Heterogeneity analysis of Gd-DTPA uptake: Improvement in breast lesion differentiation

Journal of Computer Assisted Tomography

Volumn 23, Issue 4, 1999, Pages 615-621

  Issa, Bashar ^a,c   Buckley, David L ^a,b   Turnbull, Lindsay W ^a  

^a HULL ROYAL INFIRMARY   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA   (United States)

^c UNITED ARAB EMIRATES UNIVERSITY   (United Arab Emirates)

Author keywords

Breasts, neoplasms; Contrast media, uptake; Image processing; Magnetic resonance imaging, techniques

Indexed keywords

CONTRAST MEDIA; IMAGE ENHANCEMENT; MEDICAL IMAGING; PIXELS; TUMORS;

BREAST LESION; BREAST NEOPLASM; CONTRAST MEDIUM; CONTRAST MEDIUM, UPTAKE; CONTRAST-ENHANCED; CONTRAST-ENHANCED MR; GD-DTPA; IMAGES PROCESSING; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING, TECHNIQUE; TRANSFER RATES;

MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING;

CONTRAST MEDIUM; GADOLINIUM; PENTETIC ACID;

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; BREAST LESION; BREAST TUMOR; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CLINICAL FEATURE; CONTRAST ENHANCEMENT; CONTROLLED STUDY; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; FEMALE; HISTOPATHOLOGY; HUMAN; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; PRIORITY JOURNAL;

EID: 0032812586     PISSN: 03638715     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/00004728-199907000-00024     Document Type: Article

References (34)

1. Harms SE, Flamig DP, Hesley KL, et al. MR imaging of the breast with rotating delivery of excitation off resonance: clinical experience with pathological correlation. Radiology 1993;187:493-501.
2. Orel SG, Schnall MD, Powell CM, et al. Staging of suspected breast cancer: effect of MR imaging and MR-guided biopsy. Radiology 1995;196:115-22.
3. Heywang-Kobrunner SH. Contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging of the breast. Invest Radiol 1994;29:94-104.
4. Flickinger FW, Allison JD, Sherry RM, et al. Differentiation of benign from malignant breast masses by time-intensity evaluation of contrast-enhanced MRI. Magn Res Imag 1993;11:617-20.
5. Orel SG, Schnall MD, Livolsi VA, et al. Suspicious breast lesions: MR imaging with radiologic-pathologic correlation. Radiology 1994;190:485-93.
6. Stomper PC, Herman S, Klippnstein DL, et al. Suspect breast lesions: findings at dynamic gadolinium-enhanced MR imaging correlated with mammographic and pathologic features. Radiology 1995;197:387-95.
7. Gilles R, Guinebretiere J, Lucidarme O, et al. Non palpable breast tumours: diagnosis with contrast-enhanced subtraction dynamic MR imaging. Radiology 1994;191:625-31.
8. Toft PS, Kermode AG. Measurement of blood-brain barrier permeability and leakage space using dynamic MR imaging. 1. Fundamental concepts. Magn Res Med 1991;17:357-67.
9. Buckley DL, Kerslake RW, Blackband SJ, Horsman A. Quantitative analysis of multislice Gd-DTPA enhanced dynamic MR images using an automated Simplex minimization procedure. Magn Res Med 1994;32:646-51.
10. Mussurakis S, Buckley DL, Drew PJ, et al. Dynamic MR imaging of the breast combined with analysis of contrast agent kinetics in the differentiation of primary breast tumours. Clin Radiol 1997; 52:516-26.
11. Buckley Dl, Mussurakis S, Blackband SJ, et al. Dynamic MR mammography: a comparison of two pharmacokinetic modelling techniques. Proc. ISMRM, Nice, France, 1995:436.
12. Issa B, Buckley DL, Mussurakis S, Horsman A. Statistical analysis of contrast-enhanced breats MR images. Proc. ISMRM, Vancouver, Canada, 1997:1049.
13. Hittmair K, Gomiscek G, Langenberger K, et al. Method for the quantitative assessment of contrast agent uptake in dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI. Magn Res Med 1994;31:567-71.
14. Heywang-Kobrunner SH, Hahn D, Schmidt H, et al. MR imaging of the breast using gadolinium-DTPA. J Comput Assist Tomogr 1986;10:199-204.
15. Heywang-Kobrunner SH, Schlegel A, Beck R, et al. Contrast-enhanced MRI of the breast after limited surgery and radiation therapy. J Comput Assist Tomogr 1993;17:891-900.
16. Turkat Tj, Klein BD, Polan RL, et al. Dynamic MR mammography: a technique for potentially reducing the biopsy rate for benign breast disease. J Magn Res Imag 1994;4:563-8.
17. Gribbestad IS, Nilsen G, Fjosne HE, et al. Comparative signal intensity measurements in dynamic gadolinium-enhanced MR mammography. J Magn Res Imag 1994;4:477-80.
18. Mussurakis S, Buckley DL, Bowsley SJ, et al. Dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging of the breast combined with pharmacokinetic analysis of gadolinium-DTPA uptake in the diagnosis of local recurrence of early-stage carcinoma. Invest Radiol 1995;30:650-62.
19. Boetes C, Barentsz JO, Mus RD. MR characterization of suspicious breast lesions with a gadolinium-enhanced turbo-FLASH subtraction technique. Radiology 1994;193:777-81.
20. Larsson HBW, Stubgaard M, Frederiksen JL, et al. Quantification of blood-brain barrier defect by magnetic resonance imaging and gadolinium-DTPA in patients with multiple sclerosis and brain tumors. Magn Res Med 1990;16:117-31.
21. Larsson HBW, Tofts PS. Measurement of blood-brain barrier permeability using dynamic Gd-DTPA scanning - a comparison of methods. Magn Res Med 1992;24:174-6.
22. Brix G, Semmler W, Port R, et al. Pharmacokinetic parameters in CNS Gd-DTPA enhanced MR imaging. J Comput Assist Tomogr 1991;15:621-8.
23. Kelcz F, Santyr GE, Cron GO, Mongin SJ. Application of a quantitative model to differentiate benign from malignant breast lesions detected by dynamic, gadolinium-enhanced MRI. J Magn Res Imag 1996;6:743-52.
24. Morgan PH, Mercer LP, Foldin NW. General model for nutritional responses of higher organisms. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 1975;72: 4327-31.
25. Adams AH, Brookeman JR, Merickel MB. Breast lesion discrimination using statistical analysis and shape measure on magnetic resonance imagery. Comput Med Imag Graph 1991;15:339-49.
26. Sinha S, Lucas-Quesada FA, DeBruhl ND, et al. Multifeature analysis of Gd-enhanced MR images of breast lesions. J Magn Res Imag 1997;7:1016-26.
27. Momenan R, Loew MH, Insana MF, et al. Application of pattern recognition techniques in ultrasound tissue characterization. 10th International Conference on Pattern Recognition, IEEE, 1990:1: 608-12.
28. Knowles AJ, Issa B, Burton S, et al. Classification of benign and malignant breast disease by neural network analysis of dynamic imaging. Proc. ISMRM, Sydney, Australia, 1998:928.
29. Plevritis SK, Daniel BL, Yen YF, et al. Classification algorithms for MRI breast lesions. Proc. ISMRM, Sydney, Australia, 1998:930.
30. Furman-Haran E, Margalit R, Robgeld D, Degani H. Dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging reveals stress-induced angiogenesis in MCF7 human breast tumors. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 1996;93:6247-51.
31. Parker GJM, Suckling J, Tanner SF, et al. Probing tumor microvascularity by measurement, analysis and display of contrast agent uptake kinetics. J Magn Res Imag 1997;7:564-74.
32. Kaiser WA. False-positive results in dynamic MR mammography - causes, frequency and methods to avoid. MRI Clin North Am 1994;2:539-55.
33. Mussurakis S, Buckley DL, Horsman A. Dynamic MR imaging of invasive breast cancer: correlation with tumour grade and other histological factors. Br J Radiol 1997;70:446-51.
34. Mussurakis S, Buckley DL, Horsman A. Dynamic MRI of invasive breast cancer: assessment of three region-of-interest analysis methods. J Comput Assist Tomogr 1997;21:431-8.