Computed model of gadolinium enhanced MRI of breast disease

European Journal of Radiology

Volumn 24, Issue 2, 1997, Pages 109-119

  Kenney, Philip J ^a   Sobol, Wlad T ^a   Smith, J Kevin ^a   Morgan, Desiree E ^a  

^a University of Alabama at Birmingham   (United States)

Author keywords

breast cancer; gadolinium; MRI

Indexed keywords

GADOLINIUM PENTETATE;

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; BREAST CANCER; CLINICAL TRIAL; COMPUTER MODEL; CONTRAST ENHANCEMENT; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; FEMALE; HUMAN; INTRAVENOUS DRUG ADMINISTRATION; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; PRIORITY JOURNAL;

ALGORITHMS; BREAST; BREAST NEOPLASMS; COMPUTER SIMULATION; CONTRAST MEDIA; DATA DISPLAY; FEMALE; GADOLINIUM; GADOLINIUM DTPA; HUMANS; IMAGE ENHANCEMENT; IMAGE PROCESSING, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; INJECTIONS, INTRAVENOUS; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MODELS, BIOLOGICAL; NEOVASCULARIZATION, PATHOLOGIC; ORGANOMETALLIC COMPOUNDS; PENTETIC ACID; PERMEABILITY; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY;

EID: 0031079725     PISSN: 0720048X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0720-048X(96)01141-2     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. [1] Kaiser WA. False-positive results in dynamic MR mammography. MRI Clinics North Am 1994; 2: 539-555.
2. [2] Heywang-Koebrunner SH, Viehweg P. Sensitivity of contrast-enhanced MR imaging of the breast. MRI Clinics North Am 1994; 2: 527-538.
3. [3] Harms SE, Flamig DP, Hesley KL, Meiches MD, Jensen RA, Evans WP, Savino DA, Wells RV. MR imaging of the breast with rotating delivery of excitation off resonance: Clinical experience with pathologic correlation. Radiology 1993; 187: 493-501.
4. [4] Turkat TJ, Klein BD, Polan RL, Richman RH. Dynamic MR mammography: A technique for potentially reducing the biopsy rate for benign breast disease. JMRI 1994; 4: 563-568.
5. [5] Kaiser WA, Zeitler E. MR imaging of the breast: Fast imaging sequences with and without Gd-DTPA. Radiology 1989; 170: 681-686.
6. [6] Chenevert TL, Helvie MA, Aisen AM, Francis IR, Adler DD, Roubidoux MA, Londy FJ. Dynamic three-dimensional imaging with partial k-space sampling: Initial application for gadolinium-enhanced rate characterization of breast lesions. Radiology 1995; 196: 135-142.
7. [7] 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 Imag 1993; 11: 617-620.
8. [8] Fobben ES, Rubin CZ, Kalisher L, Dembner AG, Seltzer MH, Santoro EJ. Breast MR imaging with commercially available techniques: Radiologic-pathologic correlation. Radiology 1995; 196: 143-152.
9. [9] Orel SG, Schnall MD, LiVolsi VA, Troupin RH. Suspicious breast lesions: MR imaging with radiologic-pathologic correlation. Radiology 1994; 190: 485-493.
10. [10] Buckley DL, Mussurakis S, Bowsley SJ, Fox, JN, Carleton PJ, Tumbull LW, Horsman A. Locoregional recurrence of breast carcinoma: Detection with Gd-DTPA enhanced dynamic MR imaging. Presented at Third SMR Annual Meeting, Nice, France, 1995.
11. [11] Gribbestad IS, Nilsen G, Fjøsne H, Fougner R, Haugen OA, Petersen SB, Rinck PA, Kvinnsland S. Contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging of the breast. Acta One 1992; 31: 833-842.
12. [12] Schmidt F, Stollberger R, Pedevilla M, Lusschin-Ebengreuth G, Kriel D, Ebner F. Definition of benign breast lesions with contrast enhanced 3D-imaging with a high temporal resolution. Presented at Third SMR Annual Meeting, Nice, France, 1995.
13. [13] Kelcz F, Santyr GE, Cron GO. Incorporation of washin and washout criteria for improvement of specificity in dynamic gadolinium enhanced MRI of breast lesions. Presented at First SMR Meeting, Dallas, 1994.
14. [14] Gilles R, Zafrani B, Guinebretière J, Meunier M, Lucidarme O, Tardivon AA, Rochard F, Vanel D, Neuenschwander S, Arriagada R. Ductal carcinoma in situ: MR imaging-histopathologic correlation. Radiology 1995; 196: 415-419.
15. [15] Pedevilla M, Stollberger R, Schmidt •F, Wach P, Ebner F. Comparison of various methods used for breast tumor characterization in GD-DTPA enhanced MR-imaging. Presented at First SMR Meeting, Dallas, 1994.
16. [16] Muller-Schimpfle. Dynamic MR mammography: Is there a benefit of a sophisticated evaluation of enhancement curves. Presented at Third SMR meeting, Nice, France, 1995.
17. [17] Hall-Craggs MA, Mumtaz H, Wotherspoon A, Paley M, Wilkinson ID, Chinn RSJ, Davidson T, Taylor I. MR mammography for the assessment of recurrent breast carcinoma. Presented at Third SMR meeting, Nice, France, 1995.
18. [18] Heywang-Kobrunner SH, Haustein J, Pohl C, Beck R, Lommatzsch B, Untch M, Nathrath WBJ. Contrast enhanced MR imaging of the breast: Comparison of two different doses of gadopentetate dimeglumine. Radiology 1994; 19(1): 639-646.
19. [19] Fischer U, Vosshenrich R, Funke M, Oestmann JW, Grabbe EH. MR imaging-guided breast biopsy: experience with two stereotaxic systems. Presented at 80th RSNA Annual Meeting, Chicago, USA, IL, 1994.
20. [20] Weinreb JC, Newstead G. MR imaging of the breast. Radiology 1995; 196: 593-610.
21. [21] Simon I, Metens T, Lemort M, Dagnelie J, Nogaret JM, Gottlob R. Diagnosis of recurrence of breast carcinoma after conservative therapy with Gd enhanced MRI at 0.5 Tesla. Presented at Third SMR meeting, Nice, France, 1995.
22. [22] Porter B, Taylor V, Smith JP, Tsao V. Contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance mammography. Acad Radiol 1994; 1: 36-46.
23. [23] Sperber GO, Ericsson A, Hemmingsson A, Jung B, Thuomas K-Å. Improved Fomiulae for Signal Amplitudes in Repeated NMR Sequences: Applications in NMR Imaging. Magn Reson Med 1986; 3: 685-698.
24. [24] Sobol WT, Gauntt DG. On the stationary states in gradient echo imaging. JMRI 1996; 6: 384-398.
25. [25] Bottomley PA, Hardy CJ, Arsersinger RE, Allen-Moore G. A review of 1H NMR relaxation in pathology: Are T1 and T2 diagnostic? Med Phys 1987; 14: 1-37.
26. 2+ complexes. Mag Reson Med 1984; 1: 496.
27. [27] Sobol WT. Magnetic resonance contrast agents: Physical basis of relaxation. Neuroimaging Clininc North Am 1994; 4: 27-42.
28. [28] Weidner N, Semple JP, Welch WR, Folkman J. Tumor angiogenesis and metastasis-correlation in invasive breast carcinoma. N Eng J Med 1991; 324: 1-8.
29. [29] Folkman J. What is the evidence that tumors are angiogenesis dependent? J Natl CA Instit 1990; 82:4-6.
30. [30] Frough C, Guinebretière, Contesso G, Paola RD, Blèry. Correlation between contrast enhancement in dynamic magnetic resonance imaging of the breast and tumor angiogenesis. Invest Radiol 1994; 29: 1043-1049.
31. [31] Knopp MV, Brix G, Junkermann HJ, Sinn HP. MR mammography with pharmacokinetic mapping for monitoring of breast cancer treatment during neoadjuvant therapy. Breast Imag 1994; 2: 633-658,
32. [32] Tofts PS, Berkowitz B, Schnall MD. Quantitative analysis of dynamic GD-DTPA enhancement in breast tumors using a permeability model. Magn Reson Med 1995; 33: 564-568.
33. [33] Hittmair K, Gomiscek G, Langenberger K, Recht M, Imhof H, Krwner J. Method for quantitative assessment of contrast agent uptake in dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI. Magn Reson Med 1994; 31:567-571.
34. [34] Poon CS, Bronskill MJ, Henkelman RM, Boyd NF. Quantitative magnetic resonance imaging parameters and their relationship to mammographic pattern. J Natl Cancer Inst 1992; 84: 777-781
35. [35] Hylton NM, Frankel SD. Imaging techniques for breast MR imaging. MRI Clinics North Am 1994; 2: 511-525.