Comparison between breast MRI and contrast-enhanced spectral mammography

Medical Science Monitor

Volumn 21, Issue , 2015, Pages 1358-1367

  Łuczyńska, Elżbieta ^a   Heinze Paluchowska, Sylwia ^a   Hendrick, Edward ^b   Dyczek, Sonia ^a   Ryś, Janusz ^a   Herman, Krzysztof ^a   Blecharz, Paweł ^a   Jakubowicz, Jerzy ^a  

^a INSTITUTE OF ONCOLOGY   (Poland)

^b UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

Author keywords

Breast; Breast neoplasms; Magnetic resonance imaging; Mammography

Indexed keywords

GADOBUTROL; CONTRAST MEDIUM; IOHEXOL; IOPROMIDE;

ARTICLE; BI RADS; BREAST CARCINOMA; BREAST EXAMINATION; BREAST FIBROADENOMA; BREAST LESION; BREAST PAPILLOMA; CANCER CLASSIFICATION; CANCER LOCALIZATION; CANCER SIZE; CARCINOMA IN SITU; CLINICAL EVALUATION; COMPARATIVE EFFECTIVENESS; CONTRAST ENHANCED SPECTRAL MAMMOGRAPHY; CONTRAST ENHANCEMENT; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIFFUSION COEFFICIENT; DIFFUSION WEIGHTED IMAGING; DIGITAL MAMMOGRAPHY; FEMALE; FIBROCYSTIC BREAST DISEASE; HISTOPATHOLOGY; HUMAN; HUMAN TISSUE; IMAGE RECONSTRUCTION; INTRADUCTAL CARCINOMA; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; POSTOPERATIVE PERIOD; PREDICTIVE VALUE; RADIOLOGIST; RECEIVER OPERATING CHARACTERISTIC; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; X RAY DOSE DISTRIBUTION; ANALOGS AND DERIVATIVES; BREAST DISEASES; BREAST NEOPLASMS; CARCINOMA, DUCTAL, BREAST; CARCINOMA, INTRADUCTAL, NONINFILTRATING; CARCINOMA, LOBULAR; COMPARATIVE STUDY; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; DIFFERENTIAL DIAGNOSIS; FIBROADENOMA; LABORATORY DIAGNOSIS; MAMMOGRAPHY; PATHOLOGY; PROCEDURES; RADIATION DOSE; RADIOGRAPHY; TUMOR VOLUME;

BREAST DISEASES; BREAST NEOPLASMS; CARCINOMA, DUCTAL, BREAST; CARCINOMA, INTRADUCTAL, NONINFILTRATING; CARCINOMA, LOBULAR; CONTRAST MEDIA; DIAGNOSIS, DIFFERENTIAL; FALSE NEGATIVE REACTIONS; FALSE POSITIVE REACTIONS; FEMALE; FIBROADENOMA; HUMANS; IOHEXOL; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MAMMOGRAPHY; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS; RADIATION DOSAGE; ROC CURVE; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; TUMOR BURDEN;

EID: 84929409696     PISSN: 12341010     EISSN: 16433750     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.12659/MSM.893018     Document Type: Article

References (36)

1. Siegel R, Naishadham D, Jemal A: Cancer statistics, 2013. Cancer J Clin, 2013; 63(1): 11–30.
2. Kuhl CK: Concepts for differential diagnosis in breast MR imaging. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am, 2006; 14(3): 305–28.
3. Kuhl C: The current status of breast MR imaging. Part I. Choice of technique, image interpretation, diagnostic accuracy, and transfer to clinical practice. Radiology, 2007; 244(2): 356–78.
4. Prionas ND, Lindfors KK, Ray S et al: Contrast-enhanced dedicated breast CT: initial clinical experience. Radiology, 2010; 256(3): 714–23.
5. Davis PL, McCarty KS: Sensitivity of enhanced MRI for the detection of breast cancer: new, multicentric, residual, and recurrent. Eur Radiol, 1997; 7(Suppl.5): 289–98.
6. Benndorf M, Baltzer PAT, Vag T et al: Breast MRI as an adjunct to mammography: Does it really suffer from low specificity? A retrospective analysis stratified by mammographic BI-RADS classes. Acta Radiol, 2010; 51(7): 715–21.
7. Swayampakula AK, Dillis C, Abraham J: Role of MRI in screening, diagnosis and management of breast cancer. Expert Rev. Anticancer Ther, 2008; 8(5): 811–17.
8. Argus A, Mahoney MC: Clinical indications for breast MRI. Appl Radiol, 2010; 39(10): 10–19.
9. ACR Practice Guideline for the Performance of Contrast-enhanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging of the Breast. Reston, VA: American College of Radiology; 2013.
10. Mainiero MB, Lourenco A, Mahoney MC et al: ACR Appropriateness Criteria Breast Cancer Screening. J Am Coll Radiol, 2013; 10(1): 11–14.
11. Wang Z, Li S, Wang L et al: Polyacrylamide hydrogel injection for breast augmentation: another injectable failure. Med Sci Monit, 2012; 18(6): CR399–408.
12. Morris EA, Liberman L, Ballon DJ et al: MRI of occult breast carcinoma in a high-risk population. Am J Roentgenol, 2003; 181(3): 619–26.
13. Berg WA: Rationale for a trial of screening breast ultrasound: American College of Radiology Imaging Network (ACRIN) 6666. Am J Roentgenol, 2003;180(5): 1225–28.
14. Eberl MM, Fox CH, Edge SB et al: BI-RADS classification for management of abnormal mammograms. J Am Board Fam Med, 2006; 19(2): 161–64.
15. Monticciolo DL, Caplan LS: The American College of Radiology’s BI-RADS 3 Classification in a Nationwide Screening Program: current assessment and comparison with earlier use. Breast J, 2004; 10(2): 106–10.
16. Liberman L, Menell JH: Breast imaging reporting and data system (BI-RADS). Radiol Clin North Am, 2002; 40(3): 409–30, v.
17. Mahoney MC, Gatsonis C, Hanna L et al: Positive predictive value of BIRADS MR imaging. Radiology, 2012; 264(1): 51–58.
18. D’Orsi CJ, Sickles EA, Mendelson EB et al: ACR BI-RADS® Atlas, Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System. 5th ed. Reston, VA: American College of Radiology; 2013.
19. Saslow D, Boetes C, Burke W et al: American Cancer Society guidelines for breast screening with MRI as an adjunct to mammography. Cancer J Clin, 2007; 57(2): 75–89. Erratum in: Cancer J Clin, 2007, 57(3), 185.
20. Brennan M, Spillane A, Houssami N: The role of breast MRI in clinical practice. Aust Fam Physician, 2009; 38(7): 513–19.
21. Lehman CD: Role of MRI in screening women at high risk for breast cancer. J Magn Reson Imaging, 2006; 98(5): 964–70.
22. Misra S, Solomon NL, Moffat FL, Koniaris LG: Screening Criteria for Breast Cancer Adv Surg, 2010; 44: 87–100.
23. Lewin JM, Isaacs PK, Vance V, Larke FJ: Dual-energy contrast-enhanced digital subtraction mammography: feasibility. Radiology, 2003; 229(1): 261–68.
24. Dromain C, Thibault F, Muller S et al: Dual-energy contrast-enhanced digital mammography: initial clinical results. Eur Radiol, 2011; 21(3): 565–74.
25. Dromain C, Thibault F, Diekmann F et al: Dual-energy contrast-enhanced digital mammography: initial clinical results of a multireader, multicase study. Breast Cancer Res, 2012; 14(3): R94.
26. Thibault F, Balleyguier C, Tardivon A, Dromain C: Contrast enhanced spectral mammography: better than MRI? Eur J Radiol, 2012; 81(Suppl.1): S162–64.
27. Jochelson MS, Dershaw DD, Sung JS et al: Bilateral contrast-enhanced dual- energy digital mammography: feasibility and comparison with conventional digital mammography and MR imaging in women with known breast carcinoma. Radiology, 2013; 266(3): 743–51.
28. Fallenberg EM, Dromain C, Diekmann F et al: Contrast-enhanced spectral mammography versus MRI: Initial results in the detection of breast cancer and assessment of tumour size. Eur Radiol, 2014; 24(1): 256–64.
29. Delille J-P, Slanetz PJ, Yeh ED et al: Physiologic changes in breast magnetic resonance imaging during the menstrual cycle: perfusion imaging, signal enhancement, and influence of the T1 relaxation time of breast tissue. Breast J, 2005; 11(4): 236–41.
30. Ellis RL: Optimal timing of breast MRI examinations for premenopausal women who do not have a normal menstrual cycle. Am J Roentgenol, 2009; 193(6): 1738–40.
31. Skarpathiotakis M, Yaffe MJ, Bloomquist AK et al: Development of contrast digital mammography. Dwyer SJ III, Schneider RH (eds.). Med Phys, 2002; 29(10): 2419–26.
32. Puong S, Bouchevreau X, Patoureaux F et al: Dual-energy contrast enhanced digital mammography using a new approach for breast tissue canceling. Proc SPIE, 2007; 6510(0): 65102H.
33. Diekmann F, Freyer M, Diekmann S et al: Evaluation of contrast-enhanced digital mammography. Eur J Radiol, 2011; 78(1): 112–21.
34. Jochelson M: Advanced Imaging Techniques for the Detection of Breast Cancer. Am Soc Clin Oncol, 2012; 65–69.
35. Rankin SC: MRI of the breast. Br J Radiol, 2000; 73(872): 806–18.
36. Fallenberg EM, Dromain C, Diekmann F et al: Contrast-enhanced spectral mammography versus MRI: Initial results in the detection of breast cancer and assessment of tumour size. Eur Radiol, 2014; 24(1): 256–64.