Contrast-enhanced spectral mammography (CESM) versus breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI): A retrospective comparison in 66 breast lesions

被引:112
作者
Li, L. [1 ]
Roth, R. [1 ]
Germaine, P. [2 ]
Ren, S. [3 ]
Lee, M. [1 ]
Hunter, K. [4 ,5 ]
Tinney, E. [1 ]
Liao, L. [6 ]
机构
[1] Cooper Univ Hosp, Dept Radiol, 900 Centennial Blvd,Bldg 1,Suite B, Voorhees, NJ 08043 USA
[2] Cooper Univ Hosp, Dept Radiol, One Cooper Plaza, Camden, NJ 08013 USA
[3] Cooper Univ Hosp, Dept Pathol, One Cooper Plaza, Camden, NJ 08013 USA
[4] Rowan Univ, Cooper Med Sch, 401 Haddon Ave,Room 140, Camden, NJ 08103 USA
[5] Cooper Univ Hosp, Cooper Res Inst, 401 Haddon Ave,Room 140, Camden, NJ 08103 USA
[6] Cooper Univ Hosp, Cooper Breast Imaging Ctr, 900 Centennial Blvd,Bldg 1,Suite B, Voorhees, NJ 08043 USA
关键词
Contrast-enhanced spectral mammography (CESM); Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI); Breast cancer diagnosis; Comparative studies; DIGITAL MAMMOGRAPHY; INTEROBSERVER VARIABILITY; CANCER; TOMOSYNTHESIS; PERFORMANCE; RISK; US;
D O I
10.1016/j.diii.2016.08.013
中图分类号
R8 [特种医学]; R445 [影像诊断学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100207 ; 1009 ;
摘要
Objective: The purpose of this study was to retrospectively compare the diagnostic performance of contrast-enhanced spectral mammography (CESM) with that of breast magnetic resonance imaging (BMRI) in breast cancer detection using parameters, including sensitivity, positive predictive value (PPV), lesion size, morphology, lesion and background enhancement, and examination time. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 48 women (mean age, 56years +/- 10.6 [SD]) with breast lesions detected between October 2012 and March 2014 were included. Both CESM and BMRI were performed for each patient within 30 days. The enhancement intensity of lesions and breast background parenchyma was subjectively assessed for both modalities and was quantified for comparison. Statistical significance was analyzed using paired t-test for mean size of index lesions in all malignant breasts (an index lesion defined as the largest lesion in each breast), and a mean score of enhancement intensity for index lesions and breast background. PPV, sensitivity, and accuracy were calculated for both CESM and BMRI. The average duration time of CESM and MRI examinations was also compared. RESULTS: A total of 66 lesions were identified, including 62 malignant and 4 benign lesions. Both CESM and BMRI demonstrated a sensitivity of 100% for detection of breast cancer. There was no statistically significant difference between the mean size of index lesions (P=0.108). The enhancement intensity of breast background was significantly lower for CESM than for BMRI (P<0.01). The mean score of enhancement intensity of index lesions on CESM was significantly less than that for BMRI (P<0.01). The smallest lesion that was detected by both modalities measured 4mm. CESM had a higher PPV than BMRI (P>0.05). The average examination time for CESM was significantly shorter than that of BMRI (P<0.01). CONCLUSION: CESM has similar sensitivity than BMRI in breast cancer detection, with higher PPV and less background enhancement. CESM is associate with significantly shorter exam time thus a more accessible alternative to BMRI, and has the potential to play an important tool in breast cancer detection and staging. (C) 2016 Editions francaises de radiologie. Published by Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:113 / 123
页数:11
相关论文
共 27 条
[1]   Whole-body positron emission tomography-CT: Optimized CT using oral and IV contrast materials [J].
Antoch, G ;
Freudenberg, LS ;
Stattaus, J ;
Jentzen, W ;
Mueller, SP ;
Debatin, JF ;
Bockisch, A .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ROENTGENOLOGY, 2002, 179 (06) :1555-1560
[2]   Dual-energy contrast-enhanced digital mammography in routine clinical practice in 2013 [J].
Badr, S. ;
Laurent, N. ;
Regis, C. ;
Boulanger, L. ;
Lemaille, S. ;
Poncelet, E. .
DIAGNOSTIC AND INTERVENTIONAL IMAGING, 2014, 95 (03) :245-258
[3]   Rationale for a trial of screening breast ultrasound: American College of Radiology Imaging Network (ACRIN) 6666 [J].
Berg, WA .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ROENTGENOLOGY, 2003, 180 (05) :1225-1228
[4]   Mammographic density and the risk and detection of breast cancer [J].
Boyd, Norman F. ;
Guo, Helen ;
Martin, Lisa J. ;
Sun, Limei ;
Stone, Jennifer ;
Fishell, Eve ;
Jong, Roberta A. ;
Hislop, Greg ;
Chiarelli, Anna ;
Minkin, Salomon ;
Yaffe, Martin J. .
NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, 2007, 356 (03) :227-236
[5]   Comparison between two-dimensional synthetic mammography reconstructed from digital breast tomosynthesis and full-field digital mammography for the detection of T1 breast cancer [J].
Choi, Ji Soo ;
Han, Boo-Kyung ;
Ko, Eun Young ;
Ko, Eun Sook ;
Hahn, Soo Yeon ;
Shin, Jung Hee ;
Kim, Min Jung .
EUROPEAN RADIOLOGY, 2016, 26 (08) :2538-2546
[6]  
Dromain Clarisse, 2006, AJR Am J Roentgenol, V187, pW528, DOI 10.2214/AJR.05.1944
[7]   Dual-energy contrast-enhanced digital mammography: initial clinical results [J].
Dromain, Clarisse ;
Thibault, Fabienne ;
Muller, Serge ;
Rimareix, Francoise ;
Delaloge, Suzette ;
Tardivon, Anne ;
Balleyguier, Corinne .
EUROPEAN RADIOLOGY, 2011, 21 (03) :565-574
[8]   Contrast-enhanced digital mammography [J].
Dromain, Clarisse ;
Balleyguier, Corinne ;
Adler, Ghazal ;
Garbay, Jean Remi ;
Delaloge, Suzette .
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF RADIOLOGY, 2009, 69 (01) :34-42
[9]   Breast imaging reporting and data system (BI-RADS) lexicon for breast MRI: Interobserver variability in the description and assignment of BI-RADS category [J].
El Khoury, Mona ;
Lalonde, Lucie ;
David, Julie ;
Labelle, Maude ;
Mesurolle, Benoit ;
Trop, Isabelle .
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF RADIOLOGY, 2015, 84 (01) :71-76
[10]   Contrast-enhanced spectral mammography versus MRI: Initial results in the detection of breast cancer and assessment of tumour size [J].
Fallenberg, E. M. ;
Dromain, C. ;
Diekmann, F. ;
Engelken, F. ;
Krohn, M. ;
Singh, J. M. ;
Ingold-Heppner, B. ;
Winzer, K. J. ;
Bick, U. ;
Renz, D. M. .
EUROPEAN RADIOLOGY, 2014, 24 (01) :256-264