EXPERIENCE ON EVALUATION AND CORRELATION OF SUSPICIOUS BREAST LESION ON SCREENING DIGITAL MAMMOGRAPHY AND ULTRASOUND WITH HISTOPATHOLOGY AND MRI
Abstract
Breast cancer is a leading cause of cancer mortality among women with 12.5% lifetime risk for developing breast cancer by 85 years of age (1). The
incidence is also increased by about 4% per year since 1980's. However Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) programme
reported decrease in the breast cancer mortality rate from 3.1 % to 9.3 % during the period of 1989 to 1992 across all age groups.(2) This decrease in
mortality was at least partially attributable to the benefits gained by early detection through screening mammography. The high prevalence and
need for early treatment of breast malignancy emphasizes the need for early and accurate diagnosis.
The radiological examination of breast is an integral part of modern multidisciplinary approach for effective management of breast disease (3). The
aim of breast imaging is to assess the probability of a lesion being benign or malignant. Currently digital mammography, ultrasound, color Doppler
and MRI are being utilized for detection of breast cancer.
The suspicious lesion has to be evaluated with tissue diagnosis as well as MRI as the MRI has advantage of evaluation of whole breast with dynamic
curve and diffusion weighted imaging, if needed spectroscopic evaluation.
Keywords
Full Text:
PDFReferences
Michell JM, The breast. In: Sutton D. Textbook of radiology and imaging. 7th ed. Edinburg. Churchill Livingstone 2003; 1453-88.
Warner E, Plewes DB, Shumak RS, et al. Comparison of breast magnetic resonance imaging, mammography, and ultrasound for surveillance of women at high risk for hereditary breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2001; 19:3524–3531.
Kuhl CK, Mielcarek P, Klaschik S, et al. Are signal time course data useful for differential diagnosis of enhancing lesions in dynamic breast MR imaging? Radiology 1999; 211:101–110.
Kolb TM, Lichy J, Newhanse JH. Comparison of the performance of screening mammography, physical examination and breast ultrasound and evaluation of factors that influences them. Radiology 2002; 225: 165-75.
Agoston AT, Daniel BL, Herfkens RJ, et al. Intensity-modulated parametric mapping for simultaneous display of rapid dynamic and high-spatial-resolution breast MR imaging data. RadioGraphics 2001; 21:217–226.
Ingrid S, David DD. Diagnostic breast imaging. 2nd ed. New York:Thieme 2001; 87-127 and 132-6.4.
Cardenosa G, Breast cancer: an overview. In: Cardenosa G.Breast imaging, Baltimore: Lippencott William & Wilkins 2004; 1-13.
Kriege M, Brekelmans CT, Boetes C, et al: Efficacy of MRI and mammography for breast-cancer screening in women with a familial or genetic predisposition. N Engl J Med 351:427-437, 2004.
Tilanus-Linthorst M, Verhoog L, Obdeijn IM, et al: A BRCA1/2 mutation, high breast density and prominent pushing margins of a tumor independently contribute to a frequent false-negative mammography. Int J Cancer 102:91-95, 2002.
Kolb TM, Lichy J, Newhouse JH: Occult cancer in women with dense breasts: Detection with screening US—Diagnostic yield and tumor characteristics. Radiology 207:191-199, 1998.
Flickinger FW, Allison JD, Sherry RM, Wright JC. Differentiation of benign from malignant breast masses by time–intensity evaluation of contrast enhanced MRI. Magn Reson Imaging1993; 11:617 -620.
Bowen B¬C, Quencer RM, Margosian P, et al: MR angiography of occlusive disease of the arteries in the head and neck: current concepts. Am J Roentgenol 1994; 162:9
Yang JJ, Hill MD, Morrish WF, Hudon ME, Barber PA, Demchuk AM, Sevick RJ, Frayne R. Comparison of pre- and post contrast 3D time-of-flight MR angiography for the evaluation of distal intracranial branch occlusions in acute ischemic stroke. Am J Neuroradiol 2002; 23:557-567
American College of Radiology. Illustrated Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System, 3rd ed. Reston, VA: American College of Radiology, 1998
Warren RM, Pointon L, Thompson D, et al. Reading protocol for dynamic contrast-enhanced MR images of the breast: sensitivity and specificity analysis. Radiology 2005;236:779–788.
Harms SE, Flamig DR Evans WR et al: MR imaging of the breast: Current status and future potential. AJR 163:1039- 1047, 1994.
Orel SG, Schnall MD, LiVolsi VA, et al. Suspicious breast lesions: MR imaging with radiologic-pathologic correlation. Radiology. 1994;190: 485-493.
Heywang SH,Hahn D,etal:MR of breast :Histopathologic correlation,Eur J Radiol 3/7:175-183,,1987.
Boetes C, Barentsz JO, Mus RD, et al. MR characterization of suspicious breast lesions with a gadolinium-enhanced turboFLASH subtraction technique. Radiology 1994;193 : 777-781.
Perman WH, Heiberg EM, Grunz J, Herrmann VM, Janney CG. A fast 3D-imaging technique for performing dynamic Gd-enhanced MRI of breast lesions. Magn Reson Imaging 1994; 12:545-551.
Heiberg EV, Perman WH, Herrmann VM, Janney CG. Dynamic sequential 3D gadolinium-enhanced MRI of the whole breast. Magn Reson Imaging 1996; 14:337-348.
Stomper PC, Herman S, Klippenstein DL, et al. Suspect breast lesions: findings at dynamic gadolinium-enhanced MR imaging correlated with mammographic and pathologic features. Radiology 1995; 197:387-395
Monticciolo DL, Nelson RC, Dixon WT, et al: MR detection of leakage from silicone breast implants: Value of a silicone-selective pulse sequence. AJR 163:51-59, 1994
Yen YF, Ikeda DM, Herflens RF, et al. Pharmakokinetic analysis of breast disease with dynamic spiral MRI [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the fourth meeting of the International Society for Magnetic Resonance in Medicine 1996. p.745.
Greenman RL, Lenkinski RE, Schnall MD. Bilateral imaging using separate interleaved 3D volumes and dynamically switched multiple receive coil arrays.Magn Reson Med 1998;39:108– 15.
Fischer U, Kopka L, Grabbe E. Breast carcinoma:Effect of preoperative contrast-enhanced MR imaging on the therapeutic approach. Radiology 1999;213:881-888.
Slanetz PJ, Edmister WB, Weisskoff RM, et al. Occult contralateral breast cancer detected by breast MR [abstract]. Radiology 1998;209:467.
Harms SE. Breast magnetic resonance imaging. Semin Ultrasound,CT MR. 1998;19:104-120.
Orel SG,Mendonca MH,Reynolds C, et al. MR imaging of ductal carcinoma in situ. Radiology. 1997;202:413-420.
Orel SG, Schnall MD, Powell CM, et al: Staging ofsuspected breast cancer: Effect of MR imaging and MR-guided biopsy. Radiology 196:115-122.21, 1995.
Fischer U, Kopka L, Grabbe E: Breast carcinoma: Effect of preoperative contrast-enhanced MR imaging on the therapeutic approach. Radiology 213:881-888, 1999.
Berg W.A. :Imaging the local extent of disease; Semin Breast Dis 4:153 -173, 2001.
Morris EA. Breast cancer imaging with MRI. Radiol Clin North Am 2002;40:443–446.
Morris EA, Schwartz LH, Dershaw DD, et al. MR imaging of the breast in patients with occult primary breast carcinoma. Radiology. 1997;205:437-440.
Orel SG,Weinstein SP, Schnall MD, et al. Breast MR imaging in patients with axillary node metastases and unknown primary malignancy. Radiology. 1999;212:543 549.
Olson JA, Morris EA, Van Zee K_I, et al: Magnetic resonance imaging facilitates breast conservation for occult breast cancer. Ann Surg Oncol 7:411-415, 2000.
Warner E, Plewes DB, Shumak RS, et al. Comparison of breast magnetic resonance imaging, mammography, and ultrasound for surveillance of women at high risk for hereditary breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2001;19(15): 3524– 31
Ikeda DM, Birdwell RL, Daniel BL: Potential role of magnetic resonance imaging and other modalities in ductal carcinoma in situ detection. Seminars in Breast Disease 3:50- 60, 2000
Orel SG, Mendonca MH, Reynolds C, et al. MR imaging of ductal carcinoma in situ. Radiology 1997; 202:413-420
Westerhof JP, Fischer U, Moritz JD, Oestmann JW. MR imaging of mammographically detected clustered microcalcifications: is there any value? Radiology 1998; 207:675– 81.
Rodenko GN, Harms SE, Pruneda JM, et al. MR imaging in the management before surgery of lobular carcinoma of the breast: correlation with pathology. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1996; 167:1415-1419.
Weinstein SP, Orel SG, Heller R, et al. MR imaging of the breast in patients with invasive lobular carcinoma. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2001; 176:399-406.
Hylton NM, Frankel SD. Imaging techniques for breast MR imaging. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 1994; 2:511-525.
Hylton NM, Kinkel K. Technical aspects of breast magnetic resonance imaging. Top Magn Reson Imaging 1998; 9:3-16.
Kim SJ, Morris EA, Liberman L. Observer variability and applicability of BI-RADS terminology for breast MR imaging: invasive carcinomas as focal masses. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2001; 177: 551–557.
Susan Greenstein Orel Differentiating Benign from Malignant Enhancing Lesions Identified at MR Imaging of the Breast: Are Time–Signal Intensity Curves an Accurate Predictor? Radiology 1999; 211:5-7
Kuhl CK, Mielcareck P, Klaschik S, et al. Dynamicbreast MR imaging: are signal time course data useful for differential diagnosis of enhancing lesions? Radiology 1999;211:101–110.
Liu PF, Debatin JF, Caduff RF, et al. Improved diagnostic accuracy in dynamic contrast enhanced MRI of the breast by combined quantitative and qualitative analysis. Br J Radiol 1998; 71:501-509
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.