[Doubtful mammographic findings: the value of negative MR mammography for tumor exclusion]

Preoperative assessment of breast cancer: sonography versus MR imaging

OBJECTIVE

The purposes of our study were to compare the diagnostic value of whole-breast sonography and MR imaging as adjunctive techniques to mammography and to determine whether MR imaging should be used routinely in the preoperative assessment of patients with suspected breast cancer.

SUBJECTS AND METHODS

. One hundred four women (age range, 34-84 years; mean age, 60 years) with findings highly suggestive of malignancy in the breast were examined with mammography, sonography, and dynamic MR imaging before undergoing surgery. All visualized suspicious lesions were correlated histologically. The diagnostic relevance of sonographic and MR imaging findings was compared with the diagnostic value of the findings of clinical examination and mammography alone.

RESULTS

. Twenty-seven tumors showed multifocal or multicentric invasive growth at pathology. Of these 27, 48% were correctly diagnosed via mammography alone; 63%, via the combination of mammography and sonography; and 81%, via MR imaging. Nine of the index tumors were invisible on mammography but were detected on sonography. Use of sonography benefited 13 patients and produced two studies with false-positive findings. Use of MR imaging benefited seven patients and produced eight studies with false-positive findings. In summary, 93% of all patients gained no advantage from MR imaging. Relevant additional findings were significantly more frequent in patients with dense breasts.

CONCLUSION

Although MR imaging is most sensitive for the detection of small tumors, routine preoperative MR imaging appears to be unnecessary for most patients if a combination of mammography and whole-breast sonography is used. Additional MR imaging can be restricted to problematic cases in women with dense breast parenchyma.