Lesion conspicuity on synthetic screening mammography compared to full field digital screening mammography.

OBJECTIVE: To compare lesion conspicuity on synthetic screening mammography (SM) plus digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) versus full field digital mammography (FFDM) plus DBT. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Seven breast imagers each prospectively evaluated 107-228 screening mammograms (FFDM, DBT, and SM; total 1206 examinations) over 12 weeks in sets of 10-50 consecutive examinations. Interpretation sessions alternated as follows: SM + DBT, then FFDM, or FFDM + DBT, then SM. Lesion conspicuity on SM versus FFDM (equal/better versus less) was assessed using proportions with 95% confidence intervals. DBT-only findings were excluded. RESULTS: Overall 1082 of 1206 (89.7%) examinations were assessed BI-RADS 1/2, and 124 of 1206 (10.3%) assessed BI-RADS 0. There were 409 evaluated findings, including 134 masses, 119 calcifications, 72 asymmetries, 49 architectural distortion, and 35 focal asymmetries. SM conspicuity compared to FFDM conspicuity for lesions was rated 1) masses: 77 (57%) equal or more conspicuous, 57 (43%) less conspicuous; 2) asymmetries/focal asymmetries: 61 (57%) equal or more conspicuous, and 46 (43%) less conspicuous; 3) architectural distortion: 46 (94%) equal or more conspicuous, 3 (6%) less conspicuous; 4) calcifications: 115 (97%) equal or more conspicuous, 4 (3%) less conspicuous. SM had better conspicuity than FFDM for calcifications and architectural distortion and similar conspicuity for most masses and asymmetries. CONCLUSION: Compared to FFDM, SM has better conspicuity for calcifications and architectural distortion and similar conspicuity for most masses and asymmetries.

Ultrasound visibility of select breast biopsy markers for targeted axillary node localization following neoadjuvant treatment: simulation using animal tissue models.

PURPOSE: To compare ultrasound visibility of selected biopsy markers in animal tissue models simulating axillary echotexture. METHODS: Four breast biopsy markers were selected based on size, shape, and composition and compared to an institutional standard for testing in beef steak and pork loin phantoms. BD® UltraCor™ Twirl™; Hologic® Tumark® Professional series Q, Vision, and X; and BD® UltraClip™ Dual Trigger wing-shaped (institutional standard) biopsy markers were deployed at superficial (0-2.0 cm) and deep (2.1-4.0 cm) depths in the animal models. An animal model without a biopsy marker served as control. Four participating breast imagers blinded to marker shape and location assessed ultrasound visibility of each biopsy marker using a handheld 5-12 MHz linear array transducer with a 4-point grading system (0, not visible; 1, unsure if visible; 2, visible with difficulty; 3, definite visibility). Each breast imager was asked to select the three most easily visualized biopsy markers. RESULTS: Total visibility scores with the four-point grading system demonstrate highest score for the Twirl™ (48/48 points), followed by the Tumark® Q (42/48) and Tumark® Vision (41/48) biopsy markers. Overall individual accuracy scores across all biopsy marker types ranged from 83.3 to 95.8%. Visibility scores based on subjective radiologist assessment also demonstrate the highest vote for the Twirl™ (11), followed by the Tumark® Vision (7) and Tumark® Q (6) biopsy markers. The wing-shaped biopsy marker had the lowest visibility and voter score. CONCLUSION: The Twirl™ followed by the Tumark® Q and Vision biopsy markers demonstrates the highest visibility scores using a four-point grading system and by radiologist vote.

Factors that impact the duration of MRI-guided core needle biopsy.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of our study was to determine which patient-related, target lesion-related, or procedure-related variables impact the duration of MRI-guided core needle breast biopsy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between July 11, 2006, and September 26, 2007, data were collected for 75 single-target MRI-guided 9-gauge vacuum-assisted core needle biopsy procedures using a grid-guidance technique and performed at a single institution. The following variables were studied: MRI suite occupation time, number of operators, patient age and breast size, target morphology and location, approach to target, equipment used, number of image acquisitions and times the patient was moved in and out of the closed magnet, and occurrence of complications. Statistical analysis was performed using the Student's t test, analysis of variance, and Pearson's correlation, with p values < 0.05 considered significant. RESULTS: The mean duration was 57.9 minutes (SD, 17.2 minutes; range, 30-109 minutes). None of the patient- or target-related variables significantly impacted the duration, although lesions located in the anterior third of the breast showed a trend to prolong the procedure (p = 0.059). The time to complete a procedure was reduced when the operating radiologist was assisted by a breast imaging fellow-in-training (p = 0.01). Increasing numbers of image acquisitions and times the patient was moved in and out of the magnet significantly lengthened the procedure duration (p = 0.0001 for both). No major complications occurred. Biopsies yielded 16% (12/75) malignant and 84% (63/75) benign diagnoses. CONCLUSION: Variables that minimized procedure duration were number of image acquisitions, number of patient insertions or removals from the magnet, and assistance of a breast imaging fellow-in-training. No patient-related or target-related variables impacted procedure time.

Lactating Adenoma: Sonographic Features.

The lactating adenoma is a benign breast lesion occurring as a palpable mass in pregnant or lactating patients. The ultrasound characteristics of 15 lactating adenomas in 15 patients were reviewed retrospectively. Most of the lactating adenomas in this series (10 of 15) had one or more typically benign features such as circumscribed borders, smooth lobulations, or an echogenic pseudocapsule. The remaining five, however, had features typically associated with malignancy, including irregular, angulated, or ill-defined margins, or posterior acoustic shadowing.