Search

The clinical use of breast magnetic resonance (MR) imaging is increasing, especially for applications requiring paramagnetic contrast-agent injection. This document presents a synthetic list of acceptable indications with potential advantages for women according to evidence from the literature and the expert opinion of the panel that developed this statement. We generally recommend that breast MR imaging be performed in centres with experience in conventional breast imaging [mammography and ultrasonography (US)] and needle-biopsy procedures (under stereotactic or US guidance) as well as in breast MR imaging and second-look US for findings not revealed by conventional imaging performed before MR imaging. In our opinion, there is no evidence in favour of breast MR imaging as a diagnostic tool to characterise equivocal findings at conventional imaging when needle-biopsy procedures can be performed, nor for the study of asymptomatic, non-high-risk women with negative conventional imaging. After a description of technical and methodological requirements, we define the indications and limitations of breast MR imaging for surveillance of high-risk women, local staging before surgery, evaluation of the effect of neoadjuvant chemotherapy, breast previously treated for carcinoma, carcinoma of unknown primary syndrome, nipple discharge and breast implants.

We report the case of a woman, affected by breast diffuse large B-Cell lymphoma, who developed a xanthogranulomatous process wrongly interpreted as residual disease on 18F-FDG-PET/CTand Whole Body Magnetic Resonance after treatment with ibrutinib plus standard immunochemotherapy. Newer drugs, such as immunomodulatory agents and checkpoint inhibitors, have demonstrated high effectiveness on lymphoma, but are associated with unclear imaging features such as tumor flare or pseudo-progression, related to inflammatory reactions. Wide imaging techniques availability improves diagnostic possibilities. However, the awareness of the adopted treatment strategy and its possible implications on imaging features is crucial to make a correct response assessment.

The implementation of a database of digitised mammograms is discussed. The digitised images were collected beginning in 1999 by a community of physicists in collaboration with radiologists in several Italian hospitals as a first step in developing and implementing a computer-aided detection (CAD) system. All 3,369 mammograms were collected from 967 patients and classified according to lesion type and morphology, breast tissue and pathology type. A dedicated graphical user interface was developed to visualise and process mammograms to support the medical diagnosis directly on a high-resolution screen. The database has been the starting point for developing other medical imaging applications, such as a breast CAD, currently being upgraded and optimised for use in a distributed environment with grid services, in the framework of the Instituto Nazionale di Fisicia Nucleare (INFN)-funded Medical Applications on a Grid Infrastructure Connection (MAGIC)-5 project.

Background: To assess inter-reader agreement for US BI-RADS descriptors using S-Detect: a computer-guided decision-making software assisting in US morphologic analysis. Methods: 73 solid focal breast lesions (FBLs) (mean size: 15.9mm) in 73 consecutive women (mean age: 51years) detected at US were randomly and independently assessed according to the BI-RADS US lexicon, without and with S-Detect, by five independent reviewers. US-guided core-biopsy and 24-month follow-up were considered as standard of reference. Kappa statistics were calculated to assess inter-operator agreement, between the baseline and after S-Detect evaluation. Agreement was graded as poor (≤ 0.20), moderate (0.21–0.40), fair (0.41–0.60), good (0.61–0.80), or very good (0.81–1.00). Results: 33/73 (45.2%) FBLs were malignant and 40/73 (54.8%) FBLs were benign. A statistically significant improvement of inter-reader agreement from fair to good with the use of S-Detect was observed for shape (from 0.421 to 0.612) and orientation (from 0.417 to 0.7) (p < 0.0001) and from moderate to fair for margin (from 0.204 to 0.482) and posterior features (from 0.286 to 0.522) (p < 0.0001). At baseline analysis isoechoic (0.0485) and heterogeneous (0.1978) echo pattern, microlobulated (0.1161) angular (0.1204) and spiculated (0.1692) margins and combined pattern (0.1549) for posterior features showed the worst agreement rate (poor). After S-Detect evaluation, all variables but isoechoic pattern showed an agreement class upgrade with a statistically significant improvement of inter-reader agreement (p < 0.0001). Conclusions: S-Detect significantly improved inter-reader agreement in the assessment of FBLs according to the BI-RADS US lexicon but evaluation of margin and echo pattern needs to be further improved, particularly isoechoic pattern.

To compare microvascular flow imaging (MVFI) to conventional Color-Doppler (CDI) and Power-Doppler (PDI) imaging in the detection of vascularity of Focal Breast Lesions (FBLs). A total of 180 solid FBLs (size: 3.5–45.2 mm) detected in 180 women (age: 21–87 years) were evaluated by means of CDI, PDI, and MVFI. Two blinded reviewers categorized lesion vascularity in absent or present, and vascularity pattern as (a) internal; (b) vessels in rim; (c) combined. The presence of a “penetrating vessel” was assessed separately. Differences in vascularization patterns (chi2 test) and intra- and inter-observer agreement (Fleiss method) were calculated. ROC analysis was performed to assess performance of each technique in differentiating benign from malignant lesions. About 103/180 (57.2%) FBLs were benign and 77/180 (42.8%) were malignant. A statistically significant ( p

PURPOSE: This study was undertaken to evaluate the role of ultrasound (US) elastography in characterising focal breast lesions classified as indeterminate on B-mode US. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Eighty-four focal breast lesions, 64 benign and 20 malignant (mean diameter, 15.1 mm), detected but not characterised on B-mode US in 72 women, Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) US category 3 (n=56) or category 4 (n=28), were studied with US elastography and classified in consensus by two radiologists according to a five-point colour scale. Sensitivity, specificity and positive and negative predictive values (PPV and NPV) of US elastography compared with conventional US were calculated in relation to microhistology (n=67) and cytology (n=17), which were used as the reference standard. RESULTS: A total of 65/84 (77.4%) lesions were correctly classified as benign or malignant using US elastography, whereas the remaining 19/84 (22.6%) were incorrectly assessed. There were no statistically significant differences between US elastography and B-mode US with regard to sensitivity (70% vs. 68.4%), specificity (79.6% vs. 78.5%), PPV (51.8% vs. 48.1%) and NPV 89% vs. 89.5% (p>0.5). By contrast, a statistically significant difference was noted in the evaluation of BI-RADS 3 lesions, in which US elastography had 50% sensitivity, 86% specificity, 30% PPV and 93.5% NPV compared with BI-RADS 4 lesions (78.6%, 57.1%, 64.7% and 72.7%) (p

The study compares the diagnostic accuracy (correct identification of cancer) of a new computer-assisted diagnosis (CAD) system (Cyclopus) with two other commercial systems (R2 and CADx). Cyclopus was tested on a set of 120 mammograms on which the two compared commercial systems had been previously tested. The set consisted of mammograms reported as negative, preceding 31 interval cancers reviewed as screening error or minimal sign, and of 89 verified negative controls randomly selected from the same screening database. Cyclopus sensitivity was 74.1% (R2=54.8%; CADx=41.9%) and was higher for interval cancers reviewed as screening error (90.9%; R2=54.5%; CADx=81.8%) compared with those reviewed as minimal sign (65.0%; R2=55.0%; CADx=20.0%). Specificity was 15.7% (R2=29.2%; CADx=17.9%). Overall accuracy was 30.8% (R2=35.8%; CADx=24.1%). The positive predictive value of a case with CAD marks [regions of interest (ROI)] was 23.4% (23/98; R2=16.0%; CADx=15.1%). Average ROI number per view among negative controls was 1.13 (R2=0.93; CADx=0.99). Cyclopus was more sensitive for masses compared with isolated microcalcifications (208 vs 62 ROI; R2=90 vs 213; CADx=192 vs 130). Compared with two other commercial systems, Cyclopus was more sensitive (R2 p=0.14; CADx p=0.02) and less specific (R2 p=0.02; CADx p=0.64). © 2009 Springer-Verlag Italia.

In this paper we propose a method to reduce the FP/imm number through CC and MLO mammographic views comparison of the same patient. The proposed solution uses the symmetry properties of the breast to compute a geometric transformation that permits to represent the two images in comparable coordinates systems. Through this method, potential pathological ROIs of one of the projections are correlated with the ROIs in the second view. To show the effectiveness of the result we apply the method on a dataset composed of 112 couples of pathological images. Experiments shows that method enables a reduction by up to 700/0 of the FP/imm number detected after the classification step