Postexcisional breast magnetic resonance imaging in patients with breast cancer: Predictable findings of residual cancer

Journal of Computer Assisted Tomography

Volumn 33, Issue 6, 2009, Pages 940-945

  Kim, Jeong Ah ^a   Son, Eun Ju ^a   Kim, Eun Kyung ^a   Kim, Min Jung ^a   Kwak, Jin Young ^a   Jeong, Joon ^b  

^a Yonsei University College of Medicine   (South Korea)

^b Yonsei University College of Medicine   (South Korea)

Author keywords

Breast cancer; Excision; MRI

Indexed keywords

BIOPSY; DISEASES; FORECASTING; MAGNETISM; MEDICAL IMAGING; RESONANCE; SURGERY;

BREAST CANCER; BREAST MAGNETIC-RESONANCE IMAGING; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; EXCISION; MORPHO-LOGICS; NEGATIVE PREDICTIVE VALUE; NODULAR ENHANCEMENT; POSITIVE PREDICTIVE VALUES; PROGRESSIVE ENHANCEMENT; THIN RIM;

MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING;

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; BREAST BIOPSY; BREAST CANCER; CANCER DIAGNOSIS; CANCER PATIENT; CANCER SURGERY; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; EXCISION; FEMALE; HUMAN; HUMAN TISSUE; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MASTECTOMY; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; PARTIAL MASTECTOMY; PREDICTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; THICKNESS; BIOPSY; BREAST TUMOR; METHODOLOGY; MIDDLE AGED; MINIMAL RESIDUAL DISEASE; PATHOLOGY; PREDICTION AND FORECASTING;

CONTRAST MEDIUM; GADOLINIUM PENTETATE;

ADULT; AGED; BIOPSY; BREAST NEOPLASMS; CONTRAST MEDIA; FEMALE; GADOLINIUM DTPA; HUMANS; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MIDDLE AGED; NEOPLASM, RESIDUAL; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY;

EID: 73949141777     PISSN: 03638715     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/RCT.0b013e3181a6b719     Document Type: Article

References (19)

1. Jardines L, Fowble B, Schultz D, et al. Factors associated with a positive reexcision after excisional biopsy for invasive breast cancer. Surgery. 1995;118:803-809.
2. Gage I, Schnitt SJ, Nixon AJ, et al. Pathologic margin involvement and the risk of recurrence in patients treated with breast-conserving therapy. Cancer. 1996;78:1921-1928.
3. Pittinger TP, Maronian NC, Poulter CA, et al. Importance of margins status in outcome of breast-conserving surgery for carcinoma. Surgery. 1994;116:605-608.
4. Harms SE. Technical report of the international working group on breast MRI. J Magn Reson Imaging. 1999;10:979-1015.
5. Gilles R, Guinebretiere JM, Lucidarme O, et al. Nonpalpable breast tumors: diagnosis with contrast-enhanced subtraction dynamic MR imaging. Radiology. 1994;191:625-631.
6. Berg WA, Gutierrez L, NessAiver MS, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of mammography, clinical excamination, US, and MR imaging in preoperative assessment of breast cancer. Radiology. 2004; 233:830-849.
7. Van Goethem M, Shelfout K, Dijckmans L, et al. MR mammography in the pre-operative staging of breast cancer in patients with dense breast tissue: comparison with mammography and ultrasound. Eur Radiol. 2004;14:809-816.
8. Orel SG, Reynolds C, Schnall MD, et al. Breast carcinoma: MR imaging before re-excisional biopsy. Radiology. 1997;205:429-436.
9. Lee JM, Oreal SG, Czerniecki BJ, et al. MRI before reexcision surgery in patients with breast cancer. AJR. 2004;182:473-480.
10. Kinkel K, Helbich TH, Esserman LJ, et al. Dynamic high-spatial-resolution MR imaging of suspicious breast lesions: diagnostic criteria and interobserver variability. AJR. 2000;175:35-43.
11. Gwin JL, Eisenberg BL, Hoffman JP, et al. Incidence of gross and microscopic carcinoma in specimens from patients with breast cancer after re-excision lumpectomy. Ann Surg. 1993;218:729-734.
12. Solin LJ, Fowble BL, Schultz DJ, et al. The significance of the pathology margins of the tumor excision on the outcome of patients treated with definitive irradiation for early stage breast cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1991;21:279-287.
13. Kawashima H, Tawara M, Suzuki M, et al. Effectiveness of dynamic MRI for diagnosing pericicatrical minimal residual breast cancer following excisional biopsy. Eur J Radiol. 2001;40:2-9.
14. Soderstrom CE, Harms SE, Farrell RS, et al. Detection with MR imaging of residual tumor in the breast soon after surgery. AJR. 1997;168:485-488.
15. Frei KA, Kinkel K, Bonel HM, et al. MR imaging of the breast in patients with positive margins after lumpectomy: influence of the time interval between lumpectomy and MR imaging. AJR. 2000;175: 1577-1584.
16. Boetes C, Strijk SP, Holland R, et al. False-negative MR imaging of malignant breast tumors. Eur Radiol. 1997;7:1231-1234.
17. Morris EA. Diagnostic breast MR imaging: current status and future directions. Radiol Clin North Am. 2007;45:863-880.
18. Gluck BS, Dershaw DD, Liberman L, et al. Microcalcifications on postoperative mammograms as an indicator of adequacy of tumor excision. Radiology. 1993;188:469-472.
19. Beron PJ, Horwitz EM, Martinez AA, et al. Pathologic and mammographic findings predicting the adequacy of tumor excision before breast conserving therapy. AJR. 1996;167:1409-1414.