Contrast-enhanced breast MRI in patients with suspicious microcalcifications on mammography: Results of a multicenter trial

American Journal of Roentgenology

Volumn 186, Issue 6, 2006, Pages 1723-1732

  Bazzocchi, Massimo ^a   Zuiani, Chiara ^a   Panizza, Pietro ^b   Del Frate, Chiara ^a   Soldano, Franca ^c   Isola, Miriam ^c   Sardanelli, Francesco ^d   Giuseppetti, Gian Marco ^e   Simonetti, Giovanni ^f   Lattanzio, Vincenzo ^g   Del Maschio, Alessandro ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF UDINE   (Italy)

^b SAN RAFFAELE HOSPITAL   (Italy)

^c UNIVERSITY OF UDINE   (Italy)

^d IRCCS POLICLINICO SAN DONATO   (Italy)

^e UNIVERSITÀ POLITECNICA DELLE MARCHE   (Italy)

^f UNIVERSITY OF ROME TOR VERGATA   (Italy)

^g POLICLINICO   (Italy)

Author keywords

Breast; Breast carcinoma; Breast microcalcifications; Mammography; MRI

Indexed keywords

GADOTERIDOL; CONTRAST MEDIUM;

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; BOLUS INJECTION; BREAST BIOPSY; BREAST CALCIFICATION; BREAST CARCINOMA; CANCER DIAGNOSIS; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTRAST ENHANCEMENT; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; FEMALE; FIBROCYSTIC BREAST DISEASE; HUMAN; INTRADUCTAL CARCINOMA; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MAMMOGRAPHY; MULTICENTER STUDY; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SINGLE DRUG DOSE; BREAST DISEASE; BREAST TUMOR; CALCINOSIS; METHODOLOGY; MIDDLE AGED; PATHOLOGY; RADIOGRAPHY; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY;

ADULT; AGED; BREAST DISEASES; BREAST NEOPLASMS; CALCINOSIS; CONTRAST MEDIA; FEMALE; HUMANS; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MAMMOGRAPHY; MIDDLE AGED; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY;

EID: 33745510828     PISSN: 0361803X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2214/AJR.04.1898     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Frouge C. Stratégie diagnostique en sénologie. Paris, France: Masson, 1995:29-61
2. Stomper PC, Margolin FR. Ductal carcinoma in situ: the mammographer's perspective. AJR 1994; 162:585-591
3. Stomper PC, Connolly JL, Meyer JE, Harris JR. Clinically occult ductal carcinoma in situ detected with mammography: analysis of 100 cases with radiologic-pathologic correlation. Radiology 1989; 172:235-241
4. Bassett LW. Mammographic analysis of calcifications. Radiol Clin North Am 1992; 30:93-105
5. Heywang-Kobrunner SH. Contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging of the breast. Invest Radiol 1994; 29:94-104
6. Viehweg P, Lampe D, Buchmann J, Heywang-Kobrunner SH. In situ and minimally invasive breast cancer: morphologic and kinetic features on contrast-enhanced MR imaging. MAGMA 2000; 11:129-137
7. Orel SG, Mendonca ME, Reynolds C, et al. MR imaging of ductal carcinoma in situ. Radiology 1997; 202:413-420
8. Holland R, Hendriks JH, Vebeek AL, et al. Extent, distribution and mammographic/histological distribution of breast ductal carcinoma in situ. Lancet 1990; 335:519-522
9. Soderstrom CE, Harms SE, Copit DS, et al. Three-dimensional RODEO breast MR imaging of lesions containing ductal carcinoma in situ. Radiology 1996; 201:427-432
10. Kuhl CK. MRI of breast tumors. Eur Radiol 2000; 10:46-58
11. Gilles R, Meunier M, Lucidarme O, et al. Clustered breast microcalcifications: evaluation by dynamic contrast enhanced subtraction MRI. J Comput Assist Tomogr 1996; 20:9-14
12. Westerhof JP, Fischer U, Moritz JD, Oestmann JW. MR imaging of marnmographically detected clustered microcalcifications: is there any value? Radiology 1998; 207:675-681
13. Tesoro-Tess JD, Amoruso A, Rovini D, et al. Microcalcifications in clinically normal breast: the value of high field, surface coil, Gd-DTPA-enhanced MRI. Eur Radiol 1995; 5:417-422
14. Nakahara H, Namba K, Fukami A, et al. Three-dimensional MR imaging of mammographically detected suspicious microcalcifications. Breast Cancer 2001; 8:116-124
15. Trecate G, Tess JD, Vergnaghi D, et al. Breast microcalcifications studied with 3D contrast-enhanced high-field magnetic resonance imaging: more accuracy in the diagnosis of breast cancer. Tumori 2002; 88:224-233
16. American College of Radiology. Breast imaging reporting and data system (BI-RADS), 3rd ed. Reston, VA: American College of Radiology, 1998
17. Berg WA, Mrose HE, Ioffe OB. Atypical lobular hyperplasia or lobular carcinoma in situ at core-needle breast biopsy. Radiology 2001; 218:503-509
18. Fischer U, Kopka L, Grabbe E. Breast carcinoma: effect of preoperative contrast-enhanced MR imaging on the therapeutic approach. Radiology 1999; 213:881-888
19. Marija J. Norusis/SPSS Inc. SPSS professional statistics 7.5. New York, NY: Prentice Hall Professional Technical Reference, 1997:37-64
20. McCullagh P, Nelder JA. Generalized linear models, 2nd ed. Boca Raton, FL: Chapman & Hall/CRC, 1989:98-128
21. Kaiser WA, Zeitler E. MR imaging of the breast: fast imaging sequences with and without Gd-DTPA - preliminary observations. Radiology 1989; 170:681-686
22. Gilles R, Zafrani B, Guinebretiere JM, et al. Ductal carcinoma in situ: MR imaging-histopathological correlation. Radiology 1995; 196:415-419
23. Heywang-Kobrunner S, Beck R. Contrast-enhanced MRI of the breast, 2nd ed., Berlin, Germany: Springer-Verlag, 1995
24. Kuhl CK, Mielcareck P, Klaschik S, et al. Dynamic breast MR imaging: are signal intensity-time course data useful for differential diagnosis of enhancing lesions? Radiology 1999; 211:101-110
25. Kuhl CK. MRI of breast tumors. Eur Radiol 2000; 10:46-58
26. Soderstrom CE, Harms SE, Copit DS, et al. Thee-dimensional RODEO breast MR imaging of lesions containing ductal carcinoma in situ. Radiology 1996; 201:427-432
27. Boetes C, Mus RD, Holland R, et al. Breast tumors: comparative accuracy of MR imaging relative to mammography and US for demonstrating extent. Radiology 1995; 197:743-747
28. Szabò BK, Aspelin P, Wiberg MK, Tot T, Boné B. Invasive breast cancer: correlation of dynamic MR. features with prognostic factors. Eur Radiol 2003; 13:2425-2435