Using the BI-RADS lexicon in a restrictive form of double reading as a strategy for minimizing screening mammography recall rates.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this article is to determine the potential reduction in screening recall rates by strictly following standardized BI-RADS lexicon for lesions seen on screening mammography. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Of 3084 consecutive mammograms performed at our screening facilities, 345 women with 437 lesions were recalled for additional imaging and constituted our study population. Three radiologists retrospectively classified lesions using the standard BI-RADS lexicon and assigned each to one of four groups: group A, the finding met criteria for recall by the BI-RADS lexicon; group B, the finding did not meet strict BI-RADS criteria for recall but was sufficiently indeterminate to warrant recall by the majority of the study panel; group C, the finding was classifiable by the BI-RADS lexicon but was not recalled because it was benign or stable; and group D, the questioned finding was not considered an abnormality by our study panel. Recall rates and the cancer detection rate were determined. The adjusted recall rate was calculated for lesions considered appropriate for recall (group A), and the reduction in the recall rate was determined. RESULTS: Nineteen malignancies were detected in our recalled population, for a cancer detection rate of 0.65%. All 19 malignancies were lesions considered appropriate for recall (group A). If only group A lesions had been recalled, the recall rate would have decreased from 11.4% to 6.2%, representing a 46% reduction in recalls without affecting the cancer detection rate. CONCLUSION: Using the BI-RADS lexicon as a decision-making aid may help adjust thresholds for recalling indeterminate or suspicious lesions and reduce recall rates from screening mammography.

Patient Perceptions of Breast Cancer Risk in Imaging-Detected Low-Risk Scenarios and Thresholds for Desired Intervention: A Multi-Institution Survey.

PURPOSE: To determine women's perceptions of breast cancer risk and thresholds for desiring biopsy when considering BI-RADS 3 and 4A scenarios and recommendations, respectively. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Women presenting for screening mammography from five geographically diverse medical centers were surveyed. Demographic information and baseline anxiety were queried. Participants were presented with scenarios of short-term imaging follow-up recommendations (ie, BI-RADS 3) and biopsy recommendations (ie, BI-RADS 4A) for low-risk mammographic abnormalities and asked to estimate their breast cancer risk for each scenario. Participants reported the threshold (ie, likelihood of cancer) where they would feel comfortable undergoing short-term imaging follow-up and biopsy and their anticipated regret for choosing short-term follow-up versus biopsy. RESULTS: Analysis of 2,747 surveys showed that participants estimated breast cancer risk of 32.8% for a BI-RADS 3 and 41.1% for a BI-RADS 4A scenarios are significantly greater rates than clinically established rates (<2% [P < .001] and 2%-10% [P < .001], respectively). Over one-half (55.4%) of participants reported they would never want imaging follow-up if there was any chance of cancer; two-thirds (66.2%) reported they would desire biopsy if there was any chance of cancer. Participants reported greater anticipated regret (P < .001) and less relief and confidence (P < .001) with the decision to undergo follow-up imaging versus biopsy. CONCLUSION: Women overestimate breast cancer risk associated with both BI-RADS 3 and 4A scenarios and desire very low biopsy thresholds. Greater anticipated regret and less relief and confidence was reported with the choice to undergo short-term imaging follow-up compared with biopsy.

Impact of Sodium Bicarbonate-Buffered Lidocaine on Patient Pain During Image-Guided Breast Biopsy.

PURPOSE: This randomized, double-blind controlled study evaluated the effectiveness of sodium bicarbonate-buffered lidocaine on reducing pain during imaging-guided breast biopsies. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This prospective, HIPAA-compliant study randomly assigned 85 women undergoing ultrasound- or stereotactic-guided core-needle breast biopsies to receive intradermally and intraparenchymally either 1% lidocaine buffered with sodium bicarbonate (9:1 ratio) (bicarbonate study group) or 1% lidocaine alone (control group). Pain was evaluated using a 0-to-10 Likert pain scale during both intradermal and intraparenchymal anesthesia injections and during tissue sampling. Prebiopsy breast pain, anxiety, medical history, demographics, biopsy type, radiologist level of training, breast density, and lesion histology were recorded. Data were analyzed using analysis of variance and analysis of covariance. RESULTS: Unadjusted mean pain scores were 1.47 and 2.07 (study and control groups, respectively; P = .15) during intradermal injections, and 1.84 and 2.98 (study and control groups, respectively; P = .03) during intraparenchymal injections. Tissue sampling mean pain scores were .81 and 1.71 (study and control groups, respectively; P = .07). Moderator analyses found (1) among patients with preprocedural pain, those in the bicarbonate group experienced less intradermal injection pain (0.85 ± 1.23) than patients in the control group (2.50 ± 2.09); (2) among patients with fatty or scattered fibroglandular tissue, those in the bicarbonate group (1.35 ± 1.95) experienced less intraparenchymal injection pain than the control group (3.52 ± 3.13); and (3) during ultrasound-guided biopsies, patients in the bicarbonate group experienced less tissue-sampling pain (0.23 ± 0.63) than the control group (1.79 ± 3.05). CONCLUSIONS: Overall, buffering lidocaine with sodium bicarbonate significantly reduced pain during intraparenchymal injections, and additional pain reduction was found in certain patient subgroups during intradermal injections, intraparenchymal injections, and tissue sampling.

MRI-guided vacuum-assisted breast biopsy with a handheld portable biopsy system.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate a compact portable 10-gauge handheld battery-operated vacuum-assisted biopsy system for MRI-guided breast biopsy. CONCLUSION: The compact portable battery-operated biopsy system can be used successfully for MRI-guided core breast biopsy and is an alternative to current systems.