|
|
||||||||
1 Breast Imaging Section, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, 1275 York
Ave., New York, NY 10021.
2 Department of Pathology, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
10021.
OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this study was to determine the prevalence and positive predictive value of ductal enhancement among MR imagingdetected breast lesions that had biopsy and to assess the histologic findings associated with ductal enhancement.
MATERIALS AND METHODS. Retrospective review was performed of 427 nonpalpable, mammographically occult lesions that had MR imagingguided needle localization and surgical biopsy. Lesions were reviewed by one radiologist who was unaware of the histologic outcomes and were classified according to a standardized lexicon. MR imaging and histologic findings of ductal enhancing lesions were reviewed.
RESULTS. Ductal enhancement accounted for 88 (21%) of 427 lesions and 88 (59%) of 150 nonmass lesions. Histologic finding in these 88 lesions were ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) in 18 (20%); infiltrating carcinoma in five (6%), including three with DCIS; lobular carcinoma in situ (LCIS) in nine (10%); atypical ductal hyperplasia in eight (9%); and benign in 48 (55%). Among the 48 benign lesions, the dominant histologic findings were fibrocystic change (n = 16); ductal hyperplasia (n = 8); fibrosis (n = 8); postbiopsy change (n = 5); benign breast tissue (n = 3); sclerosing adenosis (n = 2); and single cases of fibroadenoma, fibroadenomatoid change, lymph node, mastitis, papilloma, and radial scar. Factors associated with a trend toward a higher frequency of carcinoma included clumped enhancement (p = 0.05) and synchronous ipsilateral cancer (p = 0.07).
CONCLUSION. Ductal enhancement accounted for 21% of MR imagingdetected lesions that had biopsy and had a positive predictive value of 26%. Differential diagnosis of ductal enhancement includes carcinoma (usually DCIS); atypical ductal hyperplasia; LCIS; and benign findings such as fibrocystic change, ductal hyperplasia, and fibrosis.
![]()
CiteULike
Complore
Connotea
Del.icio.us
Digg
Reddit
Technorati What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
M. E. Noz and G. Q. Maguire Jr. Reply: 18F-FDG PET in Detecting Primary Breast Cancer J. Nucl. Med., October 1, 2007; 48(10): 1752 - 1752. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
C. Kuhl The Current Status of Breast MR Imaging * Part I. Choice of Technique, Image Interpretation, Diagnostic Accuracy, and Transfer to Clinical Practice Radiology, August 1, 2007; 244(2): 356 - 378. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M. Tozaki, T. Igarashi, and K. Fukuda Breast MRI using the VIBE sequence: clustered ring enhancement in the differential diagnosis of lesions showing non-masslike enhancement. Am. J. Roentgenol., August 1, 2006; 187(2): 313 - 321. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
A. Shimauchi, T. Yamada, A. Sato, K. Takase, S. Usami, T. Ishida, T. Moriya, and S. Takahashi Comparison of MDCT and MRI for evaluating the intraductal component of breast cancer. Am. J. Roentgenol., August 1, 2006; 187(2): 322 - 329. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M. Tozaki and K. Fukuda High-spatial-resolution MRI of non-masslike breast lesions: interpretation model based on BI-RADS MRI descriptors. Am. J. Roentgenol., August 1, 2006; 187(2): 330 - 337. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
B. Erguvan-Dogan, G. J. Whitman, A. C. Kushwaha, M. J. Phelps, and P. J. Dempsey BI-RADS-MRI: a primer. Am. J. Roentgenol., August 1, 2006; 187(2): W152 - W160. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M. D. Schnall, J. Blume, D. A. Bluemke, G. A. DeAngelis, N. DeBruhl, S. Harms, S. H. Heywang-Kobrunner, N. Hylton, C. K. Kuhl, E. D. Pisano, et al. Diagnostic Architectural and Dynamic Features at Breast MR Imaging: Multicenter Study Radiology, January 1, 2006; 238(1): 42 - 53. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
C. K. Kuhl, H. H. Schild, and N. Morakkabati Dynamic Bilateral Contrast-enhanced MR Imaging of the Breast: Trade-off between Spatial and Temporal Resolution Radiology, September 1, 2005; 236(3): 789 - 800. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
E. Yeh, P. Slanetz, D. B. Kopans, E. Rafferty, D. Georgian-Smith, L. Moy, E. Halpern, R. Moore, I. Kuter, and A. Taghian Prospective Comparison of Mammography, Sonography, and MRI in Patients Undergoing Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy for Palpable Breast Cancer Am. J. Roentgenol., March 1, 2005; 184(3): 868 - 877. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |