Dedicated Photon-Counting CT for Detection and Classification of Microcalcifications: An Intraindividual Comparison With Digital Breast Tomosynthesis.

OBJECTIVES: Clinical experience regarding the use of dedicated photon-counting breast CT (PC-BCT) for diagnosis of breast microcalcifications is scarce. This study systematically compares the detection and classification of breast microcalcifications using a dedicated breast photon-counting CT, especially designed for examining the breast, in comparison with digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT). MATERIALS AND METHODS: This is a prospective intraindividual study on women with DBT screening-detected BI-RADS-4/-5 microcalcifications who underwent PC-BCT before biopsy. PC-BCT images were reconstructed with a noninterpolated spatial resolution of 0.15 × 0.15 × 0.15 mm (reconstruction mode 1 [RM-1]) and with 0.3 × 0.3 × 0.3 mm (reconstruction mode 2 [RM-2]), plus thin-slab maximum intensity projection (MIP) reconstructions. Two radiologists independently rated the detection of microcalcifications in direct comparison with DBT on a 5-point scale. The distribution and morphology of microcalcifications were then rated according to BI-RADS. The size of the smallest discernible microcalcification particle was measured. For PC-BCT, the average glandular dose was determined by Monte Carlo simulations; for DBT, the information provided by the DBT system was used. RESULTS: Between September 2022 and July 2023, 22 participants (mean age, 61; range, 42-85 years) with microcalcifications (16 malignant; 6 benign) were included. In 2/22 with microcalcifications in the posterior region, microcalcifications were not detectable on PC-BCT, likely because they were not included in the PC-BCT volume. In the remaining 20 participants, microcalcifications were detectable. With high between-reader agreement (κ > 0.8), conspicuity of microcalcifications was rated similar for DBT and MIPs of RM-1 (mean, 4.83 ± 0.38 vs 4.86 ± 0.35) (P = 0.66), but was significantly lower (P < 0.05) for the remaining PC-BCT reconstructions: 2.11 ± 0.92 (RM-2), 2.64 ± 0.80 (MIPs of RM-2), and 3.50 ± 1.23 (RM-1). Identical distribution qualifiers were assigned for PC-BCT and DBT in 18/20 participants, with excellent agreement (κ = 0.91), whereas identical morphologic qualifiers were assigned in only 5/20, with poor agreement (κ = 0.44). The median size of smallest discernible microcalcification particle was 0.2 versus 0.6 versus 1.1 mm in DBT versus RM-1 versus RM-2 (P < 0.001), likely due to blooming effects. Average glandular dose was 7.04 mGy (PC-BCT) versus 6.88 mGy (DBT) (P = 0.67). CONCLUSIONS: PC-BCT allows reliable detection of in-breast microcalcifications as long as they are not located in the posterior part of the breast and allows assessment of their distribution, but not of their individual morphology.

Quantification of Breast Volume According to age and BMI: A Three-Dimensional MRI Analysis of 400 Women.

OBJECTIVE: Breast size alteration is the most common aesthetic surgical procedure worldwide. This study aimed to assess the correlation between breast volume and BMI or age. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The analyses were conducted utilizing 400 patients selected by a retrospective review of the archives at our institution. Epidemiological data and medical history were assessed. Adjusting for the age and BMI of patient from previously described cohorts, we calculated mean breast volumes per side and differences from the upper and lower percentiles to the mean volumes. RESULTS: The patients had a median BMI of 23.5 (range: 14.7-45.6) and a median age of 51 (range: 24-82). The average total breast volume increased strongly with BMI (r=0.834, p<0.01) and moderately with age (r=0.305, p<0.01). Within a BMI range of 18-24, breast volumes in the 8th and 18th percentile differ on average by about 50 ml. One BMI unit increase in women with breast sizes in the 10th percentile accounts for a breast volume difference of about 30 ml. CONCLUSION: BMI strongly correlates with breast size. To achieve natural results, preoperative consultation and planning of aesthetic and reconstructive breast surgery must recognize BMI as a major determinant of average breast size. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE IV: This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .

Feasibility study of 2D Dixon-Magnetic Resonance Fingerprinting (MRF) of breast cancer.

Purpose: Application of MRF to evaluate the feasibility of 2D Dixon blurring-corrected MRF (2DDb-cMRF) to differentiate breast cancer (BC) from normal fibroglandular tissue (FGT). Methods: Prospective study on 14 patients with unilateral BC on 1.5 T system/axial T2w-TSE sequence, 2DDb-cMRF, B1 map, dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE) T1-w GE-series. Mean T1 and T2 values and standard deviations were computed in the BC-/FGT-ROI on pre-/post-contrast MRF-maps and their differences were tested by two-tailed student t-test.Accuracy and repeatability of MRF were evaluated in a phantom experiment with gelatin with Primovist surrounded by fat.The T1 reduction between pre-/post-contrast MRF-maps was correlated to DCE signal enhancement in the last image post-contrast through the Pearson´s correlation coefficient (r) and for the phantom validation experiment through the Lin's concordance correlation coefficient (CCC).Visual evaluation of cancers on MRF-Maps was performed by rating each MRF-Map by 3 radiologists. Results: T1- and T2-MRF values of BC vs. FGT were for T1 and T2 pre-contrast respectively: 1147 ± 1 ms vs. 1052 ± 9 ms (p = 0.007) and 83 ± 1 ms vs. 73 ± 1 ms (p = 0.03); post-contrast respectively: 367.3 ± 121.5 ms vs. 690.3 ± 200.3 ms (p = 0.0005) and 76.9 ± 11.5 ms vs. 69.8 ± 15.2 ms (p = 0.12). r was positive (FGT r = 0.7; BC r = 0.6). CCC was 0.999 for T1 and 0.994 for T2. In the T1- and T2-MRF-Maps before contrast respectively (7,7,8)/14 and (5,9,8)/14 cancers were visible to the readers; afterwards, (11,12,12)/14 and (5,6,11)/14. Conclusions: MRF is promising for distinction between BC and FGT as well as for analyzing pre-/post-contrast T1 changes. However, its potential for differential diagnosis warrants further studies.

Background parenchymal enhancement in contrast-enhanced MR imaging suggests systemic effects of intrauterine contraceptive devices.

OBJECTIVES: Levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine contraceptive devices (LNG-IUDs) are designed to exhibit only local hormonal effects. There is an ongoing debate on whether LNG-IUDs can have side effects similar to systemic hormonal medication. Benign background parenchymal enhancement (BPE) in dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE) MRI has been established as a sensitive marker of hormonal stimulation of the breast. We investigated the association between LNG-IUD use and BPE in breast MRI to further explore possible systemic effects of LNG-IUDs. METHODS: Our hospital database was searched to identify premenopausal women without personal history of breast cancer, oophorectomy, and hormone replacement or antihormone therapy, who had undergone standardized DCE breast MRI at least twice, once with and without an LNG-IUD in place. To avoid confounding aging-related effects on BPE, half of included women had their first MRI without, the other half with, LNG-IUD in place. Degree of BPE was analyzed according to the ACR categories. Wilcoxon-matched-pairs signed-rank test was used to compare the distribution of ACR categories with vs. without LNG-IUD. RESULTS: Forty-eight women (mean age, 46 years) were included. In 24/48 women (50% [95% CI: 35.9-64.1%]), ACR categories did not change with vs. without LNG-IUDs. In 23/48 women (48% [33.9-62.1%]), the ACR category was higher with vs. without LNG-IUDs; in 1/48 (2% [0-6%]), the ACR category was lower with vs. without LNG-IUDs. The change of ACR category depending on the presence or absence of an LNG-IUD proved highly significant (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The use of an LNG-IUD can be associated with increased BPE in breast MRI, providing further evidence that LNG-IUDs do have systemic effects. KEY POINTS: • The use of levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine contraceptive devices is associated with increased background parenchymal enhancement in breast MRI. • This suggests that hormonal effects of these devices are not only confined to the uterine cavity, but may be systemic. • Potential systemic effects of levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine contraceptive devices should therefore be considered.