Comparing accuracy of tomosynthesis plus digital mammography or synthetic 2D mammography in breast cancer screening: baseline results of the MAITA RCT consortium.

AIM: The analyses here reported aim to compare the screening performance of digital tomosynthesis (DBT) versus mammography (DM). METHODS: MAITA is a consortium of four Italian trials, REtomo, Proteus, Impeto, and MAITA trial. The trials adopted a two-arm randomised design comparing DBT plus DM (REtomo and Proteus) or synthetic-2D (Impeto and MAITA trial) versus DM; multiple vendors were included. Women aged 45 to 69 years were individually randomised to one round of DBT or DM. FINDINGS: From March 2014 to February 2022, 50,856 and 63,295 women were randomised to the DBT and DM arm, respectively. In the DBT arm, 6656 women were screened with DBT plus synthetic-2D. Recall was higher in the DBT arm (5·84% versus 4·96%), with differences between centres. With DBT, 0·8/1000 (95% CI 0·3 to 1·3) more women received surgical treatment for a benign lesion. The detection rate was 51% higher with DBT, ie. 2·6/1000 (95% CI 1·7 to 3·6) more cancers detected, with a similar relative increase for invasive cancers and ductal carcinoma in situ. The results were similar below and over the age of 50, at first and subsequent rounds, and with DBT plus DM and DBT plus synthetic-2D. No learning curve was appreciable. Detection of cancers >= 20 mm, with 2 or more positive lymph nodes, grade III, HER2-positive, or triple-negative was similar in the two arms. INTERPRETATION: Results from MAITA confirm that DBT is superior to DM for the detection of cancers, with a possible increase in recall rate. DBT performance in screening should be assessed locally while waiting for long-term follow-up results on the impact of advanced cancer incidence.

Patient-centred care with self-compression mammography in clinical practice: a randomized trial compared to standard compression.

OBJECTIVE: To test the efficacy of self- compared to radiographer-led compression to reduce the average glandular dose without affecting image quality and compliance to follow-up mammography. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Women presenting for mammography for breast cancer follow-up, symptoms, opportunistic screening, or familial risk were asked to participate and, if willing, were randomized to self-compression or radiographer-led compression. Image quality was assessed blindly by two independent radiologists and two radiographers. Pain and discomfort were measured immediately after mammography and their recall was asked when the women participated in the follow-up mammogram, 1 or 2 years later. RESULTS: In total, 495 women (mean age 57 years +/-14) were enrolled, 245 in the self-compression and 250 radiographer-compression arms. Image quality was similar in the two arms (radiologists' judgement p = 0.90; radiographers' judgement p = 0.32). A stronger compression force was reached in the self- than in the radiographer-arm (114.5 vs. 10.25 daN, p < .001), with a 1.7-mm reduction in thickness (p = .14), and almost no impact on dose per exam (1.90 vs. 1.93 mGy, p = .47). Moderate/severe discomfort was reported by 7.8% vs 9.6% (p = .77) and median pain score was 4.0 in both arms (p = .55). Median execution time was 1 min longer with self-compression (10.0 vs. 9.1 min, p < 0.001). No effect on subsequent mammography was detectable (p = 0.47). CONCLUSION: Self-compression achieved stronger compression of the breast, with comparable image quality, but did not substantially reduce glandular dose. The proportion of women who attended follow-up mammography was also similar in the two groups. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov NCT04009278 KEY POINTS: • In mammography, appropriate compression is essential to obtain high image quality and reduce dose. Compression causes pain and discomfort. • Self-compression has been proposed to reach better compression and possibly increase participation in mammography. • In a randomized trial, self-compression reached stronger compression of the breast, with comparable image quality but with no glandular dose reduction or impact on participation in follow-up mammography.

Foreign Body in the Cervical Oesophagus: A Case Report.

BACKGROUND: Foreign bodies in the upper aerodigestive tract represent an uncommon cause of visits to emergency departments. In the majority of cases, foreign bodies do not go beyond the pharynx. They cause dyspnoea or pneumonia if they reach the tracheobronchial tree. If ingested, they will pass spontaneously through the gastrointestinal canal in the majority of cases. Nevertheless, especially in the case of sharp-pointed or large objects, the foreign bodies can stop in the oesophagus. In case of dysphagia, stinging sensation and/or odynophagia occurring after eating a meal, a foreign body in the upper aerodigestive tract should be suspected. If not clinically visible, imaging is required. CASE PRESENTATION: A 72-year-old woman presented to the Emergency Department with pharyngodynia, odynophagia, stinging, dysphagia, and sialorrhea for 12 hours. Her symptoms started after eating a meal involving meat. The patient underwent a standard two-projection radiogram of the neck. The antero-posterior projection radiogram was unremarkable. The lateral projection radiogram showed 16 millimetres in maximum length radiopaque foreign body within the cervical oesophagus. The patient underwent transoral flexible oesophagoscopy under general anaesthesia, which resulted in successful removal of the foreign body (bony fragment). Her symptoms improved rapidly after the procedure, and the patient was discharged after 48 hours in good health. CONCLUSION: A foreign body in the cervical oesophagus may lead to visceral perforation. Once suspected, every effort should be made to identify and remove the foreign body to avoid potentially catastrophic consequences. In some cases, imaging could be necessary to detect the foreign body.

A Randomized Trial Comparing Breast Cancer Incidence and Interval Cancers after Tomosynthesis Plus Mammography versus Mammography Alone.

Background Adding digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) to digital mammography (DM) improves breast cancer screening sensitivity, but how this impacts mortality and other end points is unknown. Purpose To compare interval and overall breast cancer incidence after screening with DBT plus DM versus DM alone. Materials and Methods In this prospective trial (RETomo), women attending screening were randomized to one round of DBT plus DM (experimental arm) or to DM (control arm). All were then rescreened with DM after 12 months (women aged 45-49 years) or after 24 months (50-69 years). The primary outcome was interval cancer incidence. Cumulative incidence up to the subsequent screening round plus 9 months (21- and 33-month follow-up for women aged 45-49 and 50-69, respectively) was also reported. Ductal carcinomas in situ are included. Subgroup analyses by age and breast density were conducted; 95% CIs computed according to binomial distribution are reported. Results Baseline cancer detection was higher in the DBT plu DM arm than DM arm (101 of 13 356 women vs 61 of 13 521 women; relative detection, 1.7 [95% CI: 1.2, 2.3]). The mean age ± standard deviation for the women in both arms was 55 years ± 7. Interval cancer incidence was similar in the two arms (21 vs 22 cancers; relative incidence, 0.97 [95% CI: 0.53, 1.8]). Cumulative incidence remained higher in the DBT plus DM arm in women over 50 (153 vs 124 cancers; relative incidence, 1.2 [95% CI: 0.99, 1.6]), while it was similar in the two arms in women aged 45-49 (36 vs 41 cancers; relative incidence, 0.89 [95% CI: 0.57, 1.4]). Conclusion In women younger than 50 years, the benefit of early diagnosis seemed to be appreciable, while for women over age 50, the higher sensitivity of tomosynthesis plus mammography was not matched by a subsequent reduction in cancers at the next screening examination or in the intervening interval. Clinical trial registration no. NCT02698202 © RSNA, 2022 Online supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorial by Lee and Ray in this issue.

Predictive factors of clinical outcomes in patients with COVID-19 treated with tocilizumab: A monocentric retrospective analysis.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this retrospective observational study is to analyse clinical, serological and radiological predictors of outcome in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia treated with tocilizumab, providing clinical guidance to its use in real-life. METHOD: This is a retrospective, monocentric observational cohort study. All consecutive patients hospitalized between February the 11th and April 14th 2020 for severe COVID-19 pneumonia at Reggio Emilia AUSL and treated with tocilizumab were enrolled. The patient's clinical status was recorded every day using the WHO ordinal scale for clinical improvement. Response to treatment was defined as an improvement of one point (from the status at the beginning of tocilizumab treatment) during the follow-up on this scale. Bivariate association of main patients' characteristics with outcomes was explored by descriptive statistics and Fisher or Kruskal Wallis tests (respectively for qualitative or quantitative variables). Each clinically significant predictor was checked by a loglikelihood ratio test (in univariate logistic models for each of the considered outcomes) against the null model. RESULTS: A total of 173 patients were included. Only hypertension, the use of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, PaO2/FiO2, respiratory rate and C-reactive protein were selected for the multivariate analysis. In the multivariable model, none of them was significantly associated with response. CONCLUSIONS: Evaluating a large number of clinical variables, our study did not find new predictors of outcome in COVID19 patients treated with tocilizumab. Further studies are needed to investigate the use of tocilizumab in COVID-19 and to better identify clinical phenotypes which could benefit from this treatment.

Tocilizumab or glucocorticoids treatment for patients with SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia: An observational study.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the effect of tocilizumab or glucocorticoids in preventing death and intubation in patients hospitalized with SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study enrolling all consecutive patients hospitalized at Reggio Emilia AUSL between February the 11th and April 14th 2020 for severe COVID-19 and treated with tocilizumab or glucocorticoids (at least 80 mg/day of methylprednisolone or equivalent for at least 3 days). The primary outcome was death within 30 days from the start of the considered therapies. The secondary outcome was a composite outcome of death and/or intubation. All patients have been followed-up until May 19th 2020, with a follow-up of at least 30 days for every patient. To reduce confounding due to potential non-comparability of the two groups, those receiving tocilizumab and those receiving glucocorticoids, a propensity score was calculated as the inverse probability weighting of receiving treatment conditional on the baseline covariates. RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: Therapy with tocilizumab alone was associated with a reduction of deaths (OR 0.49, 95% CI 0.21-1.17) and of the composite outcome death/intubation (OR 0.35, 95% CI 0.13-0.90) compared to glucocorticoids alone. Nevertheless, this result should be cautiously interpreted due to a potential prescription bias.

Tocilizumab or glucocorticoids treatment for patients with SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia: An observational study

Abstract Objective To estimate the effect of tocilizumab or glucocorticoids in preventing death and intubation in patients hospitalized with SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia. Methods This was a retrospective cohort study enrolling all consecutive patients hospitalized at Reggio Emilia AUSL between February the 11th and April 14th 2020 for severe COVID-19 and treated with tocilizumab or glucocorticoids (at least 80 mg/day of methylprednisolone or equivalent for at least 3 days). The primary outcome was death within 30 days from the start of the considered therapies. The secondary outcome was a composite outcome of death and/or intubation. All patients have been followed-up until May 19th 2020, with a follow-up of at least 30 days for every patient. To reduce confounding due to potential non-comparability of the two groups, those receiving tocilizumab and those receiving glucocorticoids, a propensity score was calculated as the inverse probability weighting of receiving treatment conditional on the baseline covariates. Results and conclusion Therapy with tocilizumab alone was associated with a reduction of deaths (OR 0.49, 95% CI 0.21-1.17) and of the composite outcome death/intubation (OR 0.35, 95% CI 0.13-0.90) compared to glucocorticoids alone. Nevertheless, this result should be cautiously interpreted due to a potential prescription bias.

Biomarkers Changes after Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy in Breast Cancer: A Seven-Year Single Institution Experience.

The adoption of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) for breast cancer (BC) is increasing. The need to repeat the biomarkers on a residual tumor after NACT is still a matter of debate. We verified estrogen receptors (ER), progesterone receptors (PR), Ki67 and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) status changes impact in a retrospective monocentric series of 265 BCs undergoing NACT. All biomarkers changed with an overall tendency toward a reduced expression. Changes in PR and Ki67 were statistically significant (p = 0.001). Ki67 changed in 114/265 (43.0%) cases, PR in 44/265 (16.6%), ER in 31/265 (11.7%) and HER2 in 26/265 (9.8%). Overall, intrinsic subtype changed in 72/265 (27.2%) cases after NACT, and 10/265 (3.8%) cases switched to a different adjuvant therapy accordingly. Luminal subtypes changed most frequently (66/175; 31.7%) but with less impact on therapy (5/175; 2.8%). Only 3 of 58 triple-negative BCs (5.2%) changed their intrinsic subtype, but all of them switched treatment. No correlation was found between intrinsic subtype changes and clinicopathological features. To conclude, biomarkers changes with prognostic implications occurred in all BC intrinsic subtypes, albeit they impacted therapy mostly in HER2 negative and/or hormone receptors negative BCs. Biomarkers retesting after NACT is important to improve both tailored adjuvant therapies and prognostication of patients.

The value of computed tomography in assessing the risk of death in COVID-19 patients presenting to the emergency room.

OBJECTIVE: The aims of this study were to develop a multiparametric prognostic model for death in COVID-19 patients and to assess the incremental value of CT disease extension over clinical parameters. METHODS: Consecutive patients who presented to all five of the emergency rooms of the Reggio Emilia province between February 27 and March 23, 2020, for suspected COVID-19, underwent chest CT, and had a positive swab within 10 days were included in this retrospective study. Age, sex, comorbidities, days from symptom onset, and laboratory data were retrieved from institutional information systems. CT disease extension was visually graded as < 20%, 20-39%, 40-59%, or ≥ 60%. The association between clinical and CT variables with death was estimated with univariable and multivariable Cox proportional hazards models; model performance was assessed using k-fold cross-validation for the area under the ROC curve (cvAUC). RESULTS: Of the 866 included patients (median age 59.8, women 39.2%), 93 (10.74%) died. Clinical variables significantly associated with death in multivariable model were age, male sex, HDL cholesterol, dementia, heart failure, vascular diseases, time from symptom onset, neutrophils, LDH, and oxygen saturation level. CT disease extension was also independently associated with death (HR = 7.56, 95% CI = 3.49; 16.38 for ≥ 60% extension). cvAUCs were 0.927 (bootstrap bias-corrected 95% CI = 0.899-0.947) for the clinical model and 0.936 (bootstrap bias-corrected 95% CI = 0.912-0.953) when adding CT extension. CONCLUSIONS: A prognostic model based on clinical variables is highly accurate in predicting death in COVID-19 patients. Adding CT disease extension to the model scarcely improves its accuracy. KEY POINTS: • Early identification of COVID-19 patients at higher risk of disease progression and death is crucial; the role of CT scan in defining prognosis is unclear. • A clinical model based on age, sex, comorbidities, days from symptom onset, and laboratory results was highly accurate in predicting death in COVID-19 patients presenting to the emergency room. • Disease extension assessed with CT was independently associated with death when added to the model but did not produce a valuable increase in accuracy.

Accuracy and Reproducibility of Contrast-Enhanced Mammography in the Assessment of Response to Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy in Breast Cancer Patients with Calcifications in the Tumor Bed.

This study aimed to evaluate contrast-enhanced mammography (CEM) accuracy and reproducibility in the detection and measurement of residual tumor after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) in breast cancer (BC) patients with calcifications, using surgical specimen pathology as the reference. Pre- and post-NAC CEM images of 36 consecutive BC patients receiving NAC in 2012-2020, with calcifications in the tumor bed at diagnosis, were retrospectively reviewed by two radiologists; described were absence/presence and size of residual disease based on contrast enhancement (CE) only and CE plus calcifications. Twenty-eight patients (77.8%) had invasive and 5 (13.9%) in situ-only residual disease at surgical specimen pathology. Considering CE plus calcifications instead of CE only, CEM sensitivity for invasive residual tumor increased from 85.7% (95% CI = 67.3-96%) to 96.4% (95% CI = 81.7-99.9%) and specificity decreased from 5/8 (62.5%; 95% CI = 24.5-91.5%) to 1/8 (14.3%; 95% CI = 0.4-57.9%). For in situ-only residual disease, false negatives decreased from 3 to 0 and false positives increased from 1 to 2. CEM pathology concordance in residual disease measurement increased (R squared from 0.38 to 0.45); inter-reader concordance decreased (R squared from 0.79 to 0.66). Considering CE plus calcifications to evaluate NAC response in BC patients increases sensitivity in detection and accuracy in measurement of residual disease but increases false positives.

The association between clinical laboratory data and chest CT findings explains disease severity in a large Italian cohort of COVID-19 patients.

BACKGROUND: Laboratory data and computed tomography (CT) have been used during the COVID-19 pandemic, mainly to determine patient prognosis and guide clinical management. The aim of this study was to evaluate the association between CT findings and laboratory data in a cohort of COVID-19 patients. METHODS: This was an observational cross-sectional study including consecutive patients presenting to the Reggio Emilia (Italy) province emergency rooms for suspected COVID-19 for one month during the outbreak peak, who underwent chest CT scan and laboratory testing at presentation and resulted positive for SARS-CoV-2. RESULTS: Included were 866 patients. Total leukocytes, neutrophils, C-reactive protein (CRP), creatinine, AST, ALT and LDH increase with worsening parenchymal involvement; an increase in platelets was appreciable with the highest burden of lung involvement. A decrease in lymphocyte counts paralleled worsening parenchymal extension, along with reduced arterial oxygen partial pressure and saturation. After correcting for parenchymal extension, ground-glass opacities were associated with reduced platelets and increased procalcitonin, consolidation with increased CRP and reduced oxygen saturation. CONCLUSIONS: Pulmonary lesions induced by SARS-CoV-2 infection were associated with raised inflammatory response, impaired gas exchange and end-organ damage. These data suggest that lung lesions probably exert a central role in COVID-19 pathogenesis and clinical presentation.

Accuracy of CT in a cohort of symptomatic patients with suspected COVID-19 pneumonia during the outbreak peak in Italy.

OBJECTIVE: To assess sensitivity/specificity of CT vs RT-PCR for the diagnosis of COVID-19 pneumonia in a prospective Italian cohort of symptomatic patients during the outbreak peak. METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, we included all consecutive patients who presented to the ER between March 13 and 23 for suspected COVID-19 and underwent CT and RT-PCR within 3 days. Using a structured report, radiologists prospectively classified CTs in highly suggestive, suggestive, and non-suggestive of COVID-19 pneumonia. Ground-glass, consolidation, and visual extension of parenchymal changes were collected. Three different RT-PCR-based reference standard definitions were used. Oxygen saturation level, CRP, LDH, and blood cell counts were collected and compared between CT/RT-PCR classes. RESULTS: The study included 696 patients (41.4% women; age 59 ± 15.8 years): 423/454 (93%) patients with highly suggestive CT, 97/127 (76%) with suggestive CT, and 31/115 (27%) with non-suggestive CT had positive RT-PCR. CT sensitivity ranged from 73 to 77% and from 90 to 94% for high and low positivity threshold, respectively. Specificity ranged from 79 to 84% for high positivity threshold and was about 58% for low positivity threshold. PPV remained ≥ 90% in all cases. Ground-glass was more frequent in patients with positive RT-PCR in all CT classes. Blood tests were significantly associated with RT-PCR and CT classes. Leukocytes, lymphocytes, neutrophils, and platelets decreased, CRP and LDH increased from non-suggestive to suggestive CT classes. CONCLUSIONS: During the outbreak peak (in a high-prevalence setting), CT presented high PPV and may be considered a good reference to recognize COVID-19 patients while waiting for RT-PCR confirmation. KEY POINTS: • During the epidemic peak, CT showed high positive predictive value and sensitivity for COVID-19 pneumonia when compared with RT-PCR. • Blood tests were significantly associated with RT-PCR and CT classes.

Abdominal Visceral Infarction in 3 Patients with COVID-19.

A high incidence of thrombotic events has been reported in patients with coronavirus disease (COVID-19), which is caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. We report 3 clinical cases of patients in Italy with COVID-19 who developed abdominal viscera infarction, demonstrated by computed tomography.

Comparing two visualization protocols for tomosynthesis in screening: specificity and sensitivity of slabs versus planes plus slabs.

OBJECTIVES: Tomosynthesis (DBT) has proven to be more sensitive than digital mammography, but it requires longer reading time. We retrospectively compared accuracy and reading times of a simplified protocol with 1-cm-thick slabs versus a standard protocol of slabs + 1-mm-spaced planes, both integrated with synthetic 2D. METHODS: We randomly selected 894 DBTs (including 12 cancers) from the experimental arm of the RETomo trial. DBTs were read by two radiologists to estimate specificity. A second set of 24 cancers (8 also present in the first set) mixed within 276 negative DBTs was read by two radiologists. In total, 28 cancers with 64 readings were used to estimate sensitivity. Radiologists read with both protocols separated by a 3-month washout. Only women that were positive at the screening reading were assessed. Variance was estimated taking into account repeated measures. RESULTS: Sensitivity was 82.8% (53/64, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 67.2-92.2) and 90.6% (95% CI 80.2-95.8) with simplified and standard protocols, respectively. In the random screening setting, specificity was 97.9% (1727/1764, 95% CI 97.1-98.5) and 96.3% (95% CI 95.3-97.1), respectively. Inter-reader agreement was 0.68 and 0.54 with simplified and standard protocols, respectively. Median reading times with simplified protocol were 20% to 30% shorter than with standard protocol. CONCLUSIONS: A simplified protocol reduced reading time and false positives but may have a negative impact on sensitivity. KEY POINTS: • The adoption of digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) in screening, more sensitive than mammography, could be limited by its potential effect on the radiologists' workload, i.e., increased reading time and fatigue. • A DBT simplified protocol with slab only, compared to a standard protocol (slab plus planes) both integrated with synthetic 2D, reduced time and false positives but had a negative impact on sensitivity.

Digital Mammography versus Digital Mammography Plus Tomosynthesis for Breast Cancer Screening: The Reggio Emilia Tomosynthesis Randomized Trial.

Purpose To compare digital mammography (DM) plus digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) versus DM alone for breast cancer screening in the Reggio Emilia Tomosynthesis trial, a two-arm test-and-treat randomized controlled trial. Materials and Methods For this trial, eligible women (45-70 years old) who previously participated in the Reggio Emilia screening program were invited for mammography. Consenting women were randomly assigned 1:1 to undergo DBT+DM or DM (both of which involved two projections and double reading). Women were treated according to the decision at DBT+DM. Sensitivity, recall rate, and positive predictive value (PPV) at baseline were determined; the ratios of these rates for DBT+DM relative to DM alone were determined. Results From March 2014 to March 2016, 9777 women were recruited to the DM+DBT arm of the study, and 9783 women were recruited to the DM arm (mean age, 56.2 vs 56.3 years). Recall was 3.5% in both arms; detection was 4.5 per 1000 (44 of 9783) and 8.6 per 1000 (83 of 9777), respectively (+89%; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 31, 72). PPV of the recall was 13.0% and 24.1%, respectively (P = .0002); 72 of 80 cancers found in the DBT+DM arm and with complete DBT imaging were positive at least at one DBT-alone reading. The greater detection rate for DM+DBT was stronger for ductal carcinoma in situ (+180%, 95% CI: 1, 665); it was notable for small and medium invasive cancers, but not for large ones (+94 [95% CI: 6, 254]; +122 [95% CI: 18, 316]; -12 [95% CI: -68, 141]; for invasive cancers < 10 mm, 10-19 mm, and ≥ 20 mm, respectively). Conclusion DBT+DM depicts 90% more cancers in a population previously screened with DM, with similar recall rates.

Contrast-enhanced spectral mammography in neoadjuvant chemotherapy monitoring: a comparison with breast magnetic resonance imaging.

BACKGROUND: Neoadjuvant-chemotherapy (NAC) is considered the standard treatment for locally advanced breast carcinomas. Accurate assessment of disease response is fundamental to increase the chances of successful breast-conserving surgery and to avoid local recurrence. The purpose of this study was to compare contrast-enhanced spectral mammography (CESM) and contrast-enhanced-MRI (MRI) in the evaluation of tumor response to NAC. METHODS: This prospective study was approved by the institutional review board and written informed consent was obtained. Fifty-four consenting women with breast cancer and indication of NAC were consecutively enrolled between October 2012 and December 2014. Patients underwent both CESM and MRI before, during and after NAC. MRI was performed first, followed by CESM within 3 days. Response to therapy was evaluated for each patient, comparing the size of the residual lesion measured on CESM and MRI performed after NAC to the pathological response on surgical specimens (gold standard), independently of and blinded to the results of the other test. The agreement between measurements was evaluated using Lin's coefficient. The agreement between measurements using CESM and MRI was tested at each step of the study, before, during and after NAC. And last of all, the variation in the largest dimension of the tumor on CESM and MRI was assessed according to the parameters set in RECIST 1.1 criteria, focusing on pathological complete response (pCR). RESULTS: A total of 46 patients (85%) completed the study. CESM predicted pCR better than MRI (Lin's coefficient 0.81 and 0.59, respectively). Both methods tend to underestimate the real extent of residual tumor (mean 4.1mm in CESM, 7.5mm in MRI). The agreement between measurements using CESM and MRI was 0.96, 0.94 and 0.76 before, during and after NAC respectively. The distinction between responders and non-responders with CESM and MRI was identical for 45/46 patients. In the assessment of CR, sensitivity and specificity were 100% and 84%, respectively, for CESM, and 87% and 60% for MRI. CONCLUSION: CESM and MRI lesion size measurements were highly correlated. CESM seems at least as reliable as MRI in assessing the response to NAC, and may be an alternative if MRI is contraindicated or its availability is limited.

Ultrasound-Guided Percutaneous Catheter Drainage of Large Breast Abscesses in Lactating Women: How to Preserve Breastfeeding Safely.

INTRODUCTION: Management of breast abscess in lactating women remains controversial. During pregnancy, women may develop different kinds of benign breast lesions that could require a surgical incision performed under general anesthesia with consequent breastfeeding interruption. The purpose of this study was to prospectively evaluate the management of large breast abscesses with ultrasound-assisted drainage aiming at breastfeeding preservation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: 34 lactating women with a diagnosis of unilateral breast abscess have been treated with an ultrasound (US)-assisted drainage of the abscess. A pigtail catheter was inserted into the fluid collection using the Seldinger technique under US guide and connected to a three stop way to allow drainage and irrigation of the cavity until its resolution. RESULTS: All procedures have been found safe and well tolerated. No recurrence was observed and breastfeeding was never interrupted. CONCLUSIONS: The described technique allows to avoid surgery and to preserve breastfeeding in well-selected patients with a safe, well-tolerated and cost-effective procedure.

Role of carcinoembryonic antigen, magnetic resonance imaging, and positron emission tomography-computed tomography in the evaluation of patients with suspected local recurrence of colorectal cancer.

The role of carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and positron emission tomography (PET)-computed tomography (CT) in detection of local recurrence of colorectal cancer is evaluated in 71 patients, selected due to suspected relapse at CT follow-up. Recurrence was confirmed by histology in 18 cases and excluded in 25 cases. Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, and accuracy were as follows: 44.4%, 92.5%, 66.7%, 83.1%, and 80.3% for CEA; 88.9%, 73.6%, 53.3%, 95.1%, and 77.5% for MRI; and 94.4%, 73.6%, 54.8%, 97.5%, and 78.9% for PET-CT. A diagnostic protocol integrating CEA and dedicated imaging studies is to be advocated.