Contrast-enhanced mammography in the management of breast architectural distortions and avoidance of unnecessary biopsies

被引:1
|
作者
Bellini, Chiara [1 ]
Pugliese, Francesca [1 ]
Bicchierai, Giulia [1 ]
Amato, Francesco [2 ]
De Benedetto, Diego [1 ]
Di Naro, Federica [1 ]
Boeri, Cecilia [1 ]
Vanzi, Ermanno [1 ]
Migliaro, Giuliano [1 ]
Incardona, Ludovica [1 ]
Tommasi, Cinzia [3 ]
Orzalesi, Lorenzo [3 ]
Miele, Vittorio [4 ]
Nori, Jacopo [1 ]
机构
[1] Azienda Osped Univ Careggi, Dept Radiol, Breast Imaging Unit, Florence, Italy
[2] Osped San Giovanni Dio, Dept Radiol, Breast Imaging Unit, Agrigento, Italy
[3] Azienda Osped Univ Careggi, Breast Surg Unit, Florence, Italy
[4] Azienda Osped Univ Careggi, Dept Radiol, Florence, Italy
关键词
Breast cancer; CEM; Distortions; FIELD DIGITAL MAMMOGRAPHY; CORE NEEDLE-BIOPSY; SPECTRAL MAMMOGRAPHY; TOMOSYNTHESIS; OUTCOMES; MRI; METAANALYSIS; MALIGNANCY; IMAGES; OCCULT;
D O I
10.1007/s12282-024-01599-x
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
BackgroundTo assess contrast-enhanced mammography (CEM) in the management of BI-RADS3 breast architectural distortions (AD) in digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT).MethodsWe retrospectively reviewed 328 women with 332 ADs detected on DBT between 2017 and 2021 and selected those classified as BI-RADS3 receiving CEM as problem-solving. In CEM recombined images, we evaluated AD's contrast enhancement (CE) according to its presence/absence, type, and size. AD with enhancement underwent imaging-guided biopsy while AD without enhancement follow-up or biopsy if detected in high/intermediate-risk women.ResultsAD with enhancement were 174 (52.4%): 72 (41.4%) were malignant lesions, 102 (59.6%) false positive results: 28 (16%) B3 lesions, and 74 (42.5%) benign lesions. AD without enhancement were 158 (47.6%): 26 (16.5%) were subjected to biopsy (1 malignant and 25 benign) while the other 132 cases were sent to imaging follow-up, still negative after two years. CEM's sensitivity, specificity, positive (PPV) and negative predictive values (NPV), and accuracy were 98.63%, 60.62%, 41.38%, 99.37%, and 68.98%. The AUC determined by ROC was 0.796 (95% CI, 0.749-0.844).ConclusionCEM has high sensitivity and NPV in evaluating BI-RADS3 AD and can be a complementary tool in assessing AD, avoiding unnecessary biopsies without compromising cancer detection.
引用
收藏
页码:851 / 857
页数:7
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Contrast-enhanced Digital Mammography in the Evaluation of Breast Cancer
    Beauchemin, Noelle
    Zhu, Clara
    Hunter, Krystal
    Rosenthal, Adrienne
    Carter, Teralyn
    Lopez, Adrian
    Gruner, Ryan
    Yoon-Flannery, Kay
    Fantazzio, Michele
    Loveland-Jones, Catherine
    ANNALS OF SURGICAL ONCOLOGY, 2023, 30 (SUPPL 2) : S321 - S322
  • [22] BIRADS 4 breast lesions: comparison of contrast-enhanced spectral mammography and contrast-enhanced MRI
    Yasin R.
    El Ghany E.A.
    Egyptian Journal of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, 50 (1):
  • [23] Feasibility of contrast-enhanced mammography in women with breast implants
    Hogan, Molly P.
    Amir, Tali
    Mango, Victoria L.
    Morris, Elizabeth A.
    Jochelson, Maxine S.
    CLINICAL IMAGING, 2023, 93 (31-33) : 31 - 33
  • [24] Clinical evaluation of contrast-enhanced digital mammography and contrast enhanced tomosynthesis-Comparison to contrast-enhanced breast MRI
    Chou, Chen-Pin
    Lewin, John M.
    Chiang, Chia-Ling
    Hung, Bao-Hui
    Yang, Tsung-Lung
    Huang, Jer-Shyung
    Liao, Jia-Bin
    Pan, Huay-Ben
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF RADIOLOGY, 2015, 84 (12) : 2501 - 2508
  • [25] Contrast-enhanced ultrasound-guided biopsy of suspicious breast lesions on contrast-enhanced mammography and contrast-enhanced MRI: a case series
    Pi-Yi Huang
    Meng-Yuan Tsai
    Jer-Shyung Huang
    Pei-Ying Lin
    Chen-Pin Chou
    Journal of Medical Ultrasonics, 2023, 50 : 521 - 529
  • [26] Contrast-enhanced ultrasound-guided biopsy of suspicious breast lesions on contrast-enhanced mammography and contrast-enhanced MRI: a case series
    Huang, Pi-Yi
    Tsai, Meng-Yuan
    Huang, Jer-Shyung
    Lin, Pei-Ying
    Chou, Chen-Pin
    JOURNAL OF MEDICAL ULTRASONICS, 2023, 50 (04) : 521 - 529
  • [27] Contrast-enhanced Mammography versus Contrast-enhanced Breast MRI: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
    Potsch, Nina
    Vatteroni, Giulia
    Clauser, Paola
    Helbich, Thomas H.
    Baltzer, Pascal A. T.
    RADIOLOGY, 2022, 305 (01) : 93 - 105
  • [28] Low-Dose, Contrast-Enhanced Mammography Compared to Contrast-Enhanced Breast MRI: A Feasibility Study
    Clauser, Paola
    Baltzer, Pascal A. T.
    Kapetas, Panagiotis
    Hoernig, Mathias
    Weber, Michael
    Leone, Federica
    Bernathova, Maria
    Helbich, Thomas H.
    JOURNAL OF MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING, 2020, 52 (02) : 589 - 595
  • [29] Review of Contrast-Enhanced Mammography
    Lorente-Ramos, Rosa M.
    Azpeitia Arman, Javier
    CONTEMPORARY DIAGNOSTIC RADIOLOGY, 2022, 45 (19)
  • [30] Contrast-Enhanced Digital Mammography
    Jochelson, Maxine
    RADIOLOGIC CLINICS OF NORTH AMERICA, 2014, 52 (03) : 609 - +