BIRADS 4 breast lesions: comparison of contrast-enhanced spectral mammography and contrast-enhanced MRI
Tóm tắt
Breast cancer is the most common cancer in women worldwide. It is responsible for about 23% of cancer in females in both developed and developing countries [1]. We aimed to assess the accuracy of contrast-enhanced spectral mammography (CESM) versus contrast-enhanced breast MRI in the evaluation of BIRADS 4 breast lesions. Fifty patients were included in this study; there were 28 malignant cases and 22 benign cases; all cases were proved by histopathological result either by core biopsy or excision biopsy. CESM was found to have less sensitivity (94.1%) than MRI (100%) but CESM has higher specificity (100%) than MRI (95.5%). The accuracy of CESM was 96.4%, while the accuracy of MRI was 98.2% with no statistical significance (P value 0.827). CESM can be used as a sensitive diagnostic tool in the detection and staging of breast cancer with higher specificity and less sensitivity as compared to contrast enhanced breast MRI.
Tài liệu tham khảo
Helal M, Abu Samra M, Ibraheem MA et al (2017) Accuracy of CESM versus conventional mammography and ultrasound in evaluation of Breast imaging-reporting and data system BI-RADS 3 and 4 breast lesions with pathological correlation. Egypt J Radiol Nucl Med 48:741–750
Siegel R, Naishadham D, Jemal A (2013) Cancer statistics, 2013. Cancer J Clin 63(1):11–30
Jochelson M Advanced imaging techniques for the detection of breast cancer. Am Soc Clin Oncol Educ Book 2012:65–69
Kolb TM, Lichy J, Newhouse JH (2002) Comparison of the performance of screening mammography, physical examination, and breast US and evaluation of factors that influence them: an analysis of 27,825 patient evaluations. Radiology 225:165–175
Pisano ED, Gatsonis C, Hendrick E et al (2005) Diagnostic performance of digital versus film mammography for breast-cancer screening. N Engl J Med 353:1773–1783
Houssami N, Ciatto S, Macaskill P et al (2008) Accuracy and surgical impact of magnetic resonance imaging in breast cancer staging: systematic review and meta-analysis in detection of multifocal and multicentric cancer. J Clin Oncol 26:3248–3258
Roganovic D, Djilas D, Vujnovic S et al (2015) Breast MRI, digital mammography and breast tomosynthesis: comparison of three methods for early detection of breast cancer. Bosn J Basic Med Sci 15:64–68
Nekhlyudov L, Kiarsis K, Elmore JG. MRI of the breast: does the internet accurately report its beneficial uses and limitations? Breast J 2009; 15:189—93.
Luczyn E, Heinze-Paluchowska S, Dyczek S et al (2014) Contrast-enhanced spectral mammography: comparison with conventional mammography and histopathology in 152 women. Korean J Radiol 15(6):689–696
Roth LR, Germaineb P, Renc S et al (2017) Contrast-enhanced spectral mammography (CESM) versus breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI): A retrospective comparison in 66 breast lesions. and Interventional Imaging 98:113–123
Jochelson MS, Dershaw DD, Sung JS et al (2013) Bilateral contrast-enhanced dual-energy digital mammography: feasibility and comparison with conventional digital mammography and MR imaging in women with known breast carcinoma. Radiology 266(3):743–751
Li L, Roth R, Germaine P et al (2017) Contrast-enhanced spectral mammography (CESM) versus breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI): A retrospective comparison in 66 breast lesions. Diagn Interv Imaging:113–123
Elfiky SM, Elsaid NA, Azeb EA et al (2018) Comparison between the role of contrast enhanced mammography and dynamic contrast enhanced MRI in assessment of breast cancer recurrence. Egypt J Hosp Med 73(1):5875–5885
Liao L, Li L, Germaine P et al (2017) contrast-enhanced spectral mammography (CESM) compared with breast MRI for breast cancer detection. J Clin Oncol:11069–11069
James J.J & Tennant S.L: Contrast-enhanced spectral mammography (CESM). Clin Radiol August 2018 Volume 73, Issue 8, Pages 715–723.
Yousef A, Khatera H, Jameelb L. Contrast-enhanced spectral mammography versus magnetic resonance imaging in the assessment of breast masses. Benha Med J, January-April 2018 Vol. 35 No. 1.
Jong R, Yaffe M, Skarpathiotakis M et al (2003) Contrast-enhanced digital mammography: initial clinical experience. Radiology 228:842–850
Diekmann F, Freyer M, Diekmann S et al (2011) Evaluation of contrast-enhanced digital mammography. EUR Radiol 78:112–121
Dromain C, Balleyguier C, Adlera G, Garbay JR, Delaloge S (2009) Contrast-enhanced digital mammography. Eur Radiol 69:34–42
Lobbes MB, Lalji UC, Nelemans PJ et al (2015) The quality of tumor size assessment by contrast-enhanced spectral mammography and the benefit of additional breast MRI. J Cancer 6
Łuczyńska E, Heinze-Paluchowska S, Hendrick E et al (2015) Comparison between breast MRI and contrast-enhanced spectral mammography. Med Sci Monit 21:1358–1367
Fallenberg EM, Dromain C, Diekmann F, Engelken F, Krohn M, Singh JM et al (2014) Contrast- enhanced spectral mammography versus MRI: initial results in the detection of breast cancer and assessment of tumor size. Eur Radiol 24:256–64. -198
Dromain C, Thibault F, Muller S, Rimareix F, Delaloge S, Tardivon A et al (2011) Dual energy contrast-enhanced digital mammography: initial clinical results. Eur Radiol 21:565–574
Mokhtar O, Mahmoud S (2014) Can contrast enhanced mammography solve the problem of dense breast lesions? Egypt J Radiol Nucl Med 45:1043–1052
Newell D, Nie K, Chen JH, Hsu CC, Yu HJ, Nalcioglu O et al (2009) Selection of diagnostic features to differentiate between malignant and benign lesions that presented as mass lesions and non-mass type enhancement on breast MRI. Proc intl soc mag reson med:658
Lewin JM, Isaacs PK, Virginia V, Larke Fred J (2003) Dual-energy contrast-enhanced subtraction mammography: feasibility. Radiology 229:261–268