Frequency and Outcomes of New Suspicious Lesions on Breast MRI in the Setting of Neoadjuvant Therapy.

OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this article was to determine the frequency and outcomes of new suspicious findings on breast MRI after initiation of neoadjuvant therapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS. A retrospective database review identified all breast MRI examinations performed to assess response to neoadjuvant therapy between 2010 and 2018. Cases with new suspicious lesions assessed as BI-RADS 4 or 5 and found after the initiation of neoadjuvant treatment were included. Cases with no pretreatment MRI, cases in which the suspicious lesion was present on the baseline MRI but remained suspicious, and cases with insufficient follow-up were excluded. Radiologic, pathologic, and surgical reports were reviewed. Malignant outcomes were determined by pathologic examination. Benignity was established by pathologic examination, follow-up imaging, or both. A total of 419 breast MRI examinations in 297 women were performed to assess response to neoadjuvant therapy. After exclusions, 23 MRI examinations (5.5%) with new suspicious findings, all assessed as BI-RADS 4, comprised the final cohort. RESULTS. Of the 23 lesions, 13 new suspicious findings (56.5%) were contralateral to the known malignancy, nine (39.1%) were ipsilateral, and one (4.3%) involved the bilateral breasts. Lesion types included mass (16, 69.6%), nonmass enhancement (5, 21.7%) and focus (2, 8.7%). None of the new suspicious findings were malignant. CONCLUSION. New suspicious findings occurred in 5.5% of breast MRI examinations performed to monitor response to neoadjuvant therapy, and none of these new lesions were malignant. Our findings suggest that new lesions that arise in the setting of neoadjuvant therapy are highly unlikely to represent a new site of malignancy, particularly if the index malignancy shows treatment response. Larger studies are needed to confirm whether biopsy may be safely averted in this scenario.

Endovascular Management of Intracranial Vertebral Artery Dissection: Technical Nuances for the Preservation of Posterior Inferior Cerebellar Artery and Basilar Artery.

BACKGROUND: The treatment of intracranial vertebral artery dissection (VAD) can be challenging. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the clinical presentation, endovascular treatment techniques, and prognostic outcome of patients diagnosed with intracranial VAD at our institution. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of 35 patients who were diagnosed with VAD at our institution over 17-yr period (2001-2017) is presented. A total of 27 patients with a total of 30 affected arteries underwent endovascular treatment, and their outcome was evaluated. RESULTS: Of the 35 total patients with VAD, 15 presented with headache, 12 with focal neurological deficits, 2 with neck pain, 2 with dizziness, 1 with syncope, and 3 after trauma. Of the 30 dissected arteries, 18 were treated with deconstruction and 12 were treated with stent reconstruction. Treatment method was determined by the dominance of the affected artery and location relative to the ipsilateral posterior inferior cerebellar artery (PICA) and the basilar artery. Deconstructive techniques were utilized in all cases of hypoplastic artery dissection and the majority of codominant artery dissections, whereas reconstruction was performed on the majority of dominant artery dissections. Rupture did not impact treatment technique. Four patients demonstrated post-treatment infarcts, and another 1 patient died because of intraparenchymal bleed. The remaining 22 patients demonstrated favorable clinical outcome. None of the patients developed recanalization or needed retreatment till the last follow-up. CONCLUSION: This study suggests that endovascular treatment of intracranial VAD with deconstruction or stent reconstruction based on the patients anatomy, particularly vessel dominance and location with respect to PICA, is feasible and effective though the revascularization procedures still has its role in selected cases.

Successful bilateral uterine artery embolization during an ongoing pregnancy.

BACKGROUND: Uterine arteriovenous malformations are rare, potentially life-threatening, vascular anomalies. CASE: We report a case of a large arteriovenous malformation diagnosed during pregnancy that was successfully treated with bilateral uterine artery embolization at 20 weeks of gestation during an ongoing pregnancy. The procedure was uncomplicated, did not result in any fetal heart-rate changes, and, at 35 weeks of gestation, a liveborn male neonate was delivered through repeat cesarean without complications. Both the patient and her son are doing well more than 2 years after the procedure. CONCLUSION: Uterine artery embolization during an ongoing pregnancy did not result in acute complications to the fetus or mother.

Measuring quality of life in cleft lip and palate patients: currently available patient-reported outcomes measures.

BACKGROUND: Patient-reported outcomes in cleft lip and palate treatment are critical for patient care. Traditional surgical outcomes focused on objective measures, such as photographs, anatomic measurements, morbidity, and mortality. Although these remain important, they leave many questions unanswered. Surveys that include aesthetics, speech, functionality, self-image, and quality of life provide more thorough outcomes assessment. It is vital that reliable, valid, and comprehensive questionnaires are available to craniofacial surgeons. METHODS: The authors performed a literature review to identify questionnaires validated in cleft lip and palate patients. Qualifying instruments were assessed for adherence to guidelines for development and validation by the scientific advisory committee and for content. RESULTS: The authors identified 44 measures used in cleft lip and palate studies. After 15 ad hoc questionnaires, eight generic instruments, 11 psychiatric instruments, and one non-English language questionnaire were excluded, nine measures remained. Of these, four were never validated in the cleft population. Analysis revealed one craniofacial-specific measure (Youth Quality of Life-Facial Differences), two voice-related measures (Patient Voice-Related Quality of Life and Cleft Audit Protocol for Speech-Augmented), and two oral health-related measures (Child Oral Health Impact Profile and Child Oral Health Quality of Life). The Youth Quality of Life-Facial Differences, Child Oral Health Impact Profile, and Child Oral Health Quality of Life questionnaires were sufficiently validated. None was created specifically for clefts, resulting in content limitations. CONCLUSIONS: There is a lack of comprehensive, valid, and reliable questionnaires for cleft lip and palate surgery. For thorough assessment of satisfaction, further research to develop and validate cleft lip and palate surgery-specific instruments is needed.