Implementing radar reflector-guided localization of nonpalpable breast lesions: Feasibility, challenges, outcomes, and lessons learned.

Reflector-guided localization uses a nonradioactive radar implant for wire-free presurgical breast lesion localization. A single-institution retrospective evaluation found lower rates of positive margins and of close margins for reflector-guided localizations compared with wire localizations, resulting in a statistically significant decrease in the re-excision rates (p = 0.015). The two approaches did not show statistically significant difference in localization time and OR time. Technical challenges included particulars inherent in reflector placement, while patient factors included special considerations for reflector placement in the postsurgical breast. Despite novel challenges, we found reflector-guided localization to be accurate and efficient.

Contrast-Enhanced Mammography: A Systematic Guide to Interpretation and Reporting.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this article is to discuss the essential steps involved in performing, interpreting, managing, and reporting findings on contrast-enhanced mammography for successful implementation into clinical practice. CONCLUSION: To successfully implement contrast-enhanced mammography into clinical practice, an understanding about the acquisition of images, image interpretation, and reporting of the spectrum of negative, benign, and malignant findings is essential.

Potential role of abbreviated MRI for breast cancer screening in an academic medical center.

The purpose is to determine whether an abbreviated MRI protocol (ABMR) is ready to be used for breast cancer screening in an academic practice setting. Two hundred and fifty nine breast MRIs from 1/1/2012 to 6/30/2012 were retrospectively reviewed using ABMR (MIP, Pre-contrastT1, single dynamic post-contrastT1, and subtraction). Five breast radiologists (4-28 year-expr) participated in this reader study performed in two phases: Phase1 - radiologist's privy to clinical history but not to comparison imaging. Phase2 - radiologists provided comparison imaging. For phase1, studies were reviewed using three steps: (a) MIP only (positive/negative/intermediate); (b) ABMR (recall/no recall) and (c) With T2 (for changes in recommendations). Radiologist also recorded total time for interpretation. In Phase2 the MRIs coded as "recall" were re-reviewed with available comparison studies, noting changes in final recommendation. The abnormal interpretation rates (AIRs) were calculated for phase1 and phase2 results with comparison to the original full protocol. Of the 259 patients (avg. age-52 years; range 26-78), there were seven cancers (three invasive, three DCIS and one breast lymphoma). Acquisition time for ABMR was 3 minutes, ABMR + T2-8 minutes, and original full protocol 16 minutes. Average MIP was positive or indeterminate in 86% (6/7) and negative in 14% (1/7) cancers. The average AIR for MIP only was 20.8% (sens-77.1%; spec-80.8%. The AIR w/o comparisons was 25.6% (sens-91.4%; spec- 76.2%); however the average AIR decreased in phase 2 with comparisons to 13.7% (sens-91.4%; spec-88.5%). The AIR of the original full protocol read was 16.2% (sens-100%; spec-85.7%). Addition of T2 changed assessment in only 3% (1.2%-6.5%). Avg. read time for ABMR including T2 was 2.5 minutes (1.6-4.0 minutes). ABMR is reliable for breast cancer screening, with acceptable interpretation time and acceptable AIR.

Osteonecrosis in children after therapy for malignancy.

OBJECTIVE: Osteonecrosis in the growing population of childhood cancer survivors results from disease and treatment. Imagers must be knowledgeable about patient groups at risk for its development, patterns of involvement and potential implications. This review will focus on implications of this potentially life-altering toxicity. CONCLUSION: Childhood cancer survivors are at increased risk for developing osteonecrosis. Because osteonecrosis is often asymptomatic until late in the process, imaging is critical for its detection and characterization when interventions may be most effective to ameliorate its progression.

Comparison of Contrast-Enhanced Mammography With Conventional Digital Mammography in Breast Cancer Screening: A Pilot Study.

PURPOSE: To perform a pilot evaluation of contrast-enhanced mammography (CEM) for screening to determine whether it can improve accuracy and reader confidence in diagnosis. METHODS AND MATERIALS: This institutional review board-approved reader study was comprised of 64 de-identified CEM cases acquired from December 1, 2014, to June 7, 2016, including 48 negative, 5 biopsy-proven benign, and 11 biopsy-proven malignancies. Negative cases were followed for at least 2 years without evidence of cancer. Ten breast imagers of varying experience first rated the low-energy (LE) mammogram and then the CEM examination using BI-RADS categories and a 5-point Likert scale for confidence in diagnosis. RESULTS: There were 635 out a total possible 640 complete reader interpretations included in this analysis. The remaining five incomplete interpretations were excluded. Median sensitivity and specificity improved with the addition of CEM (sensitivity: 0.86 [95% confidence interval {CI}: 0.74-0.95] versus 1 [95% CI: 0.83-1.00], specificity: 0.85 [95% CI: 0.64-0.94] versus 0.88 [95% CI: 0.80-0.92]). Individual receiver operating characteristic curves showed significant improvement with CEM (mean area under the curve increase = 0.056 [95% CI: 0.015-0.097], P = .002). The addition of CEM significantly improved average confidence in 5 of 10 readers when compared with LE (P < .0001) and improved pooled confidence across all tissue density categories, except the almost entirely fatty category. There was a trend toward improved confidence with increasing tissue density with CEM. Degree of background parenchymal enhancement did not affect readers' level of improvement in confidence when interpreting CEM. SUMMARY: CEM improved reader performance and confidence compared with viewing only LE, suggesting a role for CEM in breast cancer screening for which larger trials are warranted.

Femoral resurfacing in young patients with hematologic cancer and osteonecrosis.

UNLABELLED: Resurfacing hemiarthroplasties were performed to treat advanced osteonecrosis of 20 femoral heads in 14 patients (median age, 19.8 years; range, 15.1-27.4 years), treated for hematologic cancer in childhood or adolescence. Seven hips in five patients were revised to total hip arthroplasties (THA) because of pain; three of these showed radiographic loosening of the femoral head resurfacing component. The median time from resurfacing to revision was 2.4 years (range, 0.9-4.8 years). Marginal Cox-regression analysis, adjusting for correlations owing to bilateral involvement, showed positive association of revision-free survival of the prosthesis with patient's age; time from resurfacing to the end of anticancer therapy, end of glucocorticosteroid therapy; percentage of joint space at the last radiograph; and size of the lesion has a negative association with revision-free survival. Because of this study's exploratory nature, p values were not adjusted for the number of statistical comparisons. Among 14 patients, the probability of not requiring resurfacing prosthesis revision was 66% (SE, +/-15%; 95% CI, 44%-100%) at 3 years. Osteonecrosis of the femoral head in young patients treated for hematologic cancer in childhood or adolescence poses a serious challenge to the orthopaedic surgeon. The data of this preliminary study suggest that in selected patients resurfacing hemiarthroplasty may delay the need for THA for 3-7 years. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II, prognostic study. See the Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Femoral head osteonecrosis in pediatric and young adult patients with leukemia or lymphoma.

PURPOSE: Osteonecrosis of the capital femoral epiphysis is a significant late toxicity of treatment for childhood leukemia and lymphoma. We determined clinical and imaging risk factors predicting clinical joint outcomes of femoral head osteonecrosis in pediatric patients with leukemia or lymphoma. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We reviewed retrospectively medical records and magnetic resonance imaging scans of 80 patients with osteonecrosis of the capital femoral epiphysis. Logistic regression was used to examine relationships between risk factors and outcomes of joint surface collapse and arthroplasty. We used Kaplan-Meier survival curves to display the time to joint surface collapse and arthroplasty based on selected predictors. RESULTS: Median time between primary diagnosis and diagnosis of osteonecrosis of the hip was 1.7 years (range, 0.1 to 17.5 years). Twenty-three patients (29%) underwent arthroplasty in 36 hips at a mean of 1.3 years (range, 0.5 to 8.6 years) after diagnosis of osteonecrosis. Median age at time of first arthroplasty was 20.1 years (range, 15.1 to 35.4 years). Joint outcome of osteonecrosis was predicted solely by lesion size at diagnosis of osteonecrosis. The worst prognosis was associated with lesions occupying more than 30% of the femoral head volume; 80% of hips with these lesions collapsed within 2 years of diagnosis and 50% required arthroplasty. CONCLUSION: Lesion size of osteonecrosis is the best predictor of clinical joint outcome of hip osteonecrosis in survivors of pediatric hematologic malignancy. Lesions occupying more than 30% of the femoral head have high likelihood of joint deterioration necessitating arthroplasty at a young age.

MRI of knee osteonecrosis in children with leukemia and lymphoma: Part 1, observer agreement.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to determine whether a new MRI-based staging system for osteonecrosis of the knee in pediatric patients could be used with an acceptable level of intra- and interobserver agreement. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a retrospective analysis of MRI studies of the knee performed in a single institution between April 1994 and July 2003. Knee osteonecrosis was identified in 168 children with a primary diagnosis of hematologic malignancy. This substantial number prompted us to design a staging system for use with pediatric patients. To assess interobserver reliability of two primary observers in using the system, they reviewed and interpreted the same 36 imaging studies of randomly chosen patients. For the assessment of intraobserver reproducibility, each observer rereviewed 16 studies. A senior observer coded potential causes of disagreement between the primary observers. RESULTS: Interobserver agreement was substantial: the kappa value was 0.66 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.58-0.75) in locations where the observers had to record only the presence or absence of a lesion, and the weighted kappa value was 0.65 (95% CI, 0.59-0.72) in locations where they had to classify the extent of involvement. The presence of marrow edema, punctate foci of altered signal, and mottled marrow changes was associated with a higher level of disagreement between the primary observers. CONCLUSION: Our proposed classification system, developed specifically for use with MRI, was used with substantial intra- and interobserver agreement. We think its use can contribute to a standardized approach to the interpretation of MRI findings in pediatric osteonecrosis of the knee.

MRI of knee osteonecrosis in children with leukemia and lymphoma: Part 2, clinical and imaging patterns.

OBJECTIVE: This aim of this study was to explore the relationship between MRI findings and clinical symptoms of knee osteonecrosis in children and to determine the significance of this relationship. Such information is important for early diagnosis of this frequent complication and for choosing an appropriate treatment strategy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Osteonecrotic lesion size and location were determined in a retrospective analysis of MR images of the knee obtained in our institution during the past 10 years. Association between MRI findings and clinical symptoms expressed by the knee scores was tested for a subgroup of our patient population who had clinical evaluation of the knees in the orthopedic clinic within 6 weeks of their MRI studies. RESULTS: In 80% of patients, osteonecrosis was bilateral. Lesions were distributed as follows: femur and tibia, 66% of the knees; femur alone, 26%; and tibia alone, 8%. Clinical symptoms of knee osteonecrosis were associated with lesions involving the articular surface of the distal femur, large lesions, and involvement of any part of the tibia. MR images showed milder osteonecrosis in patients who were less than 10 years old at the time of primary diagnosis. CONCLUSION: Osteonecrosis affecting the knees of children treated for leukemia and lymphoma is mostly asymptomatic. Children who are 10 years old or older have signs of more advanced osteonecrosis. Clinical symptoms often lag MRI presentation and may develop late in the course of the disease. Routine MRI evaluation is recommended for timely diagnosis of treatment-induced osteonecrosis.

QCT versus DXA in 320 survivors of childhood cancer: association of BMD with fracture history.

PURPOSE: To assess agreement on diagnosis of diminished bone mineral density (BMD) and correlation between BMD values obtained by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) and quantitative computed tomography (QCT) in childhood cancer survivors. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed lumbar spine QCT and DXA studies for BMD in patients who underwent both imaging studies within a 24-hr period. We determined correlation between BMD values and agreement on diagnosis of diminished BMD obtained by both modalities. Diminished BMD was defined as two or more SDs below mean for age- and gender-matched reference values. We evaluated the relationship of BMD values determined by each modality to self-reported fracture history in the 160 (50%) patients with available reports. RESULTS: Of 320 patients, 56% (178) were male; 87% (277) were white. Median age was 16.4 (range, 5.1-36.0) years. Median BMD Z-score was -1.43 (range, -5.96 to 3.20) by QCT and -1.30 (range, -5.50 to 2.80) by DXA. Correlation between QCT- and DXA-determined BMD values was significant but low, and agreement on diminished BMD was fair (kappa = 0.32). There was no association between BMD measured by either QCT or DXA and self-reported traumatic fracture history. Male gender was associated with doubling the traumatic fracture risk (P = 0.0499). CONCLUSIONS: Quantitative computed tomography and DXA may give discrepant results when used to assess bone health in childhood cancer survivors, especially in those of non-white race. This inconsistency in indicators of BMD deficiency may complicate clinical decision-making. Consecutive use of a single modality is recommended to provide reliable longitudinal information.