The hook sign for differential diagnosis of malignant from benign lesions in magnetic resonance mammography: Experience in a study of 1084 histologically verified cases

Acta Radiologica

Volumn 51, Issue 2, 2010, Pages 137-143

  Dietzel, Matthias ^a   Baltzer, Pascal A T ^a   Vag, Tibor ^a   Gajda, Mieczyslaw ^a   Camara, Oumar ^a   Kaiser, Werner A ^a  

^a FRIEDRICH SCHILLER UNIVERSITY JENA   (Germany)

Author keywords

Breast; Imaging sequences; MR imaging; Neoplasms, primary; Pathology

Indexed keywords

BENIGN LESION; BREAST IMAGING; CHI-SQUARE TESTS; DESCRIPTORS; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC VALUE; DIFFERENTIAL DIAGNOSIS; ETHICS COMMITTEE; HIGH SPECIFICITY; LIKELIHOOD RATIOS; MALIGNANT LESION; MR IMAGING; NEOPLASMS , PRIMARY; ODDS RATIOS; PECTORAL MUSCLES;

DIAGNOSIS; ELECTRIC REACTORS; HOOKS; MAGNETIC RESONANCE; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MAXIMUM LIKELIHOOD ESTIMATION; PATHOLOGY; TUMORS;

HYDRAULIC STRUCTURES;

CONTRAST MEDIUM; DIAGNOSTIC AGENT; GADOLINIUM PENTETATE;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; BREAST TUMOR; CHI SQUARE DISTRIBUTION; COMPUTER ASSISTED DIAGNOSIS; DIFFERENTIAL DIAGNOSIS; FEMALE; HUMAN; METHODOLOGY; MIDDLE AGED; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; PATHOLOGY; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; BREAST NEOPLASMS; CHI-SQUARE DISTRIBUTION; CONTRAST MEDIA; DIAGNOSIS, DIFFERENTIAL; FEMALE; GADOLINIUM DTPA; HUMANS; IMAGE INTERPRETATION, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MIDDLE AGED; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY;

EID: 76749117185     PISSN: 02841851     EISSN: 16000455     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3109/02841850903463638     Document Type: Article

References (23)

1. Berg WA, Gutierrez L, NessAiver MS, Carter WB, Bhargavan M, Lewis RS, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of mammography, clinical examination, US, and MR imaging in preoperative assessment of breast cancer. Radiology 2004;233:830-849
2. Malich A, Fischer DR, Wurdinger S, Boettcher J, Marx C, Facius M, et al. Potential MRI interpretation model: differentiation of benign from malignant breast masses. Am J Roentgenol 2005;185:964-970
3. Peters NH, Borel Rinkes IH, Zuithoff NP, Mali WP, Moons KG, Peeters PH. Meta-analysis of MR imaging in the diagnosis of breast lesions. Radiology 2008;246:116-124
4. Fischer DR, Wurdinger S, Boettcher J, Malich A, Kaiser WA. Further signs in the evaluation of magnetic resonance mammography: a retrospective study. Invest Radiol 2005; 40:430-435
5. Seely JM, Nguyen ET, Jaffey J. Breast MRI in the evaluation of locally recurrent or new breast cancer in the postoperative patient: correlation of morphology and enhancement features with the BI-RADS category. Acta Radiol 2007; 48:1-8.
6. Szabo BK, Aspelin P, Wiberg MK, Bone B. Dynamic MR imaging of the breast. Analysis of kinetic and morphologic diagnostic criteria. Acta Radiol 2003;44:379-386
7. Reinikainen H, Paakko E, Suramo I, Paivansalo M, Jauhiainen J, Rissanen T. Dynamics of contrast enhancement in MR imaging and power Doppler ultrasonography of solid breast lesions. Acta Radiol 2002;43:492-500.
8. Bone B, Pentek Z, Perbeck L, Veress B. Diagnostic accuracy of mammography and contrast-enhanced MR imaging in 238 histologically verified breast lesions. Acta Radiol 1997;38:489-496
9. Tardivon AA, Athanasiou A, Thibault F, El Khoury C. Breast imaging and reporting data system (BIRADS): magnetic resonance imaging. Eur J Radiol 2007;61:212-215 (Pubitemid 46096699)
10. Ikeda MD. MRI lexicon: what should be improved? Eur Radiol 2006;16 Suppl 5:E49-50.
11. Dietzel M, Baltzer PAT, Vag T, Herzog A, Gajda M, Camara O, et al. The adjacent vessel sign in MR-Mammography - New data and subgroup analysis in 1084 histologically verified cases. Korean J Radiol 2009; in press.
12. Winnekendonk G, Krug B, Warm M, Gohring UJ, Mallmann P, Lackner K. [Diagnostic value of preoperative contrast-enhanced MR imaging of the breast.] Rofo 2004;176:688-693 (Pubitemid 38714933)
13. McGee S. Simplifying likelihood ratios. J Gen Intern Med 2002;17:646-649
14. Jaeschke R, Guyatt GH, Sackett DL. Users' guides to the medical literature. III. How to use an article about a diagnostic test. B. What are the results and will they help me in caring for my patients? The Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group. JAMA 1994;271:703-707 (Pubitemid 24061707)
15. Newcombe RG. Two-sided confidence intervals for the single proportion: comparison of seven methods. Stat Med 1998;17:857-872
16. Armitage P, Berry G. Statistical methods in medical research. Third edition. London: Blackwell; 1994. p. 131.
17. Iacobuzio-Donahue CA, Argani P, Hempen PM, Jones J, Kern SE. The desmoplastic response to infiltrating breast carcinoma: gene expression at the site of primary invasion and implications for comparisons between tumor types. Cancer Res 2002;62:5351-5357
18. Walker RA. The complexities of breast cancer desmoplasia. Breast Cancer Res 2001;3:143-145
19. Chan KC, Knox WF, Gee JM, Morris J, Nicholson RI, Potten CS, et al. Effect of epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibition on epithelial proliferation in normal and premalignant breast. Cancer Res 2002;62:122-128
20. Bässler R. Mamma. In: Remmele W, editor. Pathologie. Berlin, Heidelberg, New York: Springer; 1997. p. 135-368.
21. Renz DM, Baltzer PA, Bottcher J, Thaher F, Gajda M, Camara O, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging of inflammatory breast carcinoma and acute mastitis. A comparative study. Eur Radiol 2008;18:2370-2380
22. Morris EA, Schwartz LH, Drotman MB, Kim SJ, Tan LK, Liberman L, et al. Evaluation of pectoralis major muscle in patients with posterior breast tumors on breast MR images: early experience. Radiology 2000;214: 67-72.
23. Baltzer PAT, Renz DM, Herrmann KH, Dietzel M, Krumbein I, Gajd a M, et al. Diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) in MR mammography (MRM): clinical comparison of echo planar imaging (EPI) and half-Fourier single-shot turbo spin echo (HASTE) diffusion techniques. Eur Radiol 2009;19:1612-1620