Utility and Outcomes of Preoperative Screening Breast MRI for Planned Bilateral Prophylactic Mastectomy in High-Risk Patients.

BACKGROUND. There is a paucity of data and consensus guidelines on the utility of preoperative MRI for planned bilateral prophylactic mastectomy. OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the utility of breast MRI performed in high-risk patients for the indication of planned bilateral prophylactic mastectomy, with attention given to the diagnostic performance for breast cancer detection. A secondary aim was to assess the potential impact of breast MRI findings on the decision to perform sentinel lymph node biopsy at the time of prophylactic mastectomy. METHODS. A retrospective database review identified MRI examinations performed at an academic medical center from August 2003 to January 2020 for the indication of planned bilateral prophylactic mastectomy. Patient demographics, imaging findings, operative details, and pathology were recorded. BI-RADS category 1 and 2 assessments were considered negative examinations, and BI-RADS category 3, 4, and 5 assessments were considered positive examinations. Descriptive statistics and performance metrics were calculated. RESULTS. The final cohort included 53 patients (mean age, 45 years). Most (35/53; 66.0%) studies were baseline examinations. Of the 53 patients, 31 (58.5%) had negative MRI examinations and 22 (41.5%) had positive MRI examinations. MRI detected two malignancies (one invasive lobular carcinoma and one high-grade ductal carcinoma in situ), both of which were assessed as BI-RADS category 4. The patient with invasive lobular cancer underwent sentinel lymph node biopsy at the time of mastectomy, which showed metastasis. Breast MRI had sensitivity of 100.0% and specificity of 60.8% for overall breast cancer detection and sensitivity of 100.0% and specificity of 59.6% for invasive cancer detection. CONCLUSION. Preoperative MRI for planned bilateral prophylactic mastectomy detected all cancers, indicating a potential role for MRI in impacting surgical decision making. CLINICAL IMPACT. Given the high NPV for cancer, our results suggest that lymph node biopsy may be safely avoided in patients with a negative MRI examination. This is clinically relevant because sentinel nodes cannot be identified after mastectomy.

Identifying intestinal malrotation on magnetic resonance examinations ordered for unrelated indications.

BACKGROUND: Anatomical imaging findings indicating normal bowel rotation can be identified on cross-sectional imaging, including magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) performed for non-related indications. OBJECTIVE: The goal of our study was to assess whether non-targeted MRI can accurately assess intestinal malrotation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Four anatomical landmarks were assessed on MRIs of the chest, spine or abdomen performed from January 2006 to June 2014, on patients who also had upper gastrointestinal series (UGI) performed within 10 years of the MRI date: 1) retroperitoneal duodenum, 2) left upper quadrant duodenojejunal junction, 3) superior mesenteric artery to the left of the superior mesenteric vein, and 4) right lower quadrant cecum. Two attending radiologists, one pediatric and one abdominal radiologist, independently reviewed the MR images. The pediatric radiologist reviewed images from UGI (considered the gold standard) to determine the intestinal rotation for each case. Validation of the criteria was performed on new patients imaged through January 2016. RESULTS: The original cohort included 109 MRIs (15 chest, 41 spine and 53 abdomen) done on 109 patients (42% males, mean age: 10.2 years). If each of the 4 anatomical questions were answered "yes" (4-YES), specificity was 100% for each radiologist and malrotation was appropriately excluded. Using the 4-YES criteria, the pediatric radiologist excluded malrotation in 71 patients (65%) and the abdominal radiologist excluded it in 65 (60%), with concurrence for 57 patients. Validation of the 4-YES criteria in 23 new patients appropriately proved the 4-YES rule, with neither labeling the one new malrotation case 4-YES. CONCLUSION: If a radiologist can confidently answer "yes" to the four questions evaluated in this study, then intestinal rotation can be safely considered normal. Normal bowel rotation should be commented upon in MRI reports when these four anatomical locations are imaged, thus helping patients avoid unnecessary UGI and radiation exposure.