High-resolution diffusion-weighted imaging for the separation of benign from malignant BI-RADS 4/5 lesions found on breast MRI at 3T

Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging

Volumn 40, Issue 3, 2014, Pages 674-681

  Wisner, Dorota J ^a   Rogers, Nathan ^a   Deshpande, Vibhas S ^b   Newitt, David N ^a   Laub, Gerhard A ^c   Porter, David A ^d   Kornak, John ^e   Joe, Bonnie N ^a   Hylton, Nola M ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^b Siemens Healthcare Magnetic Resonance Research and Development   (United States)

^c Siemens Healthcare Diagnostics Inc   (United States)

^d Siemens Healthcare   (Germany)

^e UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

benign; breast MRI; diffusion; DWI; malignant; screening

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; BREAST CANCER; BREAST DISEASE; BREAST LESION; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CONFIDENCE INTERVAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC TEST ACCURACY STUDY; DIFFERENTIAL DIAGNOSIS; DIFFUSION COEFFICIENT; DIFFUSION WEIGHTED IMAGING; ECHO PLANAR IMAGING; FEMALE; HISTOPATHOLOGY; HUMAN; HUMAN TISSUE; IMAGE ANALYSIS; MASTECTOMY; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RANK SUM TEST; READOUT SEGMENTED ECHO PLANAR DIFFUSION IMAGING; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; WILCOXON SIGNED RANKS TEST; BIOPSY; BREAST TUMOR; COMPARATIVE STUDY; COMPUTER ASSISTED DIAGNOSIS; MIDDLE AGED; PATHOLOGY; PROCEDURES; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; VERY ELDERLY;

CONTRAST MEDIUM; GADOLINIUM PENTETATE;

ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; BIOPSY; BREAST NEOPLASMS; CONTRAST MEDIA; DIAGNOSIS, DIFFERENTIAL; DIFFUSION MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; ECHO-PLANAR IMAGING; FEMALE; GADOLINIUM DTPA; HUMANS; IMAGE INTERPRETATION, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; MIDDLE AGED; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY;

EID: 84906077075     PISSN: 10531807     EISSN: 15222586     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/jmri.24416     Document Type: Article

References (18)

1. Kuhl CK, Schrading S, Bieling HB, et al. MRI for diagnosis of pure ductal carcinoma in situ: a prospective observational study. Lancet 2007; 370: 485-492.
2. Medeiros LR, Duarte CS, Rosa DD, et al. Accuracy of magnetic resonance in suspicious breast lesions: a systematic quantitative review and meta-analysis. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2011; 126: 273-285.
3. DeMartini W, Lehman C, Partridge S,. Breast MRI for cancer detection and characterization: a review of evidence-based clinical applications. Acad Radiol 2008; 15: 408-416.
4. Kul S, Cansu A, Alhan E, Dinc H, Gunes G, Reis A,. Contribution of diffusion-weighted imaging to dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI in the characterization of breast tumors. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2011; 196: 210-217.
5. Partridge SC, Mullins CD, Kurland BF, et al. Apparent diffusion coefficient values for discriminating benign and malignant breast MRI lesions: effects of lesion type and size. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2010; 194: 1664-173.
6. Ei Khouli RH, Jacobs MA, Mezban SD, et al. Diffusion-weighted imaging improves the diagnostic accuracy of conventional 3.0-T breast MR imaging. Radiology 2010; 256: 64-73.
7. Matsuoka A, Minato M, Harada M, et al. Comparison of 3.0-and 1.5-tesla diffusion-weighted imaging in the visibility of breast cancer. Radiat Med 2008; 26: 15-20.
8. Porter DA, Heidemann RM,. High resolution diffusion-weighted imaging using readout-segmented echo-planar imaging, parallel imaging and a two-dimensional navigator-based reacquisition. Magn Reson Med 2009; 62: 468-475.
9. Holdsworth SJ, Yeom K, Skare S, Gentles AJ, Barnes PD, Bammer R,. Clinical application of readout-segmented-echo-planar imaging for diffusion-weighted imaging in pediatric brain. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2011; 32: 1274-1279.
10. Hayes LL, Jones RA, Palasis S, Aguilera D, Porter DA,. Drop metastases to the pediatric spine revealed with diffusion-weighted MR imaging. Pediatr Radiol 2012; 42: 1009-1013.
11. Bogner W, Pinker-Domenig K, Bickel H, et al. Readout-segmented echo-planar imaging improves the diagnostic performance of diffusion-weighted MR breast examinations at 3.0 T. Radiology 2012; 263: 64-276.
12. Bogner W, Gruber S, Pinker K, et al. Diffusion-weighted MR for differentiation of breast lesions at 3.0 T: how does selection of diffusion protocols affect diagnosis? Radiology 2009; 253: 341-351.
13. Firat AK, Sanli B, Karakas HM, Erdem G,. The effect of intravenous gadolinium-DTPA on diffusion-weighted imaging. Neuroradiology 2006; 48: 465-470.
14. Rubesova E, Grell A-S, De Maertelaer V, Metens T, Chao S-L, Lemort M,. Quantitative diffusion imaging in breast cancer: a clinical prospective study. J Magn Reson Imaging 2006; 24: 319-324.
15. Yuen S, Yamada K, Goto M, Nishida K, Takahata A, Nishimura T,. Microperfusion-induced elevation of ADC is suppressed after contrast in breast carcinoma. J Magn Reson Imaging 2009; 29: 1080-1084.
16. Partridge SC, DeMartini WB, Kurland BF, Eby PR, White SW, Lehman CD,. Quantitative diffusion-weighted imaging as an adjunct to conventional breast MRI for improved positive predictive value. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2009; 193: 1716-1722.
17. Pereira FPA, Martins G, Figueiredo E, et al. Assessment of breast lesions with diffusion-weighted MRI: comparing the use of different b values. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2009; 193: 1030-1035.
18. Peters NHGM, Vincken KL, van den Bosch MAAJ, Luijten PR, Mali WPTM, Bartels LW,. Quantitative diffusion weighted imaging for differentiation of benign and malignant breast lesions: the influence of the choice of b-values. J Magn Reson Imaging 2010; 31: 1100-1105.