Role of breast MR imaging for predicting malignancy of histologically borderline lesions diagnosed at core needle biopsy: prospective evaluation.

PURPOSE: To prospectively determine the diagnostic performance of breast magnetic resonance (MR) imaging in predicting the malignancy of breast lesions classified as borderline at core needle biopsy (CNB). MATERIALS AND METHODS: This prospective study was approved by the local ethics committee, and all patients provided written informed consent. Between February 2007 and October 2009, 193 patients underwent ultrasonography (US)-guided CNB. Thirty-two lesions in 32 patients were classified as "borderline" ("lesions of uncertain malignant potential" according to the United Kingdom National Health Service Breast Screening program or those that are "probably benign" according to the Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System [BI-RADS] lexicon) at pathologic examination and were evaluated. All 32 patients underwent contrast agent-enhanced breast MR imaging 1-3 weeks after CNB; surgical biopsy was performed within 60 days of MR imaging. Results were compared with histologic findings. Sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, and positive and negative predictive values were calculated. RESULTS: Findings from surgical biopsy confirmed the diagnosis of seven atypical ductal hyperplasia lesions, four atypical lobular hyperplasia (ALH) lesions, five papillary lesions, two fibroepithelial lesions, three radial scars, three lobular carcinomas in situ, three ductal carcinomas in situ (DCIS), four invasive ductal carcinomas, and one invasive lobular carcinoma. With regard to malignancy, breast MR imaging helped correctly classify 22 of the 32 lesions as negative and seven as positive. Two of the lesions confirmed to be ALH were incorrectly classified as suspicious (BI-RADS category IV; false-positive finding), whereas one small DCIS was incorrectly classified as nonsuspicious (BI-RADS category II; false-negative finding). The sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, and positive and negative predictive values for the correct demonstration of malignancy at MR imaging were 88% (seven of eight lesions), 92% (22 of 24 lesions), 91% (29 of 32 lesions), 78% (seven of nine lesions), and 96% (22 of 23 lesions), respectively. CONCLUSION: Breast MR imaging can improve the evaluation of lesions classified as borderline at CNB. In cases of nonsuspicious enhancement or no enhancement at breast MR imaging, follow-up rather than surgical biopsy might be performed.

Contrast-enhanced MR mammography: improved lesion detection and differentiation with gadobenate dimeglumine.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of our study was to intraindividually compare 0.1 mmol/kg doses of gadobenate dimeglumine and gadopentetate dimeglumine for contrast-enhanced breast MRI. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Forty-seven women (mean age +/- SD, 50.8 +/- 12.9 years) with breast lesions classified as BI-RADS category 3, 4, or 5 for suspicion of malignancy underwent two identical MR examinations at 1.5 T separated by 48-72 hours. T1-weighted gradient-echo images were acquired before contrast administration and at 2-minute intervals after the randomized injection of gadopentetate dimeglumine or gadobenate dimeglumine at 2 mL/s. Two blinded readers evaluated randomized image sets for lesion detection and differentiation as benign or malignant compared with histology. The McNemar exact test and the generalized estimating equation (GEE) were used to compare lesion detection rates and diagnostic performance in terms of sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV). RESULTS: Histopathology data were available for 78 lesions. Significantly more lesions overall (75/78 [96%] vs 62/78 [79%], respectively; p = 0.0002) and significantly more malignant lesions (49/50 [98%] vs 38/50 [76%]; p = 0.0009) were detected with gadobenate dimeglumine than gadopentetate dimeglumine. All detected malignant lesions were correctly diagnosed with both agents. More detected benign lesions were correctly diagnosed with gadobenate dimeglumine than with gadopentetate dimeglumine (20/26 [77%] vs 17/24 [71%], respectively). Differentiation of lesions was significantly (p = 0.0001) better with gadobenate dimeglumine. Significantly better diagnostic performance was noted with gadobenate dimeglumine than with gadopentetate dimeglumine, respectively, for sensitivity (98.0% vs 76.0%; p = 0.0064), accuracy (88.5% vs 69.2%; p = 0.0004), PPV (86.0% vs 76.0%; p = 0.0321), and NPV (95.2% vs 57.1%; p = 0.0003). CONCLUSION: Lesion detection and malignant-benign differentiation is significantly better with 0.1 mmol/kg gadobenate dimeglumine than 0.1 mmol/kg gadopentetate dimeglumine.

Color-coded automated signal intensity curves for detection and characterization of breast lesions: preliminary evaluation of a new software package for integrated magnetic resonance-based breast imaging.

OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to evaluate the value of a color-coded automated signal intensity curve software package for contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance mammography (CE-MRM) in patients with suspected breast cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty-six women with suspected breast cancer based on mammographic and sonographic examinations were preoperatively evaluated on CE-MRM. CE-MRM was performed on a 1.5-T magnet using a 2D Flash dynamic T1-weighted sequence. A dosage of 0.1 mmol/kg of Gd-BOPTA was administered at a flow rate of 2 mL/s followed by 10 mL of saline. Images were analyzed with the new software package and separately with a standard display method. Statistical comparison was performed of the confidence for lesion detection and characterization with the 2 methods and of the diagnostic accuracy for characterization compared with histopathologic findings. RESULTS: At pathology, 54 malignant lesions and 14 benign lesions were evaluated. All 68 (100%) lesions were detected with both methods and good correlation with histopathologic specimens was obtained. Confidence for both detection and characterization was significantly (P < or = 0.025) better with the color-coded method, although no difference (P > 0.05) between the methods was noted in terms of the sensitivity, specificity, and overall accuracy for lesion characterization. Excellent agreement between the 2 methods was noted for both the determination of lesion size (kappa = 0.77) and determination of SI/T curves (kappa = 0.85). CONCLUSIONS: The novel color-coded signal intensity curve software allows lesions to be visualized as false color maps that correspond to conventional signal intensity time curves. Detection and characterization of breast lesions with this method is quick and easily interpretable.

Color Doppler ultrasound in renal transplant: role of resistive index versus renal cortical ratio in the evaluation of renal transplant diseases.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Ultrasound (US) and color Doppler are not sensitive enough to detect anomalies in cortical perfusion, which is affected in most graft dysfunctions. The renal cortical ratio (RCR) is a variation in the resistive index (RI) values from the renal artery to cortical vessels, expressed in percent. The aim of this study was to compare the RI and RCR in the differentiation of normal and pathological grafts, to assess the positive predictive value of RCR and show that RCR enables earlier diagnosis than RI. METHODS: Based on clinical, biochemical and histological examinations, 494 renal allografts were divided into 3 groups (normal grafts, acute and chronic pathologies). All patients underwent US color Doppler. RI was measured and RCR calculated. Follow-up confirmed the initial division in groups. Statistical significance was calculated using the two-tailed Student's t test. The positive predictive value was calculated for each group. RESULTS: 24 h after transplant, RCR differentiated normal grafts from acute dysfunctions despite confusing biochemical values and clinical symptoms. In chronic patients, RCR variations occurred later but always before the serum creatinine level increased. CONCLUSION: RCR presented a higher positive predictive value than RI. RCR curves were already altered in the early stages of transplant pathologies. RCR calculation is easy and makes a significant contribution towards a correct early diagnosis.

Contrast-enhanced MR mammography for evaluation of the contralateral breast in patients with diagnosed unilateral breast cancer or high-risk lesions.

PURPOSE: To prospectively evaluate accuracy of gadobenate dimeglumine-enhanced magnetic resonance (MR) mammography for depiction of synchronous contralateral breast cancer in patients with newly diagnosed unilateral breast cancer or high-risk lesions, with histologic analysis or follow-up as reference. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study had ethics committee approval; all patients provided written informed consent. One hundred eighteen consecutive women (mean age, 52 years) with unilateral breast cancer or high-risk lesions and negative findings in the contralateral breast at physical examination, ultrasonography, and conventional mammography underwent gadobenate dimeglumine-enhanced 1.5-T MR mammography. Transverse three-dimensional T1-weighted gradient-echo images were acquired before and at 0, 2, 4, 6, and 8 minutes after gadobenate dimeglumine administration (0.1 mmol per kilogram body weight). Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) was used to categorize breast density and the level of suspicion for malignant contralateral breast lesions. Results were compared with histologic findings. Sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, and positive and negative predictive values for contrast-enhanced MR mammography were evaluated. RESULTS: Contrast-enhanced MR mammography revealed contralateral lesions in 28 (24%) of 118 patients. Twenty-four lesions were detected in patients with dense breasts (BI-RADS breast density category III or IV). Lesions in eight (29%) of 28 patients were BI-RADS category 4; patients underwent biopsy. Lesions in 20 (71%) patients were BI-RADS category 5; patients underwent surgery. At histologic analysis, 22 lesions were confirmed as malignant; six lesions were fibroadenomas. No false-negative lesions were detected; none of the fibroadenomas were BI-RADS category 5. The sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, and positive and negative predictive values of contrast-enhanced MR mammography for depiction of malignant or high-risk contralateral lesions were 100%, 94%, 95%, 79%, and 100%, respectively. Follow-up findings (12-24 months) confirmed absence of contralateral lesions in 90 of 118 patients with negative contrast-enhanced MR mammographic findings in the contralateral breast. CONCLUSION: Contrast-enhanced MR mammography is accurate for detection of synchronous contralateral cancer or high-risk lesions in patients with newly diagnosed breast cancer or high-risk lesions.

Contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance mammography: does it affect surgical decision-making in patients with breast cancer?

BACKGROUND: Diagnostic imaging in women with suspected breast cancer should accurately detect and diagnose malignant tumors and facilitate the correct choice of therapy. Contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance mammography (CE-MRM) is potentially the imaging modality of choice for accurate patient management decisions. METHODS: A total of 164 women with suspected breast cancer based on clinical examination, conventional mammography and/or ultrasound each underwent preoperative bilateral CE-MRM using an axial 3D dynamic T1-weighted gradient-echo sequence and gadobenate dimeglumine as contrast agent. Images were evaluated by two readers in consensus. Histological evaluation of detected lesions was performed on samples from core biopsy or surgery. Determinations were made of the sensitivity, accuracy and positive predictive value of CE-MRM compared to mammography/ultrasound for the detection of malignant lesions and of the impact of CE-MRM for surgical decision-making. FINDINGS: Conventional mammography/ultrasound detected 175 lesions in the 164 evaluated patients. CE-MRM revealed 51 additional lesions in 34/164 patients; multifocal and multicentric cancer was detected in 7 and 4 additional patients, respectively, contralateral foci in 21 additional patients and pectoral muscle infiltration in 2 additional patients. CE-MRM also confirmed the absence or benignity of 3 and 1 lesions suspected of malignancy on mammography/ultrasound. The sensitivity and accuracy for malignant lesion detection and identification was 100% and 93.4%, respectively, for CE-MRM compared to 77.3% and 72.1% for mammography/ultrasound, respectively. Patient management was altered for 32/164 (19.5%) patients as a result of CE-MRM. INTERPRETATION: CE-MRM positively impacts patient management decisions and should be performed in all women with suspected breast cancer based on clinical examination, mammography and/or ultrasound.

CE-Magnetic Resonance Mammography for the evaluation of the contralateral breast in patients with diagnosed breast cancer.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the role of contrast-enhanced Magnetic Resonance Mammography (MRM) in the evaluation of the contralateral breast in patients with recently diagnosed breast cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifty patients with proved unilateral breast cancer, with a negative contralateral breast at physical examination, ultrasound and mammography, were studied with a 1.5 T magnet (Siemens, Vision Plus, Germany). A bilateral breast surface coil was used. Dynamic 3D Flash T1-weighted sequences were acquired in the axial plane before and 0, 2, 4, 6 and 8 minutes after the administration of 0.1 mmol/kg of Gd-BOPTA at a flow rate of 2 ml/s followed by 10 ml of saline. The level of suspicion was reported on a scale from 0 to 5 following the BI-RADS classification, based on lesion morphology and kinetic features. The results were compared with the histological findings after biopsy or surgery. RESULTS: Fourteen out of 50 patients (28%) had contralateral lesions identified on MRM. Biopsy was performed in four of them for suspicious lesions (BI-RADS 4) while 10 patients underwent surgery because of highly suggestive malignant lesions (BI-RADS 5). Histology diagnosed three fibroadenomas, 5 ductal carcinomas in situ, 2 lobular carcinomas in situ, 3 invasive ductal carcinomas and 1 invasive lobular carcinoma. Contrast-enhanced MRM yielded no false negative and three false positives. CONCLUSIONS: Our results demonstrate a very good accuracy of Magnetic Resonance Mammography in the detection of synchronous contralateral cancer in patients with newly diagnosed breast cancer. Therefore, contrast-enhanced MRM could be introduced to screen patients with proven breast cancer before they undergo surgery.

TRUS staging and follow-up in patients with anal canal cancer.

PURPOSE: The aim of our study was to define the role of grey-scale transrectal ultrasound in the evaluation, staging and follow-up of patients with histologically diagnosed anal canal cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Seventy-six patients underwent digital rectal examination, anoscopy, abdomino-pelvic CT, inguinal and transrectal ultrasound; Fifty-five received combined chemoradiotherapy, whereas 21 received only radiotherapy due to clinical contraindications to chemotherapy. Before and after treatment TNM and UT staging were compared. After treatment we evaluated the sensitivity of transrectal ultrasound in the differentiation of post-radiation fibrosis from residual tumor/local relapse (gold standard: histological analysis). Ultrasound examination was carried out to assess inguinal and perirectal lymph node involvement, and Computed Tomography to detect abdominal lymph nodes. RESULTS: In all stages, except stage 4, there were differences between TNM and UT staging, as TNM is often understaged. After treatment ultrasound showed a sensitivity of 71 percent in the differentiation of fibrosis from residual tumor (the results were confirmed by histopathologic analysis), of 93 percent in the identification of perirectal lymph nodes and of 95 percent in the identification of inguinal lymph nodes. CONCLUSIONS: Transrectal ultrasound is very useful in the staging and follow-up of anal canal carcinoma, in the evaluation of initial tumor volume and reduction after therapy. Ultrasound is useful in the distinction of fibrosis from residual tumor after therapy and as biopsy guidance.