic resonance (MR) imaging (MRI) in patients showing suspicious microcalcifications on mammography and negative ultrasound findings. Fifty patients underwent MRI before stereotactic vacuum-assisted breast biopsy (SVAB). MR findings were classified into five types for interpretation, and types 4 and 5 were considered malignant. SVAB revealed 13 carcinomas and 37 benign lesions. Malignant lesions were more frequently found in cases of positive MRI diagnoses than in negative MRI diagnoses (P < 0.001). Mammography had a sensitivity of 100%, a specificity of 24% and an accuracy of 44%, whereas mammography plus MRI had a sensitivity of 85%, a specificity of 100% and an accuracy of 96%. In the evaluation of mammographically detected microcalcifications, bilateral breast MRI is of good diagnostic value and may alter the indications for SVAB.

Bassett LW (1992) Mammographic analysis of calcifications. Radiol Clin North Am 30:93–105PubMed

Kettritz U, Rotter K, Schreer I, Murauer M, Schulz-Wendtland R, Peter D, Heywang-Köbrunner SH (2004) Stereotactic vacuum-assisted breast biopsy in 2874 patients. Cancer 100:245–251 doi:10.1002/cncr.11887 PubMedCrossRef

Mendez A, Cabanillas F, Echenique M, Malekshamran K, Perez I, Ramos E (2004) Evaluation of breast imaging reporting and data system category 3 mammograms and the use of stereotactic vacuum-assisted breast biopsy in a nonacademic community practice. Cancer 100:710–714 doi:10.1002/cncr.20017 PubMedCrossRef

Mendez A, Cabanillas F, Echenique M, Malekshamran K, Perez I, Ramos E (2004) Mammographic features and correlation with biopsy findings using 11-gauge stereotactic vacuum-assisted breast biopsy (SVABB). Ann Oncol 15:450–454PubMedCrossRef

Kettritz U, Morack G, Decker T (2005) Stereotactic vacuum-assisted breast biopsies in 500 women with microcalcifications: radiological and pathological correlations. Eur J Radiol 55:270–276 doi:10.1016/j.ejrad.2004.10.014 PubMedCrossRef

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

American College of Radiology (2003) Illustrated Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS), 4th edn. American College of Radiology, Reston

Bazzocchi M, Zuiani C, Panizza P (2006) Contrast-enhanced breast MRI in patients with suspicious microcalcifications on mammography: results of a multicenter trial. AJR Am J Roentgenol 186:1723–1732 doi:10.2214/AJR.04.1898 PubMedCrossRef

Kneeshaw PJ, Lowry M, Manton D, Hubbard A, Drew PJ, Turnbull LW (2006) Differentiation of benign from malignant breast disease associated with screening detected microcalcifications using dynamic contrast enhanced magnetic resonance imaging. Breast 15:29–38 doi:10.1016/j.breast.2005.05.002 PubMedCrossRef

10.

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

11.

Gilles R, Meunier M, Lucidarme O et al (1996) Clustered breast microcalcifications: evaluation by dynamic contrast-enhanced subtraction MRI. J Comput Assist Tomogr 20:9–14PubMedCrossRef

12.

Nakahara H, Namba K, Fukami A et al (2001) Three-dimensional MR imaging of mammographically detected suspicious microcalcifications. Breast Cancer 8:116–124PubMedCrossRef

13.

Uematsu T, Yuen S, Kasami M, Uchida Y (2007) Dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging in screening detected microcalcification lesions of the breast: is there any value? Breast Cancer Res Treat 103:269–281 doi:10.1007/s10549–006–9373-y PubMedCrossRef

14.

Zhu J, Kurihara Y, Kanemaki Y, Ogata H, Fukuda M, Nakajima Y, Maeda I (2006) Diagnostic accuracy of high-resolution MRI using a microscopy coil for patients with presumed DCIS following mammography screening. J Magn Reson Imaging 25:96–103 doi:10.1002/jmri.20809 CrossRef

15.

Pijnappel RM, Peeters PH, Hendriks JH, Mali WP (2004) Reproducibility of mammographic classifications for non-palpable suspect lesions with microcalcifications. Br J Radiol 77:312–314 doi:10.1259/bjr/84593467 PubMedCrossRef

16.

Stomper PC, Margolin FR (1994) Ductal carcinoma in situ: the mammographer’s perspective. AJR Am J Roentgenol 162:585–591PubMed

17.

Kuhl CK, Schrading S, Bieling HB et al (2007) MRI for diagnosis of pure ductal carcinoma in situ: a prospective observational study. Lancet 370:485–492 doi:10.1016/S0140–6736(07)61232-X PubMedCrossRef

18.

Tozaki M, Igarashi T, Fukuda K (2006) Positive and negative predictive values of BI-RADS MRI descriptors for focal breast masses. Magn Reson Med Sci 5:7–15 doi:10.2463/mrms.5.7 PubMedCrossRef

19.

Tozaki M, Fukuda K (2006) High-spatial-resolution MRI of non-masslike breast lesions: interpretation model based on BI-RADS MRI descriptors. AJR Am J Roentgenol 187:330–337 doi:10.2214/AJR.05.0998 PubMedCrossRef

20.

Erguvan-Dogan B, Whitman GJ, Kushwaha AC, Phelps MJ, Dempsey PJ (2006) BI-RADS-MRI: a primer. AJR Am J Roentgenol 187:w152–w160 doi:10.2214/AJR.05.0572 PubMedCrossRef

21.

Liberman L, Morris EA, Lee MJ et al (2002) Breast lesions detected on MR imaging: features and positive predictive value. AJR Am J Roentgenol 179:171–178PubMed

22.

American Joint Committee on Cancer (1997) AJCC cancer staging manual, 5th edn. Lippincott-Raven, Philadelphia, pp 171–180

23.

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

24.

Pfarl G, Helbich TH, Riedl CC, Wagner T, Gnant M, Rudas M, Liberman L (2002) Stereotactic 11-gauge vacuum-assisted breast biopsy: a validation study. AJR Am J Roentgenol 179:1503–1507PubMed

25.

Kopans DB (1989) Breast imaging. In: Kopans DB (eds) Preoperative imaging-guided needle placement and localization of clinically occult lesions. Lippincott-Raven, Philadelphia, pp 320–341

26.

Liberman L, Morris EA, Benton CL, Abramson AF, Dershaw DD (2003) Probably benign lesions at breast magnetic resonance imaging. Cancer 98:377–388 doi:10.1002/cncr.11491 PubMedCrossRef

27.

Gilles R, Zafrani B, Guinebretiere JM et al (1995) Ductal carcinoma in situ: MR imaging-histopathologic correlation. Radiology 196:415–419PubMed

28.

Ghai S, Muradali D, Bukhanov K, Kulkarni S (2005) Nonenhancing breast malignancies on MRI; sonographic and pathologic correlation. AJR Am J Roentgenol 185:481–487PubMed

29.

Menell JH, Morris EA, Dershaw DD, Abramson AF, Brogi E, Liberman L (2005) Determination of the presence and extent of pure ductal carcinoma in situ by mammography and magnetic resonance imaging. Breast J 11:382–390 doi:10.1111/j.1075–122X.2005.00121.x PubMedCrossRef

30.

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

31.

Bhattarai N, Kanemaki Y, Kurihara Y, Nakajima Y, Fukuda M, Maeda I (2006) Intraductal papilloma: Features on MR ductography using a microscopic coil. AJR Am J Roentgenol 186:44–47 doi:10.2214/AJR.04.1600 PubMedCrossRef

32.

Liberman L, Morris EA, Dershaw DD, Abramson AF, Tan LK (2003) Ductal enhancement on MR imaging of the breast. AJR Am J Roentgenol 181:519–525PubMed

Title: The clinical value of bilateral breast MR imaging: is it worth performing on patients showing suspicious microcalcifications on mammography?
Authors: Ayano Akita
Akihiro Tanimoto
Hiromitsu Jinno
Kaori Kameyama
Sachio Kuribayashi
Publication date: 01-09-2009
Publisher: Springer-Verlag
Published in: European Radiology / Issue 9/2009
Print ISSN: 0938-7994
Electronic ISSN: 1432-1084
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-009-1396-4

At a glance: The STEP trials

Springer Medicine

The clinical value of bilateral breast MR imaging: is it worth performing on patients showing suspicious microcalcifications on mammography?

Abstract

At a glance: The STEP trials

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 9/2009

The value of combined soft-tissue and vessel visualisation before transarterial chemoembolisation of the liver using C-arm computed tomography

CT-guided radiofrequency ablation of spinal osteoid osteomas with concomitant perineural and epidural irrigation for neuroprotection

Diagnostic accuracy of contrast-enhanced MR angiography in severe carotid stenosis: meta-analysis with metaregression of different techniques

Reply to letter to the Editor re: Adrenal pheochromocytoma: correlation of MRI appearances with histology and function

Direct magnetic resonance arthrography of the knee: utility of axial traction

Gastrointestinal 18F-FDG accumulation on PET without a corresponding CT abnormality is not an early indicator of cancer development