Equilibrium-phase high spatial resolution contrast-enhanced MR angiography at 1.5T in preoperative imaging for perforator flap breast reconstruction.

OBJECTIVES: The aim was (i) to evaluate the accuracy of equilibrium-phase high spatial resolution (EP) contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography (CE-MRA) at 1.5T using a blood pool contrast agent for the preoperative evaluation of deep inferior epigastric artery perforator branches (DIEP), and (ii) to compare image quality with conventional first-pass CE-MRA. METHODS: Twenty-three consecutive patients were included. All patients underwent preoperative CE-MRA to determine quality and location of DIEP. First-pass imaging after a single bolus injection of 10 mL gadofosveset trisodium was followed by EP imaging. MRA data were compared to intra-operative findings, which served as the reference standard. RESULTS: There was 100% agreement between EP CE-MRA and surgical findings in identifying the single best perforator branch. All EP acquisitions were of diagnostic quality, whereas in 10 patients the quality of the first-pass acquisition was qualified as non-diagnostic. Both signal- and contrast-to-noise ratios were significantly higher for EP imaging in comparison with first-pass acquisitions (p<0.01). CONCLUSIONS: EP CE-MRA of DIEP in the preoperative evaluation of patients undergoing a breast reconstruction procedure is highly accurate in identifying the single best perforator branch at 1.5Tesla (T). Besides accuracy, image quality of EP imaging proved superior to conventional first-pass CE-MRA.

Malignant lesions on mammography: accuracy of two different computer-aided detection systems.

We retrospectively compared the accuracy of two computer-aided detection (CAD) systems for the detection of malignant breast lesions on full-field digital mammograms. Mammograms of 326 patients were analyzed (117 patients with breast cancer, 209 negative cases), and each set of cases was read by two CAD systems (Second Look versus AccuDetect Galileo). True-positive fractions per image and case for soft densities, microcalcifications, and total cancers were assessed. Study results showed better overall performance of AccuDetect Galileo (when compared to Second Look) in detecting masses, microcalcifications, and all cancer types, especially in extremely dense breast parenchyma.

Bilateral analysis of the cross-sectional area of the internal mammary arteries and veins in patients with and without breast cancer on breast magnetic resonance imaging.

OBJECTIVE: To analyse bilateral differences in the cross-sectional area of the internal mammary artery (IMA) and vein (IMV) in breast cancer patients compared to healthy controls. MATERIALS AND METHODS: On 135 breast MRIs the cross-sectional areas of the IMA and IMV were measured on the left and right side in the second and third intercostal space (ICS) by two independent readers. Differences were analysed using a linear mixed model. RESULTS: In the healthy control group (n = 91) no significant differences between the cross-sectional areas of the IMA and IMV were observed. Both readers reported a mean adjusted difference of 0.12 mm2 (p = 0.298) and 0.21 mm2 (p = 0.058) for the IMA in the second ICS. In the malignancy group (n = 44) the cross-sectional area was significantly larger on the malignancy side compared to the contralateral side. The largest difference in the IMA was measured in the second ICS with a mean adjusted difference for reader 1 of 1.37 mm2 (p < 0.001) and for reader 2 of 0.81 mm2 (p = 0.003). CONCLUSIONS: The vascular cross-sectional area of internal mammary vessels was significantly different on the side with breast cancer compared to the contralateral side. This difference was not observed in healthy controls. MAIN MESSAGES: • MRI has become an important imaging modality in the diagnostic workup of breast cancer. • In healthy persons no significant difference in the size of the left and right IMA is observed. • A significant enlargement of the IMA on the malignant side occurs in most patients.

Standalone computer-aided detection compared to radiologists' performance for the detection of mammographic masses.

OBJECTIVES: We developed a computer-aided detection (CAD) system aimed at decision support for detection of malignant masses and architectural distortions in mammograms. The effect of this system on radiologists' performance depends strongly on its standalone performance. The purpose of this study was to compare the standalone performance of this CAD system to that of radiologists. METHODS: In a retrospective study, nine certified screening radiologists and three residents read 200 digital screening mammograms without the use of CAD. Performances of the individual readers and of CAD were computed as the true-positive fraction (TPF) at a false-positive fraction of 0.05 and 0.2. Differences were analysed using an independent one-sample t-test. RESULTS: At a false-positive fraction of 0.05, the performance of CAD (TPF = 0.487) was similar to that of the certified screening radiologists (TPF = 0.518, P = 0.17). At a false-positive fraction of 0.2, CAD performance (TPF = 0.620) was significantly lower than the radiologist performance (TPF = 0.736, P <0.001). Compared to the residents, CAD performance was similar for all false-positive fractions. CONCLUSIONS: The sensitivity of CAD at a high specificity was comparable to that of human readers. These results show potential for CAD to be used as an independent reader in breast cancer screening.

Computer-aided detection of masses at mammography: interactive decision support versus prompts.

PURPOSE: To compare effectiveness of an interactive computer-aided detection (CAD) system, in which CAD marks and their associated suspiciousness scores remain hidden unless their location is queried by the reader, with the effect of traditional CAD prompts used in current clinical practice for the detection of malignant masses on full-field digital mammograms. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The requirement for institutional review board approval was waived for this retrospective observer study. Nine certified screening radiologists and three residents who were trained in breast imaging read 200 studies (63 studies containing at least one screen-detected mass, 17 false-negative studies, 20 false-positive studies, and 100 normal studies) twice, once with CAD prompts and once with interactive CAD. Localized findings were reported and scored by the readers. In the prompted mode, findings were recorded before and after activation of CAD. The partial area under the location receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve for an interval of low false-positive fractions typical for screening, from 0 to 0.2, was computed for each reader and each mode. Differences in reader performance were analyzed by using software. RESULTS: The average partial area under the location ROC curve with unaided reading was 0.57, and it increased to 0.62 with interactive CAD, while it remained unaffected by prompts. The difference in reader performance for unaided reading versus interactive CAD was statistically significant (P = .009). CONCLUSION: When used as decision support, interactive use of CAD for malignant masses on mammograms may be more effective than the current use of CAD, which is aimed at the prevention of perceptual oversights.

Computer aided analysis of breast MRI enhancement kinetics using mean shift clustering and multifeature iterative region of interest selection.

PURPOSE: To evaluate automatic characterization of a breast MR lesion by its spatially coherent region of interest (ROI). MATERIALS AND METHODS: The method delineated 247 enhancing lesions using Otsu thresholding after manually placing a sphere. Mean Shift Clustering subdivided each volume, based on features including pharmacokinetic parameters. An iteratively trained classifier to predict the most suspicious ROI (IsR) was used, to predict the malignancy likelihood of each lesion. Performance was evaluated using receiver operator characteristic (ROC) analysis, and compared with a previous prototype. IsR was compared with noniterative training. The effect of adding BI-RADS™ morphology (from a radiologist) to the classifier was investigated. RESULTS: The area under the ROC curve (AUC) was 0.83 (95% confidence interval [CI] of 0.77-0.88), and was 0.75 (95%CI = 0.68-0.81; P = 0.029) without pharmacokinetic features. IsR performed better than conventional selection, based on one feature (AUC 0.75, 95%CI = 0.68-0.81; P = 0.035). With morphology, the AUC was 0.84 (95%CI = 0.78-0.88) versus 0.82 without (P = 0.40). CONCLUSION: Breast lesions can be characterized by their most suspicious, contiguous ROI using multi-feature clustering and iterative training. Characterization was improved by including pharmacokinetic modeling, while in our experiments, including morphology did not improve characterization.

Anatomical evaluation of the internal mammary vessels based on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI).

INTRODUCTION: The rib-sparing technique to access the internal mammary vessels for microanastomosis is the current practice in our hospital nowadays. This study is performed to analyse the best intercostal space to expose those vessels. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the chest wall of 133 women was evaluated. The Schwabegger classification (representing the anatomical variation), the intercostal space between ribs two, three and four, and the surface of the internal mammary artery and veins in the second and third intercostal space were determined on multiplanar reconstructed T2-weighted images. RESULTS: In more than half of the cases, the anatomy followed Schwabegger variation two; one lateral artery and one medial vein were symmetrical. If a second vein was present, the bifurcation was most commonly in the third intercostal space. The second intercostal space above the mammary vessels was significantly wider than the third one. The surface of the artery and vein(s) was significantly larger in the second intercostal space. CONCLUSION: In most clinical situations, the second intercostal space is most likely the best approach to the internal mammary vessels for microanastomosis using a rib-sparing technique because of wider intercostal space and larger artery and vein.

MR-guided breast biopsy at 3T: diagnostic yield of large core needle biopsy compared with vacuum-assisted biopsy.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate two MR-guided biopsy techniques at 3 T, large core needle breast biopsy (LCNB) and vacuum-assisted breast biopsy (VAB) and to compare the diagnostic yield and rate of complications to determine the optimal biopsy technique at 3 T. METHODS: 55 LCNB and 64 VAB were consecutively performed. Benign biopsy results were verified by retrospective correlation of histology, with pre-interventional, post-interventional MRI studies and follow-up and were classified as representative or non-representative. Time to follow-up was up to 2 years for the considered non-representative benign lesions. Statistical analysis was performed using the Chi-squared test. RESULTS: LCNB was technically successful in 100% of patients (55/55) and VAB in 98% of patients (63/64). Histopathological analysis resulted in 45 (82%) benign, 3 (5%) high-risk and 7 (13%) malignant lesions for LCNB and 43 (67%) benign, 3 (5%) high-risk and 18 (28%) malignant lesions. Distribution was significantly different (p < 0.001), favouring VAB over LCNB. CONCLUSION: Because of the substantially higher diagnostic yield and certainty of a benign diagnosis, VAB is the optimal biopsy technique at 3 T. LCNB should be considered when VAB is not feasible.

Is contrast enhancement required to visualize a known breast tumor in a pre-operative CT scan?

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: A pre-operative CT scan with contrast enhancement (CE) has recently been proposed to improve tumorbed delineation in breast conserving therapy. However, it is not clear whether CE is required for visualization of a known breast tumor. The main aims of this study were to compare the sensitivity of a CE-CT scan with a native CT scan (i.e. without CE) and to identify characteristics predictive for the requirement of CE. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Both a CE-CT and a native CT were made in 58 breast cancer patients (age 37-75 yr), prior to breast conserving surgery. Visibility of the tumor on CT was scored by three observers (clearly visible/doubtful/not visible). Age, tumor size, palpable tumor yes/no, histology, and visibility on mammography were analyzed with respect to the visibility of the tumor on the native CT. RESULTS: The sensitivity for tumor detection was better for CE-CT (95%) than for native CT (83%) (p<0.001). Only mammographic visibility scores appeared to be significantly correlated with the visibility of the tumor on the native CT (p=0.013). CONCLUSION: In most patients CE is not required to visualize a known breast tumor. Mammographic visibility is a good parameter to decide on the use of CE.

Comparison of enhancement characteristics between invasive lobular carcinoma and invasive ductal carcinoma.

PURPOSE: To compare enhancement characteristics between invasive lobular carcinoma (ILC) and invasive ductal carcinoma (IDC) on contrast enhanced MRI of the breast and to observe the magnitude of eventual differences as these may impair the diagnostic value of breast MRI in ILC. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed an analysis of enhancement characteristics on biphasic breast MRI in a series of 136 patients (103 IDC, 33 ILC) using an in-house developed application for pharmacokinetic modeling of contrast enhancement and a commercially available CAD application that evaluated the contrast-enhancement versus time curve. RESULTS: Pharmacokinetic analysis showed that the most enhancing voxels in IDC had significantly higher K(trans) -values than in ILC (P < 0.01). No difference in v(e) -values was noted between groups. Visual assessment of contrast-enhancement versus time curves revealed wash-out curves to be less common in ILC (48% versus 84%). However, when using the CAD-application to assess the most malignant looking curve, the difference was blotted out (76% versus 86%). CONCLUSION: ILC enhances slower than IDC but peak enhancement is not significantly less. The use of a CAD-application may help to determine the most malignant looking contrast-enhancement versus time curve, and hence facilitates lesion classification.

MRI-guided breast biopsy at 3T using a dedicated large core biopsy set: feasibility and initial results.

OBJECTIVE: The increasing importance of breast MRI in the diagnostic processes concerning breast cancer yield often lesions that are visible on MRI only. To assess the nature of these lesions, pathologic analysis is necessary. Therefore, MR-guided biopsy should be available. Breast MRI at 3T has shown advantage over 1.5T. Unfortunately, current equipment for MR-guided biopsy is better suited for intervention at 1.5T due to the danger of heating titanium co-axial sleeves and large susceptibility artifacts. We evaluated a dedicated 3T breast biopsy set that uses plastic coaxial needles to overcome these problems. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed MRI-guided breast biopsy in 23 women with 24 MRI-only visible breast lesions at 3T. Biopsy procedures were performed with plastic coaxial needles in a closed bore 3T clinical MR system on a dedicated phased array breast coil with a commercially available add-on stereotactic biopsy device. RESULTS: Width of the needle artifact was 2mm in all 24 cases. Biopsy procedure was completed between 35 and 67 min. The procedure was judged moderately easy in 12 and normal in 10 cases. One procedure was judged difficult and there was one technical failure. CONCLUSION: MRI-guided breast biopsy at 3T is a fast and accurate procedure. The plastic coaxial needles reduce the susceptibility artifact largely and do not increase the difficulty of the procedure. The diagnostic yield is at least equal to the diagnostic yield of the same procedure at 1.5T. Therefore, this technique can be safely used for lesions only visible at 3T MRI.

Value of ADC measurements for nodal staging after chemoradiation in locally advanced rectal cancer-a per lesion validation study.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the performance of diffusion-weighted MRI (DWI) in addition to T2-weighted (T2W) MRI for nodal restaging after chemoradiation in rectal cancer. METHODS: Thirty patients underwent chemoradiation followed by MRI (1.5 T) and surgery. Imaging consisted of T2W-MRI and DWI (b0, 500, 1000). On T2W-MRI, nodes were scored as benign/malignant by two independent readers (R1, R2). Mean apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) was measured for each node. Diagnostic performance was compared for T2W-MRI, ADC and T2W+ADC, using a per lesion histological validation. RESULTS: ADC was higher for the malignant nodes (1.43 ± 0.38 vs 1.19 ± 0.27 *10⁻³ mm²/s, p < 0.001). Area under the ROC curve/sensitivity/specificity were 0.88/65%/93% (R1) and 0.95/71%/91% (R2) using T2W-MRI; 0.66/53%/82% using ADC (mean of two readers); and 0.91/56%/98% (R1) and 0.96/56%/99% (R2) using T2W+ADC. There was no significant difference between T2W-MRI and T2W+ADC. Interobserver reproducibility was good for T2W-MRI (κ0.73) and ADC (intraclass correlation coefficient 0.77). CONCLUSIONS: After chemoradiation, ADC measurements may have potential for nodal characterisation, but DWI on its own is not reliable. Addition of DWI to T2W-MRI does not improve accuracy and T2W-MRI is already sufficiently accurate.

BRCA1-associated breast cancers present differently from BRCA2-associated and familial cases: long-term follow-up of the Dutch MRISC Screening Study.

PURPOSE: The Dutch MRI Screening Study on early detection of hereditary breast cancer started in 1999. We evaluated the long-term results including separate analyses of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers and first results on survival. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Women with higher than 15% cumulative lifetime risk (CLTR) of breast cancer were screened with biannual clinical breast examination and annual mammography and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Participants were divided into subgroups: carriers of a gene mutation (50% to 85% CLTR) and two familial groups with high (30% to 50% CLTR) or moderate risk (15% to 30% CLTR). RESULTS: Our update contains 2,157 eligible women including 599 mutation carriers (median follow-up of 4.9 years from entry) with 97 primary breast cancers detected (median follow-up of 5.0 years from diagnosis). MRI sensitivity was superior to that of mammography for invasive cancer (77.4% v 35.5%; P<.00005), but not for ductal carcinoma in situ. Results in the BRCA1 group were worse compared to the BRCA2, the high-, and the moderate-risk groups, respectively, for mammography sensitivity (25.0% v 61.5%, 45.5%, 46.7%), tumor size at diagnosis≤1 cm (21.4% v 61.5%, 40.9%, 63.6%), proportion of DCIS (6.5% v 18.8%, 14.8%, 31.3%) and interval cancers (32.3% v 6.3%, 3.7%, 6.3%), and age at diagnosis younger than 30 years (9.7% v 0%). Cumulative distant metastasis-free and overall survival at 6 years in all 42 BRCA1/2 mutation carriers with invasive breast cancer were 83.9% (95% CI, 64.1% to 93.3%) and 92.7% (95% CI, 79.0% to 97.6%), respectively, and 100% in the familial groups (n=43). CONCLUSION: Screening results were somewhat worse in BRCA1 mutation carriers, but 6-year survival was high in all risk groups.

Using computer-aided detection in mammography as a decision support.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate an interactive computer-aided detection (CAD) system for reading mammograms to improve decision making. METHODS: A dedicated mammographic workstation has been developed in which readers can probe image locations for the presence of CAD information. If present, CAD findings are displayed with the computed malignancy rating. A reader study was conducted in which four screening radiologists and five non-radiologists participated to study the effect of this system on detection performance. The participants read 120 cases of which 40 cases had a malignant mass that was missed at the original screening. The readers read each mammogram both with and without CAD in separate sessions. Each reader reported localized findings and assigned a malignancy score per finding. Mean sensitivity was computed in an interval of false-positive fractions less than 10%. RESULTS: Mean sensitivity was 25.1% in the sessions without CAD and 34.8% in the CAD-assisted sessions. The increase in detection performance was significant (p = 0.012). Average reading time was 84.7 ± 61.5 s/case in the unaided sessions and was not significantly higher when interactive CAD was used (85.9 ± 57.8 s/case). CONCLUSION: Interactive use of CAD in mammography may be more effective than traditional CAD for improving mass detection without affecting reading time.

Magnetic resonance imaging of the breast: recommendations from the EUSOMA working group.

The use of breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is rapidly increasing. EUSOMA organised a workshop in Milan on 20-21st October 2008 to evaluate the evidence currently available on clinical value and indications for breast MRI. Twenty-three experts from the disciplines involved in breast disease management - including epidemiologists, geneticists, oncologists, radiologists, radiation oncologists, and surgeons - discussed the evidence for the use of this technology in plenary and focused sessions. This paper presents the consensus reached by this working group. General recommendations, technical requirements, methodology, and interpretation were firstly considered. For the following ten indications, an overview of the evidence, a list of recommendations, and a number of research issues were defined: staging before treatment planning; screening of high-risk women; evaluation of response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy; patients with breast augmentation or reconstruction; occult primary breast cancer; breast cancer recurrence; nipple discharge; characterisation of equivocal findings at conventional imaging; inflammatory breast cancer; and male breast. The working group strongly suggests that all breast cancer specialists cooperate for an optimal clinical use of this emerging technology and for future research, focusing on patient outcome as primary end-point.

Assessment of false-negative cases of breast MR imaging in women with a familial or genetic predisposition.

In order to assess the characteristics of malignant breast lesions those were not detected during screening by MR imaging. In the Dutch MRI screening study(MRISC), a non-randomized prospective multicenter study,women with high familial risk or a genetic predisposition for breast cancer were screened once a year by mammography and MRI and every 6 months with a clinical breast examination (CBE). The false-negative MR examinations were subject of this study and were retrospectively reviewed by two experienced radiologists. From November 1999 until March 2006, 2,157 women were eligible for study analyses. Ninety-seven malignant breast tumors were detected, including 19 DCIS (20%). In 22 patients with a malignant lesion, the MRI was assessed as BI-RADS 1 or 2. One patient was excluded because the examinations were not available for review. Forty-three percent (9/21) of the false-negative MR cases concerned pure ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) or DCIS with invasive foci, in eight of them no enhancement was seen at the review. In six patients the features of malignancy were missed or misinterpreted.Small lesion size (n = 3), extensive diffuse contrast enhancement of the breast parenchyma (n = 2),and a technically inadequate examination (n = 1) were other causes of the missed diagnosis. A major part of the false-negative MR diagnoses concerned non-enhancing DCIS, underlining the necessity of screening not only with MRI but also with mammography. Improvement of MRI scanning protocols may increase the detection rate of DCIS. The missed and misinterpreted cases are reflecting the learning curve of a multicenter study.

Computer-aided detection in full-field digital mammography in a clinical population: performance of radiologist and technologists.

The purpose of the study was to evaluate the impact of a computer-aided detection (CAD) system on the performance of mammogram readers in interpreting digital mammograms in a clinical population. Furthermore, the ability of a CAD system to detect breast cancer in digital mammography was studied in comparison to the performance of radiologists and technologists as mammogram readers. Digital mammograms of 1,048 consecutive patients were evaluated by a radiologist and three technologists. Abnormalities were recorded and an imaging conclusion was given as a BI-RADS score before and after CAD analysis. Pathology results during 12 months follow up were used as a reference standard for breast cancer. Fifty-one malignancies were found in 50 patients. Sensitivity and specificity were computed before and after CAD analysis and provided with 95% CIs. In order to assess the detection rate of malignancies by CAD and the observers, the pathological locations of these 51 breast cancers were matched with the locations of the CAD marks and the mammographic locations that were considered to be suspicious by the observers. For all observers, the sensitivity rates did not change after application of CAD. A mean sensitivity of 92% was found for all technologists and 84% for the radiologist. For two technologists, the specificity decreased (from 84 to 83% and from 77 to 75%). For the radiologist and one technologist, the application of CAD did not have any impact on the specificity rates (95 and 83%, respectively). CAD detected 78% of all malignancies. Five malignancies were indicated by CAD without being noticed as suspicious by the observers. In conclusion, the results show that systematic application of CAD in a clinical patient population failed to improve the overall sensitivity of mammogram interpretation by the readers and was associated with an increase in false-positive results. However, CAD marked five malignancies that were missed by the different readers.

Magnetic resonance imaging of ductal carcinoma in situ: what is its clinical application? A review.

BACKGROUND: After breast-conserving surgery of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) of the breast or invasive breast carcinoma with an extensive intraductal component, tumor-positive surgical margins are frequently found. Therefore, the extent of the intraductal disease needs to be accurately determined preoperatively. METHODS: Data for this review were identified by search of PubMed. Reference lists of selected articles were cross-searched for additional literature. RESULTS: DCIS is accurately detected with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), but the typical malignant features are inconsistently seen and most often in high-grade DCIS or in DCIS with a small invasive component. The histopathologic extent of DCIS is more accurately demonstrated with MRI. However, overestimation due to benign proliferative lesions does frequently occur. An improved depiction of DCIS could lead to improved preoperative staging. Conversely, the identification of more extensive disease on MRI could give rise to unnecessary interventions. Therefore, MRI should be used carefully and preferable in specialized and experienced centers. CONCLUSION: [corrected] To date, there is no evidence that the use of MRI improves outcomes (ie, decreases recurrence rates) in patients with DCIS.

Magnetic resonance imaging in size assessment of invasive breast carcinoma with an extensive intraductal component.

BACKGROUND: Breast-conserving treatment of invasive breast carcinoma with an extensive intraductal component (EIC) is associated with DCIS-involved surgical margins and therefore it has an increased recurrence rate. EIC is a non-palpable lesion of which the size is frequently underestimated on mammography. This study was undertaken to evaluate the accuracy of MRI in size assessment of breast cancer with EIC. METHODS: 23 patients were identified and the mammographic (n = 21) and MR (n = 23) images were re-reviewed by a senior radiologist. Size on MR images was compared with histopathological tumour extent. RESULTS: The correlation of radiological size with histopathological size was r = 0.20 in mammography (p = 0.39) compared to r = 0.65 in MRI (p < 0.01). Mammography underestimated histopathological tumour size in 62%. MR images over- or underestimated tumour size in 22% and 30% of the cases, respectively. In poorly differentiated EIC, MRI adequately estimated the extent more often compared to moderately differentiated EIC (60% versus 25%, respectively). CONCLUSION: Size assessment of MRI imaging was more accurate compared to mammography. This was predominantly true for poorly differentiated EIC.