High-spatial-resolution 3-T breast MRI of nonmasslike enhancement lesions: An analysis of their features as significant predictors of malignancy

American Journal of Roentgenology

Volumn 198, Issue 5, 2012, Pages 1223-1230

  Uematsu, Takayoshi ^a   Kasami, Masako ^a  

^a SHIZUOKA CANCER CENTER   (Japan)

Author keywords

3 T MRI; BI RADS MRI descriptors; Breast cancer; Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS); Nonmasslike enhancement

Indexed keywords

GADOLINIUM PENTETATE;

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; BREAST BIOPSY; BREAST CANCER; BREAST SURGERY; CANCER INVASION; CANCER SIZE; CLUSTERED RING ENHANCEMENT; CONTRAST ENHANCEMENT; DENDRITIC ENHANCEMENT; FEMALE; FOCAL ENHANCEMENT; HIGH SIGNAL INTENSITY; HUMAN; HUMAN TISSUE; IMAGE DISPLAY; INTRADUCTAL CARCINOMA; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; NONMASSLIKE ENHANCEMENT; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; PREDICTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; RADIOLOGICAL PARAMETERS; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; SEGMENTAL ENHANCEMENT;

ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; BIOPSY; BREAST NEOPLASMS; CARCINOMA IN SITU; CONTRAST MEDIA; FEMALE; HUMANS; IMAGE INTERPRETATION, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; LOGISTIC MODELS; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MIDDLE AGED; NEOPLASM INVASIVENESS; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES;

EID: 84860340622     PISSN: 0361803X     EISSN: 15463141     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2214/AJR.11.7350     Document Type: Article

References (18)

1. Ikeda DM, Hylton NM, Kuhl CK, et al. BI-RADS: magnetic resonance imaging, 1st ed. In: D'Orsi CJ, Mendelson EB, Ikeda DM, et al. Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System: ACR BI-RADS - breast imaging atlas. Reston, VA: American College of Radiology, 2003
2. Gutierrez RL, DeMartini WB, Eby PR, Kurland BF, Peacock S, Lehman CD. BI-RADS lesion characteristics predict likelihood of malignancy in breast MRI for masses but not for nonmasslike enhancement. AJR 2009; 193:994-1000
3. Tozaki M, Igarashi T, Fukuda K. Breast MRI using the VIBE sequence: clustered ring enhancement in the differential diagnosis of lesions showing non-masslike enhancement. AJR 2006; 187:313-321 (Pubitemid 44148272)
4. Yuen S, Uematsu T, Kasami M, Uchida Y, Nishimura T. Segmental enhancement on breast MR images: differential diagnosis and diagnostic strategy. Eur Radiol 2008; 18:2067-2075
5. Kanemaki Y, Kurihara Y, Okamoto K, et al. Ductal carcinoma in situ: correlations between high-resolution magnetic resonance imaging and histopathology. Radiat Med 2007; 25:1-7 (Pubitemid 46384713)
6. Kuhl CK. Breast MR imaging at 3T. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 2007; 15:315-320 (Pubitemid 47430009)
7. Chatterji M, Mercado CL, Moy L. Optimizing 1.5-Tesla and 3-Tesla dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging of the breasts. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 2010; 18:207-224
8. Liberman L, Morris EA, Lee MJ, et al. Breast lesions detected on MR imaging: features and positive predictive value. AJR 2002; 179:171-178 (Pubitemid 34694831)
9. Tozaki M, Fukuda K. High-spatial-resolution MRI of non-masslike breast lesions: interpretation model based on BI-RADS MRI descriptors. AJR 2006; 187:330-337 (Pubitemid 44148274)
10. Lehman CD. Magnetic resonance imaging in the evaluation of ductal carcinoma in situ. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr 2010; 41:150-151
11. Baltzer PA, Dietzel M, Kaiser WA. Nonmass lesions in magnetic resonance imaging of the breast: additional T2-weighted images improve diagnostic accuracy. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2011; 35:361-366
12. Pinker K, Grabner G, Bogner W, et al. A combined high temporal and high spatial resolution 3 Tesla MR imaging protocol for the assessment of breast lesions. Invest Radiol 2009; 44:553-558
13. Elsamaloty H, Elzawawi MS, Mohammad S, Herial N. Increasing accuracy of detection of breast cancer with 3-T MRI. AJR 2009; 192:1142-1148
14. Baltzer PA, Freiberg C, Beger S, et al. Clinical MR-mammography: are computer-assisted methods superior to visual or manual measurements for curve type analysis? A systemic approach. Acad Radiol 2009; 16:1070-1076
15. 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 (Pubitemid 30415534)
16. Mussurakis S, Buckley DL, Coady AM, Turnbull LW, Horsman A. Observer variability in the interpretation of contrast enhanced MRI of the breast. Br J Radiol 1996; 69:1009-1016 (Pubitemid 26388605)
17. 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; 21:431-438 (Pubitemid 27212423)
18. Vag T, Baltzer PA, Dietzel M, et al. Kinetic analysis of lesions without mass effect on breast MRI using manual and computer-assisted methods. Eur Radiol 2011; 21:893-898