Preoperative Breast Magnetic Resonance Imaging for the Assessment of the Size of Ductal Carcinoma In Situ
1
조회
0
다운로드
2
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Purpose: The purpose of this study was to determine whether magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) could assess the size of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) more accurately compared to mammography and ultrasonography using the histopathological dimension of the surgical specimen as the reference measurement. Methods: This was a retrospective review study using data from our institution database of breast cancer. Preoperative contrast-enhanced MRI, mammography and ultrasonography were performed to detect and assess the size of DCIS in 131 patients. The greatest dimensions of DCIS determined by the imaging modalities were compared with the histopathological dimensions of the surgical specimens. Intraclass coefficients were calculated to examine the agreement among the MRI, mammography and ultrasonography measurements. The Wilcoxon signed-rank test was used to evaluate the statistical significance of the differences in size among MRI, mammography or ultrasonography and histopathology findings. Results: Of the 131 DCIS lesions, 126 (96.2%) were detected by MRI, 103 (78.6%) were detected by mammography, and 121 (92.4%) were detected by ultrasonography. The mean lesion size was 38.8 mm on histopathology, 36.0 mm on MRI, 28.8 mm on mammography, and 23.3 mm on ultrasonography, and there were no significant differences between sizes determined by histopathology and MRI, while there were significant differences between histopathology and the other modalities. The correlation coefficient between histopathological measurement and MRI was 0.837, versus 0.461 between histopathology and mammography and 0.284 between histopathology and ultrasonography. The lesion size was correctly estimated (±5 mm), under-estimated (<5 mm), or over-estimated (>5 mm), respectively, by MRI in 52.7%, 30.5%, and 16.8% of cases; by mammography in 32.0%, 51.2%, and 16.8% of cases, respectively; and by ultrasonography in 24.4%, 62.6%, and 13.0% of cases, respectively. Conclusion: In our study, MRI was more accurate for detection and assessment the size of DCIS compared to mammography and ultrasonography.
Abstract
Purpose: The purpose of this study was to determine whether magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) could assess the size of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) more accurately compared to mammography and ultrasonography using the histopathological dimension of the surgical specimen as the reference measurement. Methods: This was a retrospective review study using data from our institution database of breast cancer. Preoperative contrast-enhanced MRI, mammography and ultrasonography were performed to detect and assess the size of DCIS in 131 patients. The greatest dimensions of DCIS determined by the imaging modalities were compared with the histopathological dimensions of the surgical specimens. Intraclass coefficients were calculated to examine the agreement among the MRI, mammography and ultrasonography measurements. The Wilcoxon signed-rank test was used to evaluate the statistical significance of the differences in size among MRI, mammography or ultrasonography and histopathology findings. Results: Of the 131 DCIS lesions, 126 (96.2%) were detected by MRI, 103 (78.6%) were detected by mammography, and 121 (92.4%) were detected by ultrasonography. The mean lesion size was 38.8 mm on histopathology, 36.0 mm on MRI, 28.8 mm on mammography, and 23.3 mm on ultrasonography, and there were no significant differences between sizes determined by histopathology and MRI, while there were significant differences between histopathology and the other modalities. The correlation coefficient between histopathological measurement and MRI was 0.837, versus 0.461 between histopathology and mammography and 0.284 between histopathology and ultrasonography. The lesion size was correctly estimated (±5 mm), under-estimated (<5 mm), or over-estimated (>5 mm), respectively, by MRI in 52.7%, 30.5%, and 16.8% of cases; by mammography in 32.0%, 51.2%, and 16.8% of cases, respectively; and by ultrasonography in 24.4%, 62.6%, and 13.0% of cases, respectively. Conclusion: In our study, MRI was more accurate for detection and assessment the size of DCIS compared to mammography and ultrasonography.
참고문헌 (30)
- Dershaw DD, "Ductal carcinoma in situ: mammographic findings and clinical implications", Radiology, 170, pp.411~415 (1989)
- Ernster VL, "Incidence of and treatment for ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast", JAMA, 275, pp.913~918 (1996)
- Jemal A, "Cancer statistics, 2003", CA Cancer J Clin, 53, pp.5~26 (2003)
- Recht A, "The fourth EORTC DCIS Consensus meeting (Château Marquette, Heemskerk, The Netherlands, 23-24 January 1998): conference report", Eur J Cancer, 34, pp.1664~1669 (1998)
- Cellini C, "Multiple re-excisions versus mastectomy in patients with persistent residual disease following breast conservation surgery", Am J Surg, 189, pp.662~666 (2005)
- Sakorafas GH, "Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) of the breast: evolving perspectives", Cancer Treat Rev, 26, pp.103~125 (2000)
- Boyages J, "Predictors of local recurrence after treatment of ductal carcinoma in situ: a meta-analysis", Cancer, 85, pp.616~628 (1999)
- Chung A, "The impact of MRI on the treatment of DCIS", Am Surg, 71, pp.705~710 (2005)
- Berg WA, "Diagnostic accuracy of mammography, clinical examination, US, and MR imaging in preoperative assessment of breast cancer", Radiology, 233, pp.830~849 (2004)
- Medeiros LR, "Accuracy of magnetic resonance in suspicious breast lesions: a systematic quantitative review and meta-analysis", Breast Cancer Res Treat, 126, pp.273~285 (2011)
- Marcotte-Bloch C, "MRI for the size assessment of pure ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS): a prospective study of 33 patients", Eur J Radiol, 77, pp.462~467 (2011)
- Do Youn Kim, "MRI of the Breast for the Detection and Assessment of the Size of Ductal Carcinoma in Situ", Korean Journal of Radiology, 8(1), pp.32~39 (2007), 대한영상의학회
- Shiraishi A, "Extension of ductal carcinoma in situ: histopathological association with MR imaging and mammography", Magn Reson Med Sci, 2, pp.159~163 (2003)
- Orel SG, "Suspicious breast lesions: MR imaging with radiologic-pathologic correlation", Radiology, 190, pp.485~493 (1994)
- Solin LJ, "Relationship of breast magnetic resonance imaging to outcome after breast-conservation treatment with radiation for women with early-stage invasive breast carcinoma or ductal carcinoma in situ", J Clin Oncol, 26, pp.386~391 (2008)
- Itakura K, "The impact of preoperative magnetic resonance imaging on surgical treatment and outcomes for ductal carcinoma in situ", Clin Breast Cancer, 11, pp.33~38 (2011)
- D’Orsi CJ, "ACR BI-RADS Atlas: Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System" (2003), American College of Radiology
- Mendelson EB, "Toward a standardized breast ultrasound lexicon, BI-RADS: ultrasound", Semin Roentgenol, 36, pp.217~225 (2001)
- Morris EA, "ACR BI-RADS Atlas: Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System" (2013), American College of Radiology
- Cutuli B, "Standards, options and recommendations for the management of ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast (DCIS): update 2004", Bull Cancer, 92, pp.155~168 (2005)
- Kuhl CK, "MRI for diagnosis of pure ductal carcinoma in situ: a prospective observational study", Lancet, 370, pp.485~492 (2007)
- Yang WT, "Sonographic, mammographic, and histopathologic correlation of symptomatic ductal carcinoma in situ", AJR Am J Roentgenol, 182, pp.101~110 (2004)
- Stavros AT, "Ductal Carcinoma In Situ of the Breast", pp.135~158 (1997), Williams & Wilkins
- Yang WT, "In vivo demonstration of microcalcification in breast cancer using high resolution ultrasound", Br J Radiol, 70, pp.685~690 (1997)
- Lee MH, "Sonographic findings of pure ductal carcinoma in situ", J Clin Ultrasound, 41, pp.465~471 (2013)
- Soderstrom CE, "Three-dimensional RODEO breast MR imaging of lesions containing ductal carcinoma in situ", Radiology, 201, pp.427~432 (1996)
- Hwang ES, "Magnetic resonance imaging in patients diagnosed with ductal carcinoma-in-situ: value in the diagnosis of residual disease, occult invasion, and multicentricity", Ann Surg Oncol, 10, pp.381~388 (2003)
- Menell JH, "Determination of the presence and extent of pure ductal carcinoma in situ by mammography and magnetic resonance imaging", Breast J, 11, pp.382~390 (2005)
- Holland R, "Extent, distribution, and mammographic", histological correlations of breast ductal carcinoma in situ, 1990, pp.335, 519~522
- Schouten van der Velden AP, "The value of magnetic resonance imaging in diagnosis and size assessment of in situ and small invasive breast carcinoma", Am J Surg, 192, pp.172~178 (2006)