Search

Preoperative MRI of the breasts has been proven to be the most sensitive imaging modality in the detection of multifocal or multicentric tumor manifestations as well as simultaneous contralateral breast cancer. The aim of the presented retrospective study was to evaluate the benefit of preoperative MRI for patients with breast cancer. Preoperative MRI performed in 121 patients (group A) were compared to 225 patients without preoperative MRI (group B). Patients of group A underwent contrast-enhanced MR imaging of the breast using a 2D FLASH sequence technique (TR/TE/FA 336 ms/5 ms/90 degrees; 32 slices of 4-mm thickness, time of acquisition 1:27 min, contrast agent dosage 0.1 mmol Gd-DTPA/kg bw). All patients had histologically verified breast cancer and follow-up for more than 20 months (mean time group A: 40.3 months, group B: 41 months). Both groups received the same types of systemic treatment after breast conserving surgery. The in-breast tumor recurrence rate in group A was 1/86 (1.2%) compared to 9/133 (6.8%) in group B. Contralateral carcinoma were detected within follow-up in 2/121 (1.7%) in group A vs. 9/225 (4%) in group B. All results were statistically significant (P0.001). Based on these results, preoperative MRI of the breasts is recommended in patients with histopathologically verified breast cancer for local staging.

For the first time, full-field digital mammography (FFDM) allows computer-aided detection (CAD) analysis of directly acquired digital image data. The purpose of this study was to evaluate a CAD system in patients with histologically correlated breast cancer depicted with FFDM. Sixty-three cases of histologically proven breast cancer detected with FFDM (Senographe 2000D, GE Medical Systems, Buc, France) were analyzed using a CAD system (Image Checker V2.3, R2 Technology, Los Altos, Calif.). Fourteen of these malignancies were characterized as microcalcifications, 37 as masses, and 12 as both. The mammographic findings were categorized as BI-RADS 3 (n=5), BI-RADS 4 (n=17) and BI-RADS 5 (n=40). The sensitivity for malignant lesions and the rate of false-positive marks per image were calculated. The sensitivity and its 95% confidence interval (CI) were estimated. The sensitivity of the CAD R2 system in breast cancer seen on FFDM was 89% for microcalcifications [CI(95%)=(70%; 98%)] and 81% for masses [CI(95%)=(67%; 91%)]. As expected, the detection rate was higher in lesions categorized as BI-RADS 5 (37 of 40) compared with lesions categorized as BI-RADS 4 (11 of 17). In the group categorized as BI-RADS 3 the detection rate was 4 of 5 lesions; however, this group was very small. The rate of false-positive marks was 0.35 microcalcification marks/image and 0.26 mass marks/image. The overall rate of false-positive marks was 0.61 per image. CAD based on FFDM provides an optimized work flow. Results are equivalent to the results reported for CAD analysis of secondarily digitized image data. Sensitivity for microcalcifications is acceptable and for masses is low. The number of false-positive marks per image should be reduced.

The goal of this prospective study was to compare a full-field digital mammography system (FFDM) to a conventional screen-film mammography system (SFM) for the detection and characterization of microcalcifications. Fifty-five patients with 57 isolated microcalcification clusters were examined using a FFDM system (Senographe 2000D, GE Medical Systems, Milwaukee, Wis.) and a SFM system (Senographe DMR, GE Medical Systems, Milwaukee, Wis.). A conventional screen-film mammogram and a digital contact mammogram were obtained of each cluster. The image quality and the number of calcification particles were evaluated, and a characterization (BI-RADS 1-5) of microcalcifications was given by four experienced readers. Histopathology revealed 16 benign lesions (sclerosing adenosis, dysplasia, hamartoma, radial scar) in 15 patients and 21 malignant tumors (in situ carcinoma, invasive carcinoma) in 20 patients. Twenty patients had benign changes verified by long-term follow-up. Image quality of FFDM was assessed as superior to SFM in more than 50% of the cases. The FFDM showed more calcifications in 41% of all cases. Sensitivity and specificity for FFDM vs SFM were 95.2 vs 91.9% and 41.4 vs 39.3%, respectively. Moreover, FFDM demonstrated a higher diagnostic accuracy (deviation: 0.86 BI-RADS steps) compared with FSM (deviation 0.93 BI-RADS steps). The FFDM system with a 100- micro m pixel size provides better image quality than SFM in patients with mammographic microcalcifications. The FFDM has a higher sensitivity and a higher reliability in characterizing microcalcifications.

The aim of this study was to define the value of MRI of the pancreas for preoperative local staging of patients with a suspected pancreatic mass. Ninety-four patients (41 women, 53 men; age range 32-87 years) with a suspected pancreatic tumor underwent preoperative staging with MRI on a 1.5-T system. The MRI protocol included breath-hold MR cholangiopancreatography in turbo spin-echo technique, biphasic contrast-enhanced 3D MR angiography, and MRI of the upper abdomen with breath-hold T2-weighted half-Fourier acquired single-shot turbo spin-echo and T1-weighted fast-low-angle-shot (pre- and postcontrast) sequences. Data were collected prospectively and analyzed by two radiologists in agreement modality. Evaluation criteria were vascular involvement, resectability, and a characterization benign vs malignant. Results were compared to histopathology in 78 patients. Sixteen patients were followed-up. In 74 of 94 patients a solid tumor or an inflammation of the pancreas ( n=62) or the papilla ( n=12) was detected. In this group, MRI had a sensitivity of 98%, a specificity of 92%, and an accuracy of 96% in the characterization of malignant tumors. Regarding only the solid tumors, the positive predictive value of MRI was 87% with respect to resectability. Other pathologic findings included adenoma or inflammation of the duodenum ( n=5), carcinoma or benign stenosis of the choledochus duct ( n=7) and carcinoma of the gall bladder ( n=2). In 6 patients MRI did not depict any pathologic findings, and follow-up confirmed this interpretation. Magnetic resonance imaging allows a local preoperative staging in patients with suspected pancreatic tumor. Limitations, however, concern to the diagnostics of peritoneal and/or liver metastases.

The objective of this study was to compare screen-film mammography (SFM) to full-field digital mammography (FFDM) regarding image quality as well as detectability and characterization of lesions using equivalent images of the same patient acquired with both systems. Two mammography units were used, one with a screen-film system (Senographe DMR) and the other with a digital detector (Senographe 2000D, both GEMS). Screen-film and digital mammograms were performed on 55 patients with cytologically or histologically proven tumors on the same day. Together with these, 75 digital mammograms of patients without tumor and the corresponding previous screen-film mammograms not older than 1.5 years were reviewed by three observers in a random order. Contrast, exposure, and the presence of artifacts were evaluated. Different details, such as the skin, the retromamillary region, and the parenchymal structures, were judged according to a three-point ranking scale. Finally, the detectability of microcalcifications and lesions were compared and correlated to histology. Image contrast was judged to be good in 76%, satisfactory in 20%, and unsatisfactory in 4% of screen-film mammograms. Digital mammograms were judged to be good in 99% and unsatisfactory in 1% of cases. Improper exposure of screen-film system occurred in 18% (10% overexposed and 8% underexposed). Digital mammograms were improperly exposed in 4% of all cases but were of acceptable quality after post-processing. Artifacts, most of them of no significance, were found in 78% of screen-film and in none of the digital mammograms. Different anatomical regions, such as the skin, the retromamillary region, and dense parenchymal areas, were better visualized in digital than in screen-film mammography. All malignant tumors were seen by the three radiologists; however, digital mammograms allowed a better characterization of these lesions to the Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS;) [corrected] categories (FFDM better than SFM in 23 of 165 vs 9 of 165 judged cases in SFM). In conclusion, digital mammography offers a consistent, high image quality in combination with a better contrast and without artifacts. Lesion detection in digital images was equal to that in screen-film images; however, categorization of the lesions to the BI-RADS classification was slightly better.