Audit of Prior Screening Mammograms of Screen-Detected Cancers: Implications for the Delay in Breast Cancer Detection.

When cancer is detected in a screening mammogram, on occasion retrospective review of prior screening (pre-index) mammograms indicates a likely presence of cancer. These missed cancers during pre-index screens constitute a delay in detection and diagnosis. This study was undertaken to quantify the missed cancer rate by auditing pre-index screens to improve the quality of mammography screening practice. From a cohort of 135 screen-detected cancers, 120 pre-index screening mammograms could be retrieved and served as the study sample. A consensus read by 2 radiologists who interpreted the pre-index screens in an unblinded manner with full knowledge of cancer location, cancer type, lesion type, and pathology served as the truth or reference standard. Five radiologists interpreted the pre-index screens in a blinded manner. Established performance metrics such as sensitivity and specificity were quantified for each reader in interpreting these pre-index screens in a blinded manner. All five radiologists detected lesions in 8/120 (6.7%) screens. Excluding the 2 readers whose performance was close to random, all the 3 remaining readers detected lesions in 13 pre-index screens. This indicates that there is a delay in diagnosis by at least one cycle from 8/120 (6.7%) to 13/120 (10.8%). There were no observable trends in terms of either the cancer type or the lesion type. Auditing prior screening mammograms in screen-detected cancers can help in identifying the proportion of cases that were missed during interpretation and help in quantifying the delay in breast cancer detection.

Nonmass enhancement on breast MRI: review of patterns with radiologic-pathologic correlation and discussion of management.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this article is to review the varied appearances and associated diagnoses of nonmass enhancement on breast MRI with radiologic-pathologic correlation. CONCLUSION: Knowledge of the distribution and internal characteristics of these findings is helpful to determine when core needle biopsy is indicated. Correlating imaging with pathologic findings is critical in making appropriate recommendations regarding clinical management.

Recommendations for adnexal cysts: have the Society of Radiologists in Ultrasound consensus conference guidelines affected utilization of ultrasound?

PURPOSE: In 2009, the Society of Radiologists in Ultrasound (SRU) convened a consensus conference to discuss the management of adnexal cysts in asymptomatic women and reach consensus on when follow-up imaging was required. The purpose of this quality assurance project was to assess the impact of using the resulting guidelines in our institution during 1-month periods before and after publication of the guidelines. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed all pelvic ultrasound reports for a 1-month period before the conference (February 2009) and 2 years later (February 2011) after publication of the SRU guidelines. Incidence of recommendations for simple cysts and classic hemorrhagic cysts 5 cm or less in premenopausal women and simple cysts less than 1 cm in postmenopausal women was compared. Fisher exact test was used to compare proportions. RESULTS: Over the time period evaluated, the number of pelvic sonograms performed in our department decreased by 27%. The overall number of cysts with recommendations for follow-up decreased from February 2009 (132 studies with recommendations for follow-up in 870 pelvic ultrasound examinations, 15%) to February 2011 (71 recommendations for follow-up in 639 examinations, 11%; P = 0.02). The percentage of premenopausal simple cysts and classic hemorrhagic cysts described as less than 5 cm where follow-up was recommended decreased from 39/48 (89%) to 2/29 (7%, P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Use of the SRU guidelines on the management of adnexal cysts has, in our practice, dramatically decreased radiologist recommendations for follow-up of benign appearing cysts.