1
|
Behzadi ST, Moser R, Kiesl S, Nano J, Peeken JC, Fischer JC, Fallenberg EM, Huber T, Haller B, Klein E, Kiechle M, Combs SE, Borm KJ. Tumor Contact With Internal Mammary Perforator Vessels as Risk Factor for Gross Internal Mammary Lymph Node Involvement in Patients With Breast Cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2024:S0360-3016(24)00339-0. [PMID: 38458496 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2024.02.030] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/29/2023] [Revised: 02/12/2024] [Accepted: 02/16/2024] [Indexed: 03/10/2024]
Abstract
PURPOSE The identification of internal mammary lymph node metastases and the assessment of associated risk factors are crucial for adjuvant regional lymph node irradiation in patients with breast cancer. The current study aims to investigate whether tumor contact with internal mammary perforator vessels is associated with gross internal mammary lymph node involvement. METHODS AND MATERIALS We included 297 patients with primary breast cancer and gross internal mammary (IMN+) and/or axillary metastases as well as 230 patients without lymph node metastases. Based on pretreatment dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging, we assessed contact of the tumor with the internal mammary perforating vessels (IMPV). RESULTS A total of 59 patients had ipsilateral IMN+ (iIMN+), 10 patients had contralateral IMN+ (cIMN+), and 228 patients had ipsilateral axillary metastases without IMN; 230 patients had node-negative breast cancer. In patients with iIMN+, 100% of tumors had contact with ipsilateral IMPV, with 94.9% (n = 56) classified as major contact. In iIMN- patients, major IMPV contact was observed in only 25.3% (n = 116), and 36.2% (n = 166) had no IMPV contact at all. Receiver operating characteristic analysis revealed that "major IMPV contact" was more accurate in predicting iIMN+ (area under the curve, 0.85) compared with a multivariate model combining grade of differentiation, tumor site, size, and molecular subtype (area under the curve, 0.65). Strikingly, among patients with cIMN+, 100% of tumors had contact with a crossing contralateral IMPV, whereas in cIMN- patients, IMPVs to the contralateral side were observed in only 53.4% (iIMN+) and 24.8% (iIMN-), respectively. CONCLUSIONS Tumor contact with the IMPV is highly associated with risk of gross IMN involvement. Further studies are warranted to investigate whether this identified risk factor is also associated with microscopic IMN involvement and whether it can assist in the selection of patients with breast cancer for irradiation of the internal mammary lymph nodes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sophie T Behzadi
- Department of Radiation Oncology, TUM School of Medicine and Health, Technical University Munich (TUM), Klinikum rechts der Isar, Munich, Germany
| | - Rebecca Moser
- Department of Radiation Oncology, TUM School of Medicine and Health, Technical University Munich (TUM), Klinikum rechts der Isar, Munich, Germany
| | - Sophia Kiesl
- Department of Radiation Oncology, TUM School of Medicine and Health, Technical University Munich (TUM), Klinikum rechts der Isar, Munich, Germany
| | - Jana Nano
- Department of Radiation Oncology, TUM School of Medicine and Health, Technical University Munich (TUM), Klinikum rechts der Isar, Munich, Germany
| | - Jan C Peeken
- Department of Radiation Oncology, TUM School of Medicine and Health, Technical University Munich (TUM), Klinikum rechts der Isar, Munich, Germany
| | - Julius C Fischer
- Department of Radiation Oncology, TUM School of Medicine and Health, Technical University Munich (TUM), Klinikum rechts der Isar, Munich, Germany
| | - Eva M Fallenberg
- Department of Radiology, TUM School of Medicine and Health, Technical University Munich (TUM), Klinikum rechts der Isar, Munich, Germany
| | - Thomas Huber
- Department of Radiology, TUM School of Medicine and Health, Technical University Munich (TUM), Klinikum rechts der Isar, Munich, Germany
| | - Bernhard Haller
- Institute of AI and Informatics in Medicine, TUM School of Medicine and Health, Technical University Munich (TUM), Klinikum rechts der Isar, Munich, Germany
| | - Evelyn Klein
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, TUM School of Medicine and Health, Technical University Munich (TUM), Klinikum rechts der Isar, Munich, Germany
| | - Marion Kiechle
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, TUM School of Medicine and Health, Technical University Munich (TUM), Klinikum rechts der Isar, Munich, Germany
| | - Stephanie E Combs
- Department of Radiation Oncology, TUM School of Medicine and Health, Technical University Munich (TUM), Klinikum rechts der Isar, Munich, Germany; Deutsches Konsortium für translationale Krebsforschung (DKTK) - Partner Site Munich, Munich, Germany; Institute of Radiation Medicine, Helmholtz Zentrum München, Munich, Germany
| | - Kai J Borm
- Department of Radiation Oncology, TUM School of Medicine and Health, Technical University Munich (TUM), Klinikum rechts der Isar, Munich, Germany.
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Loibl S, André F, Bachelot T, Barrios CH, Bergh J, Burstein HJ, Cardoso MJ, Carey LA, Dawood S, Del Mastro L, Denkert C, Fallenberg EM, Francis PA, Gamal-Eldin H, Gelmon K, Geyer CE, Gnant M, Guarneri V, Gupta S, Kim SB, Krug D, Martin M, Meattini I, Morrow M, Janni W, Paluch-Shimon S, Partridge A, Poortmans P, Pusztai L, Regan MM, Sparano J, Spanic T, Swain S, Tjulandin S, Toi M, Trapani D, Tutt A, Xu B, Curigliano G, Harbeck N. Early breast cancer: ESMO Clinical Practice Guideline for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol 2024; 35:159-182. [PMID: 38101773 DOI: 10.1016/j.annonc.2023.11.016] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/01/2023] [Revised: 11/21/2023] [Accepted: 11/28/2023] [Indexed: 12/17/2023] Open
Affiliation(s)
- S Loibl
- GBG Forschungs GmbH, Neu-Isenburg; Centre for Haematology and Oncology, Bethanien, Frankfurt, Germany
| | - F André
- Breast Cancer Unit, Medical Oncology Department, Gustave Roussy, Cancer Campus, Villejuif
| | - T Bachelot
- Department of Medical Oncology, Centre Léon Bérard, Lyon, France
| | - C H Barrios
- Oncology Department, Latin American Cooperative Oncology Group and Oncoclínicas, Porto Alegre, Brazil
| | - J Bergh
- Department of Oncology-Pathology, Bioclinicum, Karolinska Institutet and Breast Cancer Centre, Karolinska Comprehensive Cancer Centre and University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - H J Burstein
- Department of Medical Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Harvard Medical School, Boston, USA
| | - M J Cardoso
- Breast Unit, Champalimaud Foundation, Champalimaud Cancer Centre, Lisbon; Faculty of Medicine, Lisbon University, Lisbon, Portugal
| | - L A Carey
- Division of Medical Oncology, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, Chapel Hill, USA
| | - S Dawood
- Department of Oncology, Mediclinic City Hospital, Dubai, UAE
| | - L Del Mastro
- Medical Oncology Clinic, IRCCS Ospedale Policlinico San Martino, Genoa; Department of Internal Medicine and Medical Specialities, School of Medicine, University of Genoa, Genoa, Italy
| | - C Denkert
- Institute of Pathology, Philipps-University Marburg and University Hospital Giessen and Marburg, Marburg
| | - E M Fallenberg
- Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, School of Medicine & Klinikum Rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - P A Francis
- Department of Medical Oncology, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Australia
| | - H Gamal-Eldin
- Department of Surgical Oncology, National Cancer Institute, Cairo University, Cairo, Egypt
| | - K Gelmon
- Department of Medical Oncology, British Columbia Cancer, Vancouver, Canada
| | - C E Geyer
- Department of Internal Medicine, Hillman Cancer Center, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, USA
| | - M Gnant
- Comprehensive Cancer Centre, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - V Guarneri
- Department of Surgery, Oncology and Gastroenterology, University of Padova, Padova; Oncology 2 Unit, Istituto Oncologico Veneto IOV IRCCS, Padova, Italy
| | - S Gupta
- Department of Medical Oncology, Tata Memorial Centre, Mumbai, India
| | - S B Kim
- Department of Oncology, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea
| | - D Krug
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Schleswig-Holstein, Kiel, Germany
| | - M Martin
- Hospital General Universitario Gregorio Maranon, Universidad Complutense, GEICAM, Madrid, Spain
| | - I Meattini
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Careggi, Florence; Department of Experimental and Clinical Biomedical Sciences 'M. Serio', University of Florence, Florence, Italy
| | - M Morrow
- Breast Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, USA
| | - W Janni
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, University of Ulm, Ulm, Germany
| | - S Paluch-Shimon
- Sharett Institute of Oncology Department, Hadassah University Hospital & Faculty of Medicine Hebrew University, Jerusalem, Israel
| | - A Partridge
- Department of Medical Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Harvard Medical School, Boston, USA
| | - P Poortmans
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Iridium Netwerk, Antwerp; Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium
| | - L Pusztai
- Yale Cancer Center, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven
| | - M M Regan
- Division of Biostatistics, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Harvard Medical School, Boston
| | - J Sparano
- Department of Medicine, Division of Hematology/Oncology, Tisch Cancer Institute, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, USA
| | - T Spanic
- Europa Donna Slovenia, Ljubljana, Slovenia
| | - S Swain
- Medicine Department, Georgetown University Medical Centre and MedStar Health, Washington, USA
| | - S Tjulandin
- N.N. Blokhin National Medical Research Centre of Oncology, Moscow, Russia
| | - M Toi
- Tokyo Metropolitan Cancer and Infectious Disease Center, Komagome Hospital, Bunkyo-ku, Japan
| | - D Trapani
- Department of Medical Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Harvard Medical School, Boston, USA
| | - A Tutt
- Breast Cancer Research Division, The Institute of Cancer Research, London; Comprehensive Cancer Centre, Division of Cancer Studies, Kings College London, London, UK
| | - B Xu
- Department of Medical Oncology, National Cancer Centre/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China
| | - G Curigliano
- Early Drug Development for Innovative Therapies Division, Istituto Europeo di Oncologia, IRCCS, Milan; Department of Oncology and Hemato-Oncology, University of Milano, Milan, Italy
| | - N Harbeck
- Breast Centre, Department of Obstetrics & Gynaecology and Comprehensive Cancer Centre Munich, LMU University Hospital, Munich, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Böhm C, Stelter JK, Weiss K, Meineke J, Komenda A, Borde T, Makowski MR, Fallenberg EM, Karampinos DC. Robust breast quantitative susceptibility mapping in the presence of silicone. Magn Reson Med 2023; 90:1209-1218. [PMID: 37125658 DOI: 10.1002/mrm.29694] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/09/2023] [Revised: 03/17/2023] [Accepted: 04/18/2023] [Indexed: 05/02/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE To (a) develop a preconditioned water-fat-silicone total field inversion (wfsTFI) algorithm that directly estimates the susceptibility map from complex multi-echo data in the breast in the presence of silicone and to (b) evaluate the performance of wfsTFI for breast quantitative susceptibility mapping (QSM) in silico and in vivo in comparison with formerly proposed methods. METHODS Numerical simulations and in vivo multi-echo gradient echo breast measurements were performed to compare wfsTFI to a previously proposed field map-based linear total field inversion algorithm (lTFI) with and without the consideration of the chemical shift of silicone in the field map estimation step. Specifically, a simulation based on an in vivo scan and data from five patients were included in the analysis. RESULTS In the simulation, wfsTFI is able to significantly decrease the normalized root mean square error from lTFI without (4.46) and with (1.77) the consideration of the chemical shift of silicone to 0.68. Both the in silico and in vivo wfsTFI susceptibility maps show reduced shadowing artifacts in local tissue adjacent to silicone, reduced streaking artifacts and no erroneous single voxels of diamagnetic susceptibility in proximity to silicone. CONCLUSION The proposed wfsTFI method can automatically distinguish between subjects with and without silicone. Furthermore wfsTFI accounts for the presence of silicone in the QSM dipole inversion and allows for the robust estimation of susceptibility in proximity to silicone breast implants and hence allows the visualization of structures that would otherwise be dominated by artifacts on susceptibility maps.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Christof Böhm
- Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, School of Medicine, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Jonathan K Stelter
- Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, School of Medicine, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany
| | | | | | - Alexander Komenda
- Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, School of Medicine, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Tabea Borde
- Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, School of Medicine, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Marcus R Makowski
- Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, School of Medicine, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Eva M Fallenberg
- Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, School of Medicine, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Dimitrios C Karampinos
- Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, School of Medicine, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Schiaffino S, Pinker K, Cozzi A, Magni V, Athanasiou A, Baltzer PAT, Camps Herrero J, Clauser P, Fallenberg EM, Forrai G, Fuchsjäger MH, Gilbert FJ, Helbich T, Kilburn-Toppin F, Kuhl CK, Lesaru M, Mann RM, Panizza P, Pediconi F, Sardanelli F, Sella T, Thomassin-Naggara I, Zackrisson S, Pijnappel RM. European Society of Breast Imaging (EUSOBI) guidelines on the management of axillary lymphadenopathy after COVID-19 vaccination: 2023 revision. Insights Imaging 2023; 14:126. [PMID: 37466753 DOI: 10.1186/s13244-023-01453-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/01/2023] [Accepted: 05/14/2023] [Indexed: 07/20/2023] Open
Abstract
Axillary lymphadenopathy is a common side effect of COVID-19 vaccination, leading to increased imaging-detected asymptomatic and symptomatic unilateral axillary lymphadenopathy. This has threatened to negatively impact the workflow of breast imaging services, leading to the release of ten recommendations by the European Society of Breast Imaging (EUSOBI) in August 2021. Considering the rapidly changing scenario and data scarcity, these initial recommendations kept a highly conservative approach. As of 2023, according to newly acquired evidence, EUSOBI proposes the following updates, in order to reduce unnecessary examinations and avoid delaying necessary examinations. First, recommendation n. 3 has been revised to state that breast examinations should not be delayed or rescheduled because of COVID-19 vaccination, as evidence from the first pandemic waves highlights how delayed or missed screening tests have a negative effect on breast cancer morbidity and mortality, and that there is a near-zero risk of subsequent malignant findings in asymptomatic patients who have unilateral lymphadenopathy and no suspicious breast findings. Second, recommendation n. 7 has been revised to simplify follow-up strategies: in patients without breast cancer history and no imaging findings suspicious for cancer, symptomatic and asymptomatic imaging-detected unilateral lymphadenopathy on the same side of recent COVID-19 vaccination (within 12 weeks) should be classified as a benign finding (BI-RADS 2) and no further work-up should be pursued. All other recommendations issued by EUSOBI in 2021 remain valid.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Simone Schiaffino
- Imaging Institute of Southern Switzerland (IIMSI), Ente Ospedaliero Cantonale (EOC), Lugano, Switzerland
| | - Katja Pinker
- Division of General and Paediatric Radiology, Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-Guided Therapy, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
- Department of Radiology, Breast Imaging Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.
| | - Andrea Cozzi
- Imaging Institute of Southern Switzerland (IIMSI), Ente Ospedaliero Cantonale (EOC), Lugano, Switzerland
| | - Veronica Magni
- Department of Biomedical Sciences for Health, Università degli Studi di Milano, Milan, Italy
| | | | - Pascal A T Baltzer
- Division of General and Paediatric Radiology, Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-Guided Therapy, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | | | - Paola Clauser
- Division of General and Paediatric Radiology, Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-Guided Therapy, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - Eva M Fallenberg
- Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Klinikum Rechts Der Isar, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Munich, Germany
| | - Gabor Forrai
- Department of Radiology, Duna Medical Center, Budapest, Hungary
| | - Michael H Fuchsjäger
- Division of General Radiology, Department of Radiology, Medical University Graz, Graz, Austria
| | - Fiona J Gilbert
- Department of Radiology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Thomas Helbich
- Division of General and Paediatric Radiology, Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-Guided Therapy, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | | | - Christiane K Kuhl
- University Hospital of Aachen, Rheinisch-Westfälische Technische Hochschule, Aachen, Germany
| | - Mihai Lesaru
- Radiology and Imaging Laboratory, Fundeni Institute, Bucharest, Romania
| | - Ritse M Mann
- Department of Radiology, Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
- The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Pietro Panizza
- Breast Imaging Unit, IRCCS Ospedale San Raffaele, Milan, Italy
| | - Federica Pediconi
- Department of Radiological, Oncological and Pathological Sciences, Università degli Studi di Roma "La Sapienza", Rome, Italy
| | - Francesco Sardanelli
- Department of Biomedical Sciences for Health, Università degli Studi di Milano, Milan, Italy
- Unit of Radiology, IRCCS Policlinico San Donato, San Donato Milanese, Italy
| | - Tamar Sella
- Department of Diagnostic Imaging, Hadassah Hebrew University Medical Center, Jerusalem, Israel
| | | | - Sophia Zackrisson
- Diagnostic Radiology, Department of Translational Medicine, Skåne University Hospital, Lund University, Malmö, Sweden
| | - Ruud M Pijnappel
- Department of Imaging, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Stelter JK, Boehm C, Ruschke S, Weiss K, Diefenbach MN, Wu M, Borde T, Schmidt GP, Makowski MR, Fallenberg EM, Karampinos DC. Hierarchical Multi-Resolution Graph-Cuts for Water-Fat-Silicone Separation in Breast MRI. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 2022; 41:3253-3265. [PMID: 35657831 DOI: 10.1109/tmi.2022.3180302] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/15/2023]
Abstract
Water-fat separation is a non-linear non-convex parameter estimation problem in magnetic resonance imaging typically solved using spatial constraints. However, there is still limited knowledge on how to separate in vivo three chemical species in the presence of magnetic field inhomogeneities. The proposed method uses multiple graph-cuts in a hierarchical multi-resolution framework to perform robust chemical species separation in the breast for subjects with and without silicone implants. Experimental results show that the proposed method can decrease the computational time for water-fat separation and perform accurate water-fat-silicone separation with only a limited number of acquired echo images at 3 T. The silicone-separated images have an improved spatial resolution and image contrast compared to conventional scans used for regular monitoring of the silicone implant's integrity.
Collapse
|
6
|
Mann RM, Athanasiou A, Baltzer PAT, Camps-Herrero J, Clauser P, Fallenberg EM, Forrai G, Fuchsjäger MH, Helbich TH, Killburn-Toppin F, Lesaru M, Panizza P, Pediconi F, Pijnappel RM, Pinker K, Sardanelli F, Sella T, Thomassin-Naggara I, Zackrisson S, Gilbert FJ, Kuhl CK. Breast cancer screening in women with extremely dense breasts recommendations of the European Society of Breast Imaging (EUSOBI). Eur Radiol 2022; 32:4036-4045. [PMID: 35258677 PMCID: PMC9122856 DOI: 10.1007/s00330-022-08617-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 115] [Impact Index Per Article: 57.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/28/2021] [Revised: 01/21/2022] [Accepted: 01/27/2022] [Indexed: 02/07/2023]
Abstract
Breast density is an independent risk factor for the development of breast cancer and also decreases the sensitivity of mammography for screening. Consequently, women with extremely dense breasts face an increased risk of late diagnosis of breast cancer. These women are, therefore, underserved with current mammographic screening programs. The results of recent studies reporting on contrast-enhanced breast MRI as a screening method in women with extremely dense breasts provide compelling evidence that this approach can enable an important reduction in breast cancer mortality for these women and is cost-effective. Because there is now a valid option to improve breast cancer screening, the European Society of Breast Imaging (EUSOBI) recommends that women should be informed about their breast density. EUSOBI thus calls on all providers of mammography screening to share density information with the women being screened. In light of the available evidence, in women aged 50 to 70 years with extremely dense breasts, the EUSOBI now recommends offering screening breast MRI every 2 to 4 years. The EUSOBI acknowledges that it may currently not be possible to offer breast MRI immediately and everywhere and underscores that quality assurance procedures need to be established, but urges radiological societies and policymakers to act on this now. Since the wishes and values of individual women differ, in screening the principles of shared decision-making should be embraced. In particular, women should be counselled on the benefits and risks of mammography and MRI-based screening, so that they are capable of making an informed choice about their preferred screening method. KEY POINTS: • The recommendations in Figure 1 summarize the key points of the manuscript.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ritse M Mann
- Radboud University Medical Center, Geert Grooteplein Zuid 10, 6525 GA, Nijmegen, Netherlands.
- The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Plesmanlaan 121, 1066 CX, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
| | - Alexandra Athanasiou
- Breast Imaging Department, MITERA Hospital, 6, Erithrou Stavrou Str. 151 23 Marousi, Athens, Greece
| | - Pascal A T Baltzer
- Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-guided Therapy, Division of General and Pediatric Radiology, Research Group: Molecular and Gender Imaging, Medical University of Vienna, Währinger Gürtel 18-20, 1090, Wien, Austria
| | - Julia Camps-Herrero
- Hospitales Ribera Salud, Avda.Cortes Valencianas, 58, 46015, Valencia, Spain
| | - Paola Clauser
- Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-guided Therapy, Division of General and Pediatric Radiology, Research Group: Molecular and Gender Imaging, Medical University of Vienna, Währinger Gürtel 18-20, 1090, Wien, Austria
| | - Eva M Fallenberg
- Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, School of Medicine &; Klinikum Rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, Munich (TUM), Ismaninger Str. 22, 81675, München, Germany
| | - Gabor Forrai
- Department of Radiology, Duna Medical Center, Budapest, Hungary
| | - Michael H Fuchsjäger
- Division of General Radiology, Department of Radiology, Medical University Graz, Auenbruggerplatz 9, 8036, Graz, Austria
| | - Thomas H Helbich
- Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-guided Therapy, Division of General and Pediatric Radiology, Research Group: Molecular and Gender Imaging, Medical University of Vienna, Währinger Gürtel 18-20, 1090, Wien, Austria
| | - Fleur Killburn-Toppin
- Department of Radiology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge Biomedical Campus, Hills road, Cambridge, CB20QQ, UK
| | - Mihai Lesaru
- Radiology and Imaging Laboratory, Carol Davila University, Bucharest, Romania
| | - Pietro Panizza
- Breast Imaging Unit, IRCCS Ospedale San Raffaele,, Via Olgettina 60, 20132, Milan, Italy
| | - Federica Pediconi
- Department of Radiological, Oncological and Pathological Sciences, Sapienza University of Rome, Viale Regina Elena, 324, 00161, Rome, Italy
| | - Ruud M Pijnappel
- Department of Imaging, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht University, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584 CX, Utrecht, Netherlands
- Dutch Expert Centre for Screening (LRCB), Wijchenseweg 101, 6538 SW, Nijmegen, Netherlands
| | - Katja Pinker
- Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-guided Therapy, Division of General and Pediatric Radiology, Research Group: Molecular and Gender Imaging, Medical University of Vienna, Währinger Gürtel 18-20, 1090, Wien, Austria
- Department of Radiology, Breast Imaging Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 300 E 66th Street, New York, NY, 10065, USA
| | - Francesco Sardanelli
- Unit of Radiology, IRCCS Policlinico San Donato, San Donato Milanese, Milan, Italy
- Department of Biomedical Sciences for Health, Università degli Studi di Milano, Via Morandi 30, 20097 San Donato Milanese, Milan, Italy
| | - Tamar Sella
- Department of Diagnostic Imaging, Hadassah Hebrew University Medical Center, Jerusalem, Israel
| | - Isabelle Thomassin-Naggara
- Department of Radiology, Sorbonne Université, APHP, Hôpital Tenon, 4, rue de la Chine, 75020, Paris, France
| | - Sophia Zackrisson
- Diagnostic Radiology, Department of Translational Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Lund University, Skåne University Hospital Malmö, SE-205 02, Malmö, Sweden
| | - Fiona J Gilbert
- Department of Radiology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge Biomedical Campus, Hills road, Cambridge, CB20QQ, UK
| | - Christiane K Kuhl
- University Hospital of Aachen, Rheinisch-Westfälische Technische Hochschule, Pauwelsstraße30, 52074, Aachen, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Friedrich M, Kühn T, Janni W, Müller V, Banys-Paluchowski M, Kolberg-Liedtke C, Jackisch C, Krug D, Albert US, Bauerfeind I, Blohmer J, Budach W, Dall P, Fallenberg EM, Fasching PA, Fehm T, Gerber B, Gluz O, Hanf V, Harbeck N, Heil J, Huober J, Kreipe HH, Kümmel S, Loibl S, Lüftner D, Lux MP, Maass N, Möbus V, Mundhenke C, Nitz U, Park-Simon TW, Reimer T, Rhiem K, Rody A, Schmidt M, Schneeweiss A, Schütz F, Sinn HP, Solbach C, Solomayer EF, Stickeler E, Thomssen C, Untch M, Witzel I, Wöckel A, Thill M, Ditsch N. Correction: AGO Recommendations for the Surgical Therapy of the Axilla After Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy: 2021 Update. Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd 2021; 81:e31. [PMID: 34720743 PMCID: PMC8548988 DOI: 10.1055/a-1674-1114] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/31/2022] Open
Abstract
[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1055/a-1499-8431.].
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Michael Friedrich
- Klinik für Frauenheilkunde und Geburtshilfe, HELIOS Klinikum Krefeld, Krefeld, Germany
| | | | - Wolfgang Janni
- Frauenklinik, Klinikum der Universität Ulm, Ulm, Germany
| | - Volkmar Müller
- Klinik und Poliklinik für Gynäkologie, Universitätsklinikum Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
| | - Maggie Banys-Paluchowski
- Klinik für Frauenheilkunde und Geburtshilfe, UK-SH, Lübeck, Germany.,Medizinische Fakultät, Heinrich-Heine-Universität Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany
| | | | - Christian Jackisch
- Klinik für Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe, Sana Klinikum Offenbach, Offenbach, Germany
| | - David Krug
- Universitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein, Klinik für Strahlentherapie, Campus Kiel, Kiel, Germany
| | - Ute-Susann Albert
- Klinik für Frauenheilkunde und Geburtshilfe, Universitätsklinikum Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany
| | - Ingo Bauerfeind
- Frauenklinik, Klinikum Landshut gemeinnützige GmbH, Landshut, Germany
| | - Jens Blohmer
- Klinik für Gynäkologie mit Brustzentrum des Universitätsklinikums der Charité, Berlin, Germany
| | - Wilfried Budach
- Strahlentherapie, Radiologie Düsseldorf, Universitätsklinikum Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany
| | - Peter Dall
- Frauenklinik, Städtisches Klinikum Lüneburg, Lüneburg, Germany
| | - Eva M Fallenberg
- Klinikum der Universität München, Campus Großhadern, Institut für Klinische Radiologie, München, Germany
| | | | - Tanja Fehm
- Klinik für Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe, Universitätsklinikum Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany
| | - Bernd Gerber
- Universitätsfrauenklinik am Klinikum Südstadt, Klinikum Südstadt Rostock, Rostock, Germany
| | - Oleg Gluz
- Evangelisches Krankenhaus Bethesda, Brustzentrum, Mönchengladbach, Germany
| | - Volker Hanf
- Frauenklinik, Nathanstift Klinikum Fürth, Fürth, Germany
| | - Nadia Harbeck
- Brustzentrum, Klinik für Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe, Klinikum der Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität, München, Germany
| | - Jörg Heil
- Universitäts-Klinikum Heidelberg, Brustzentrum, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Jens Huober
- Klinik für Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe, Universitätsklinikum Ulm, Ulm, Germany
| | | | | | - Sibylle Loibl
- German Breast Group Forschungs GmbH, Neu-Isenburg, Germany
| | - Diana Lüftner
- Medizinische Klinik mit Schwerpunkt Hämatologie, Onkologie und Tumorimmunologie, Charité, Berlin, Germany
| | - Michael Patrick Lux
- Kooperatives Brustzentrum Paderborn, Klinik für Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe, Frauenklinik, St. Louise, Paderborn, St. Josefs-Krankenhaus, Salzkotten, St. Vincenz Krankenhaus GmbH, Germany
| | - Nicolai Maass
- Klinik für Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe, Universitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Kiel, Kiel, Germany
| | - Volker Möbus
- Klinik für Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe, Klinikum Frankfurt Höchst GmbH, Frankfurt am Main, Germany
| | - Christoph Mundhenke
- Klinik für Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe, Universitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Kiel, Kiel, Germany
| | - Ulrike Nitz
- Evangelisches Krankenhaus Bethesda, Brustzentrum, Mönchengladbach, Germany
| | - Tjoung-Won Park-Simon
- Klinik für Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe, Universitätsklinikum Hannover, Hannover, Germany
| | - Toralf Reimer
- Universitätsfrauenklinik am Klinikum Südstadt, Klinikum Südstadt Rostock, Rostock, Germany
| | - Kerstin Rhiem
- Zentrum Familiärer Brust- und Eierstockkrebs, Universitätsklinikum Köln, Köln, Germany
| | - Achim Rody
- Klinik für Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe, Universitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Lübeck, Lübeck, Germany
| | - Marcus Schmidt
- Klinik und Poliklinik für Geburtshilfe und Frauengesundheit der Johannes-Gutenberg-Universität Mainz, Mainz, Germany
| | | | - Florian Schütz
- Klinik für Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe, Diakonissen Krankenhaus Speyer, Speyer, Germany
| | - Hans-Peter Sinn
- Sektion Gynäkopathologie, Pathologisches Institut, Universitätsklinikum Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Christine Solbach
- Klinik für Frauenheilkunde und Geburtshilfe, Universitätsklinikum Frankfurt, Frankfurt am Main, Germany
| | - Erich-Franz Solomayer
- Klinik für Frauenheilkunde, Geburtshilfe und Reproduktionsmedizin, Universitätsklinikum des Saarlandes, Homburg, Germany
| | - Elmar Stickeler
- Klinik für Gynäkologie und Geburtsmedizin, Universitätsklinikum Aachen, Aachen, Germany
| | - Christoph Thomssen
- Universitätsfrauenklinik, Martin-Luther-Universität Halle-Wittenberg, Halle-Wittenberg, Germany
| | - Michael Untch
- Klinik für Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe, Helios Klinikum Berlin-Buch, Berlin, Germany
| | - Isabell Witzel
- Klinik und Poliklinik für Gynäkologie, Universitätsklinikum Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
| | - Achim Wöckel
- Klinik für Frauenheilkunde und Geburtshilfe, Universitätsklinikum Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany
| | - Marc Thill
- Klinik für Gynäkologie und Gynäkologische Onkologie, Agaplesion Markus Krankenhaus, Frankfurt am Main, Germany
| | - Nina Ditsch
- Frauenklinik, Universitätsklinikum Augsburg, Augsburg, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Friedrich M, Kühn T, Janni W, Müller V, Banys-Pachulowski M, Kolberg-Liedtke C, Jackisch C, Krug D, Albert US, Bauerfeind I, Blohmer J, Budach W, Dall P, Fallenberg EM, Fasching PA, Fehm T, Gerber B, Gluz O, Hanf V, Harbeck N, Heil J, Huober J, Kreipe HH, Kümmel S, Loibl S, Lüftner D, Lux MP, Maass N, Möbus V, Mundhenke C, Nitz U, Park-Simon TW, Reimer T, Rhiem K, Rody A, Schmidt M, Schneeweiss A, Schütz F, Sinn HP, Solbach C, Solomayer EF, Stickeler E, Thomssen C, Untch M, Witzel I, Wöckel A, Thill M, Ditsch N. AGO Recommendations for the Surgical Therapy of the Axilla After Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy: 2021 Update. Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd 2021; 81:1112-1120. [PMID: 34629490 PMCID: PMC8494519 DOI: 10.1055/a-1499-8431] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/21/2021] [Accepted: 05/04/2021] [Indexed: 12/16/2022] Open
Abstract
For many decades, the standard procedure to treat breast cancer included complete dissection of the axillary lymph nodes. The aim was to determine histological node status, which was then used as the basis for adjuvant therapy, and to ensure locoregional tumour control. In addition to the debate on how to optimise the therapeutic strategies of systemic treatment and radiotherapy, the current discussion focuses on improving surgical procedures to treat breast cancer. As neoadjuvant chemotherapy is becoming increasingly important, the surgical procedures used to treat breast cancer, whether they are breast surgery or axillary dissection, are changing. Based on the currently available data, carrying out SLNE prior to neoadjuvant chemotherapy is not recommended. In contrast, surgical axillary management after neoadjuvant chemotherapy is considered the procedure of choice for axillary staging and can range from SLNE to TAD and ALND. To reduce the rate of false negatives
during surgical staging of the axilla in pN+
CNB
stage before NACT and ycN0 after NACT, targeted axillary dissection (TAD), the removal of > 2 SLNs (SLNE, no untargeted axillary sampling), immunohistochemistry to detect isolated tumour cells and micro-metastases, and marking positive lymph nodes before NACT should be the standard approach. This most recent update on surgical axillary management describes the significance of isolated tumour cells and micro-metastasis after neoadjuvant chemotherapy and the clinical consequences of low volume residual disease diagnosed using SLNE and TAD and provides an overview of this yearʼs AGO recommendations for surgical management of the axilla during primary surgery and in relation to neoadjuvant chemotherapy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Michael Friedrich
- Klinik für Frauenheilkunde und Geburtshilfe, HELIOS Klinikum Krefeld, Krefeld, Germany
| | | | - Wolfgang Janni
- Frauenklinik, Klinikum der Universität Ulm, Ulm, Germany
| | - Volkmar Müller
- Klinik und Poliklinik für Gynäkologie, Universitätsklinikum Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
| | - Maggie Banys-Pachulowski
- Klinik für Frauenheilkunde und Geburtshilfe, UK-SH, Lübeck, Germany.,Medizinische Fakultät, Heinrich-Heine-Universität Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany
| | | | - Christian Jackisch
- Klinik für Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe, Sana Klinikum Offenbach, Offenbach, Germany
| | - David Krug
- Universitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein, Klinik für Strahlentherapie, Campus Kiel, Kiel, Germany
| | - Ute-Susann Albert
- Klinik für Frauenheilkunde und Geburtshilfe, Universitätsklinikum Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany
| | - Ingo Bauerfeind
- Frauenklinik, Klinikum Landshut gemeinnützige GmbH, Landshut, Germany
| | - Jens Blohmer
- Klinik für Gynäkologie mit Brustzentrum des Universitätsklinikums der Charité, Berlin, Germany
| | - Wilfried Budach
- Strahlentherapie, Radiologie Düsseldorf, Universitätsklinikum Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany
| | - Peter Dall
- Frauenklinik, Städtisches Klinikum Lüneburg, Lüneburg, Germany
| | - Eva M Fallenberg
- Klinikum der Universität München, Campus Großhadern, Institut für Klinische Radiologie, München, Germany
| | | | - Tanja Fehm
- Klinik für Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe, Universitätsklinikum Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany
| | - Bernd Gerber
- Universitätsfrauenklinik am Klinikum Südstadt, Klinikum Südstadt Rostock, Rostock, Germany
| | - Oleg Gluz
- Evangelisches Krankenhaus Bethesda, Brustzentrum, Mönchengladbach, Germany
| | - Volker Hanf
- Frauenklinik, Nathanstift Klinikum Fürth, Fürth, Germany
| | - Nadia Harbeck
- Brustzentrum, Klinik für Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe, Klinikum der Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität, München, Germany
| | - Jörg Heil
- Universitäts-Klinikum Heidelberg, Brustzentrum, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Jens Huober
- Klinik für Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe, Universitätsklinikum Ulm, Ulm, Germany
| | | | | | - Sibylle Loibl
- German Breast Group Forschungs GmbH, Neu-Isenburg, Germany
| | - Diana Lüftner
- Medizinische Klinik mit Schwerpunkt Hämatologie, Onkologie und Tumorimmunologie, Charité, Berlin, Germany
| | - Michael Patrick Lux
- Kooperatives Brustzentrum Paderborn, Klinik für Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe, Frauenklinik, St. Louise, Paderborn, St. Josefs-Krankenhaus, Salzkotten, St. Vincenz Krankenhaus GmbH, Germany
| | - Nicolai Maass
- Klinik für Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe, Universitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Kiel, Kiel, Germany
| | - Volker Möbus
- Klinik für Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe, Klinikum Frankfurt Höchst GmbH, Frankfurt am Main, Germany
| | - Christoph Mundhenke
- Klinik für Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe, Universitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Kiel, Kiel, Germany
| | - Ulrike Nitz
- Evangelisches Krankenhaus Bethesda, Brustzentrum, Mönchengladbach, Germany
| | - Tjoung-Won Park-Simon
- Klinik für Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe, Universitätsklinikum Hannover, Hannover, Germany
| | - Toralf Reimer
- Universitätsfrauenklinik am Klinikum Südstadt, Klinikum Südstadt Rostock, Rostock, Germany
| | - Kerstin Rhiem
- Zentrum Familiärer Brust- und Eierstockkrebs, Universitätsklinikum Köln, Köln, Germany
| | - Achim Rody
- Klinik für Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe, Universitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Lübeck, Lübeck, Germany
| | - Marcus Schmidt
- Klinik und Poliklinik für Geburtshilfe und Frauengesundheit der Johannes-Gutenberg-Universität Mainz, Mainz, Germany
| | | | - Florian Schütz
- Klinik für Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe, Diakonissen Krankenhaus Speyer, Speyer, Germany
| | - Hans-Peter Sinn
- Sektion Gynäkopathologie, Pathologisches Institut, Universitätsklinikum Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Christine Solbach
- Klinik für Frauenheilkunde und Geburtshilfe, Universitätsklinikum Frankfurt, Frankfurt am Main, Germany
| | - Erich-Franz Solomayer
- Klinik für Frauenheilkunde, Geburtshilfe und Reproduktionsmedizin, Universitätsklinikum des Saarlandes, Homburg, Germany
| | - Elmar Stickeler
- Klinik für Gynäkologie und Geburtsmedizin, Universitätsklinikum Aachen, Aachen, Germany
| | - Christoph Thomssen
- Universitätsfrauenklinik, Martin-Luther-Universität Halle-Wittenberg, Halle-Wittenberg, Germany
| | - Michael Untch
- Klinik für Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe, Helios Klinikum Berlin-Buch, Berlin, Germany
| | - Isabell Witzel
- Klinik und Poliklinik für Gynäkologie, Universitätsklinikum Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
| | - Achim Wöckel
- Klinik für Frauenheilkunde und Geburtshilfe, Universitätsklinikum Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany
| | - Marc Thill
- Klinik für Gynäkologie und Gynäkologische Onkologie, Agaplesion Markus Krankenhaus, Frankfurt am Main, Germany
| | - Nina Ditsch
- Frauenklinik, Universitätsklinikum Augsburg, Augsburg, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Schiaffino S, Pinker K, Magni V, Cozzi A, Athanasiou A, Baltzer PAT, Camps Herrero J, Clauser P, Fallenberg EM, Forrai G, Fuchsjäger MH, Helbich TH, Kilburn-Toppin F, Kuhl CK, Lesaru M, Mann RM, Panizza P, Pediconi F, Pijnappel RM, Sella T, Thomassin-Naggara I, Zackrisson S, Gilbert FJ, Sardanelli F. Axillary lymphadenopathy at the time of COVID-19 vaccination: ten recommendations from the European Society of Breast Imaging (EUSOBI). Insights Imaging 2021; 12:119. [PMID: 34417642 PMCID: PMC8378785 DOI: 10.1186/s13244-021-01062-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 41] [Impact Index Per Article: 13.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/17/2021] [Accepted: 07/17/2021] [Indexed: 01/12/2023] Open
Abstract
Unilateral axillary lymphadenopathy is a frequent mild side effect of COVID-19 vaccination. European Society of Breast Imaging (EUSOBI) proposes ten recommendations to standardise its management and reduce unnecessary additional imaging and invasive procedures: (1) in patients with previous history of breast cancer, vaccination should be performed in the contralateral arm or in the thigh; (2) collect vaccination data for all patients referred to breast imaging services, including patients undergoing breast cancer staging and follow-up imaging examinations; (3) perform breast imaging examinations preferentially before vaccination or at least 12 weeks after the last vaccine dose; (4) in patients with newly diagnosed breast cancer, apply standard imaging protocols regardless of vaccination status; (5) in any case of symptomatic or imaging-detected axillary lymphadenopathy before vaccination or at least 12 weeks after, examine with appropriate imaging the contralateral axilla and both breasts to exclude malignancy; (6) in case of axillary lymphadenopathy contralateral to the vaccination side, perform standard work-up; (7) in patients without breast cancer history and no suspicious breast imaging findings, lymphadenopathy only ipsilateral to the vaccination side within 12 weeks after vaccination can be considered benign or probably-benign, depending on clinical context; (8) in patients without breast cancer history, post-vaccination lymphadenopathy coupled with suspicious breast finding requires standard work-up, including biopsy when appropriate; (9) in patients with breast cancer history, interpret and manage post-vaccination lymphadenopathy considering the timeframe from vaccination and overall nodal metastatic risk; (10) complex or unclear cases should be managed by the multidisciplinary team.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Simone Schiaffino
- Unit of Radiology, IRCCS Policlinico San Donato, San Donato Milanese, Italy
| | - Katja Pinker
- Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-guided Therapy, Division of General and Pediatric Radiology, Research Group: Molecular and Gender Imaging, Medical University of Vienna, Wien, Austria.,Department of Radiology, Breast Imaging Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Veronica Magni
- Department of Biomedical Sciences for Health, Università degli Studi di Milano, Milan, Italy
| | - Andrea Cozzi
- Department of Biomedical Sciences for Health, Università degli Studi di Milano, Milan, Italy
| | | | - Pascal A T Baltzer
- Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-guided Therapy, Division of General and Pediatric Radiology, Research Group: Molecular and Gender Imaging, Medical University of Vienna, Wien, Austria
| | | | - Paola Clauser
- Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-guided Therapy, Division of General and Pediatric Radiology, Research Group: Molecular and Gender Imaging, Medical University of Vienna, Wien, Austria
| | - Eva M Fallenberg
- Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, School of Medicine & Klinikum Rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich (TUM) , München , Germany
| | - Gábor Forrai
- Department of Radiology, Duna Medical Center, Budapest, Hungary
| | - Michael H Fuchsjäger
- Division of General Radiology, Department of Radiology, Medical University Graz, Graz, Austria
| | - Thomas H Helbich
- Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-guided Therapy, Division of General and Pediatric Radiology, Research Group: Molecular and Gender Imaging, Medical University of Vienna, Wien, Austria
| | | | - Christiane K Kuhl
- University Hospital of Aachen, Rheinisch-Westfälische Technische Hochschule Aachen, Aachen, Germany
| | - Mihai Lesaru
- Radiology and Imaging Laboratory, Fundeni Institute, Bucharest, Romania
| | - Ritse M Mann
- Department of Medical Imaging, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.,Department of Radiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Pietro Panizza
- Breast Imaging Unit, IRCCS Ospedale San Raffaele, Milan, Italy
| | - Federica Pediconi
- Department of Radiological, Oncological, and Pathological Sciences , Università degli Studi di Roma "La Sapienza" , Rome, Italy
| | - Ruud M Pijnappel
- Department of Imaging, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Tamar Sella
- Department of Diagnostic Imaging, Hadassah Hebrew University Medical Center, Jerusalem, Israel
| | | | - Sophia Zackrisson
- Diagnostic Radiology, Department of Translational Medicine, Skåne University Hospital, Lund University, Malmö, Sweden
| | - Fiona J Gilbert
- Department of Radiology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Francesco Sardanelli
- Unit of Radiology, IRCCS Policlinico San Donato, San Donato Milanese, Italy. .,Department of Biomedical Sciences for Health, Università degli Studi di Milano, Milan, Italy.
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Thill M, Friedrich M, Kolberg-Liedtke C, Albert US, Banys-Paluchowski M, Bauerfeind I, Blohmer JU, Budach W, Dall P, Fallenberg EM, Fasching PA, Fehm T, Gerber B, Gluz O, Harbeck N, Heil J, Huober J, Jackisch C, Kreipe HH, Krug D, Kühn T, Kümmel S, Loibl S, Lüftner D, Lux MP, Maass N, Mundhenke C, Nitz U, Park-Simon TW, Reimer T, Rhiem K, Rody A, Schmidt M, Schneeweiss A, Schütz F, Sinn HP, Solbach C, Solomayer EF, Stickeler E, Thomssen C, Untch M, Witzel I, Wöckel A, Müller V, Janni W, Ditsch N. AGO Recommendations for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Patients with Locally Advanced and Metastatic Breast Cancer: Update 2021. Breast Care (Basel) 2021; 16:228-235. [PMID: 34248463 PMCID: PMC8248779 DOI: 10.1159/000516420] [Citation(s) in RCA: 14] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/07/2021] [Accepted: 04/09/2021] [Indexed: 01/02/2023] Open
Affiliation(s)
- Marc Thill
- Klinik für Gynäkologie und Gynäkologische Onkologie, Agaplesion Markus Krankenhaus, Frankfurt, Germany
| | - Michael Friedrich
- Klinik für Frauenheilkunde und Geburtshilfe, Helios Klinikum Krefeld, Krefeld, Germany
| | | | - Ute-Susann Albert
- Klinik für Frauenheilkunde und Geburtshilfe, Universitätsklinikum Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany
| | - Maggie Banys-Paluchowski
- Klinik für Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe, Universitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Lübeck, Lübeck, Germany
- Brustzentrum, Kantonsspital St. Gallen, St. Gallen, Switzerland
| | - Ingo Bauerfeind
- Frauenklinik, Klinikum Landshut gemeinnützige GmbH, Landshut, Germany
| | - Jens-Uwe Blohmer
- Klinik für Gynäkologie mit Brustzentrum des Universitätsklinikums der Charité, Berlin, Germany
| | - Wilfried Budach
- Strahlentherapie, Radiologie Düsseldorf, Universitätsklinikum Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany
| | - Peter Dall
- Frauenklinik, Städtisches Klinikum Lüneburg, Lüneburg, Germany
| | - Eva M. Fallenberg
- Institut für Klinische Radiologie, Klinikum der Universität München Campus Großhadern, Munich, Germany
| | | | - Tanja Fehm
- Klinik für Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe, Universitätsklinikum Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany
| | - Bernd Gerber
- Universitätsfrauenklinik und Poliklinik am Klinikum Südstadt, Rostock, Germany
| | - Oleg Gluz
- Brustzentrum, Evangelisches Krankenhaus Bethesda, Mönchengladbach, Germany
| | - Nadia Harbeck
- Brustzentrum, Klinik für Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe, Klinikum der Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität, Munich, Germany
| | - Jörg Heil
- Klinik für Frauenheilkunde und Geburtshilfe, Sektion Senologie, Universitätsklinikum Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Jens Huober
- Brustzentrum, Kantonsspital St. Gallen, St. Gallen, Switzerland
| | - Christian Jackisch
- Klinik für Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe, Sana Klinikum Offenbach, Offenbach, Germany
| | | | - David Krug
- Klinik für Strahlentherapie, Universitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Kiel, Kiel, Germany
| | - Thorsten Kühn
- Klinik für Frauenheilkunde und Geburtshilfe, Klinikum Esslingen, Esslingen, Germany
| | - Sherko Kümmel
- Klinik für Senologie, Evangelische Kliniken Essen Mitte, Essen, Germany
| | - Sibylle Loibl
- German Breast Group Forschungs GmbH, Frankfurt, Germany
| | - Diana Lüftner
- Medizinische Klinik mit Schwerpunkt Hämatologie, Onkologie und Tumorimmunologie, Charité, Berlin, Germany
| | - Michael P. Lux
- Kooperatives Brustzentrum Paderborn, Klinik für Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe, Frauenklinik St. Louise, Paderborn und St. Josefs-Krankenhaus, Salzkotten, St. Vincenz-Krankenhaus GmbH, Paderborn, Germany
| | - Nicolai Maass
- Klinik für Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe, Universitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Kiel, Kiel, Germany
| | - Christoph Mundhenke
- Klinik für Gynäkologie und Gynäkologische Onkologie, Agaplesion Markus Krankenhaus, Frankfurt, Germany
| | - Ulrike Nitz
- Brustzentrum, Evangelisches Krankenhaus Bethesda, Mönchengladbach, Germany
| | - Tjoung-Won Park-Simon
- Klinik für Frauenheilkunde und Geburtshilfe, Helios Klinikum Krefeld, Krefeld, Germany
| | - Toralf Reimer
- Universitätsfrauenklinik und Poliklinik am Klinikum Südstadt, Rostock, Germany
| | - Kerstin Rhiem
- Klinik für Frauenheilkunde und Geburtshilfe, Universitätsklinikum Essen, Essen, Germany
| | - Achim Rody
- Klinik für Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe, Universitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Lübeck, Lübeck, Germany
| | - Marcus Schmidt
- Klinik für Frauenheilkunde und Geburtshilfe, Universitätsklinikum Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany
| | - Andreas Schneeweiss
- Klinik für Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe, Universitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Lübeck, Lübeck, Germany
| | - Florian Schütz
- Frauenklinik, Klinikum Landshut gemeinnützige GmbH, Landshut, Germany
| | - Hans-Peter Sinn
- Klinik für Gynäkologie mit Brustzentrum des Universitätsklinikums der Charité, Berlin, Germany
| | - Christine Solbach
- Strahlentherapie, Radiologie Düsseldorf, Universitätsklinikum Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany
| | - Erich-Franz Solomayer
- Institut für Klinische Radiologie, Klinikum der Universität München Campus Großhadern, Munich, Germany
| | - Elmar Stickeler
- Frauenklinik, Universitätsklinikum Erlangen, Erlangen, Germany
| | - Christoph Thomssen
- Klinik für Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe, Universitätsklinikum Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany
| | - Michael Untch
- Universitätsfrauenklinik und Poliklinik am Klinikum Südstadt, Rostock, Germany
| | - Isabell Witzel
- Brustzentrum, Evangelisches Krankenhaus Bethesda, Mönchengladbach, Germany
| | - Achim Wöckel
- Klinik für Frauenheilkunde und Geburtshilfe, Universitätsklinikum Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany
| | - Volkmar Müller
- Brustzentrum, Evangelisches Krankenhaus Bethesda, Mönchengladbach, Germany
| | - Wolfgang Janni
- Brustzentrum, Klinik für Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe, Klinikum der Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität, Munich, Germany
| | - Nina Ditsch
- Klinik für Frauenheilkunde und Geburtshilfe, Sektion Senologie, Universitätsklinikum Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Ditsch N, Kolberg-Liedtke C, Friedrich M, Jackisch C, Albert US, Banys-Paluchowski M, Bauerfeind I, Blohmer JU, Budach W, Dall P, Fallenberg EM, Fasching PA, Fehm T, Gerber B, Gluz O, Harbeck N, Heil J, Huober J, Kreipe HH, Krug D, Kühn T, Kümmel S, Loibl S, Lüftner D, Lux MP, Maass N, Mundhenke C, Nitz U, Park-Simon TW, Reimer T, Rhiem K, Rody A, Schmidt M, Schneeweiss A, Schütz F, Sinn HP, Solbach C, Solomayer EF, Stickeler E, Thomssen C, Untch M, Witzel I, Wöckel A, Müller V, Janni W, Thill M. AGO Recommendations for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Patients with Early Breast Cancer: Update 2021. Breast Care (Basel) 2021; 16:214-227. [PMID: 34248462 DOI: 10.1159/000516419] [Citation(s) in RCA: 31] [Impact Index Per Article: 10.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/07/2021] [Accepted: 04/09/2021] [Indexed: 12/12/2022] Open
Affiliation(s)
- Nina Ditsch
- Klinik für Frauenheilkunde und Geburtshilfe, Universitätsklinikum Augsburg, Augsburg, Germany
| | | | - Michael Friedrich
- Klinik für Frauenheilkunde und Geburtshilfe, Helios Klinikum Krefeld, Krefeld, Germany
| | - Christian Jackisch
- Klinik für Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe, Sana Klinikum Offenbach GmbH, Offenbach, Germany
| | - Ute-Susann Albert
- Klinik für Frauenheilkunde und Geburtshilfe, Universitätsklinikum Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany
| | - Maggie Banys-Paluchowski
- Klinik für Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe, Universitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Lübeck, Lübeck, Germany.,Medizinische Fakultät, Heinrich-Heine-Universität Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany
| | - Ingo Bauerfeind
- Frauenklinik, Klinikum Landshut gemeinnützige GmbH, Landshut, Germany
| | - Jens-Uwe Blohmer
- Klinik für Gynäkologie mit Brustzentrum des Universitätsklinikums der Charité, Berlin, Germany
| | - Wilfried Budach
- Strahlentherapie, Radiologie Düsseldorf, Universitätsklinikum Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany
| | - Peter Dall
- Frauenklinik, Städtisches Klinikum Lüneburg, Lüneburg, Germany
| | - Eva M Fallenberg
- Institut für klinische Radiologie, Klinikum der Universität München, Campus Großhadern, Munich, Germany
| | | | - Tanja Fehm
- Klinik für Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe, Universitätsklinikum Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany
| | - Bernd Gerber
- Universitätsfrauenklinik und Poliklinik am Klinikum Südstadt, Rostock, Germany
| | - Oleg Gluz
- Brustzentrum, Evangelisches Krankenhaus Bethesda, Mönchengladbach, Germany
| | - Nadia Harbeck
- Brustzentrum, Klinik für Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe, Klinikum der Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität, Munich, Germany
| | - Jörg Heil
- Klinik für Frauenheilkunde und Geburtshilfe, Sektion Senologie, Universitätsklinikum Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Jens Huober
- Brustzentrum, Kantonsspital St. Gallen, St. Gallen, Switzerland
| | | | - David Krug
- Klinik für Strahlentherapie, Universitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Kiel, Kiel, Germany
| | - Thorsten Kühn
- Klinik für Frauenheilkunde und Geburtshilfe, Klinikum Esslingen, Esslingen, Germany
| | - Sherko Kümmel
- Klinik für Senologie, Evangelische Kliniken Essen Mitte, Essen, Germany
| | - Sibylle Loibl
- German Breast Group Forschungs GmbH, Frankfurt, Germany
| | - Diana Lüftner
- Medizinische Klinik mit Schwerpunkt Hämatologie, Onkologie und Tumorimmunologie, Charité, Berlin, Germany
| | - Michael P Lux
- Kooperatives Brustzentrum Paderborn, Klinik für Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe, Frauenklinik St. Louise, Paderborn und St. Josefs-Krankenhaus, Salzkotten, St. Vincenz-Krankenhaus GmbH, Paderborn, Germany
| | - Nicolai Maass
- Klinik für Frauenheilkunde und Geburtshilfe, Universitätsklinikum Augsburg, Augsburg, Germany
| | - Christoph Mundhenke
- Klinik für Frauenheilkunde und Geburtshilfe, Universitätsklinikum Essen, Essen, Germany
| | - Ulrike Nitz
- Brustzentrum, Evangelisches Krankenhaus Bethesda, Mönchengladbach, Germany
| | - Tjoung-Won Park-Simon
- Klinik für Frauenheilkunde und Geburtshilfe, Helios Klinikum Krefeld, Krefeld, Germany
| | - Toralf Reimer
- Universitätsfrauenklinik und Poliklinik am Klinikum Südstadt, Rostock, Germany
| | - Kerstin Rhiem
- Klinik für Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe, Sana Klinikum Offenbach GmbH, Offenbach, Germany
| | - Achim Rody
- Klinik für Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe, Universitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Lübeck, Lübeck, Germany
| | - Marcus Schmidt
- Klinik für Frauenheilkunde und Geburtshilfe, Universitätsklinikum Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany
| | - Andreas Schneeweiss
- Klinik für Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe, Universitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Lübeck, Lübeck, Germany
| | - Florian Schütz
- Medizinische Fakultät, Heinrich-Heine-Universität Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany
| | - Hans-Peter Sinn
- Frauenklinik, Klinikum Landshut gemeinnützige GmbH, Landshut, Germany
| | - Christine Solbach
- Strahlentherapie, Radiologie Düsseldorf, Universitätsklinikum Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany
| | | | - Elmar Stickeler
- Institut für klinische Radiologie, Klinikum der Universität München, Campus Großhadern, Munich, Germany
| | | | - Michael Untch
- Klinik für Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe, Universitätsklinikum Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany
| | - Isabell Witzel
- Universitätsfrauenklinik und Poliklinik am Klinikum Südstadt, Rostock, Germany
| | - Achim Wöckel
- Klinik für Frauenheilkunde und Geburtshilfe, Universitätsklinikum Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany
| | - Volkmar Müller
- Universitätsfrauenklinik und Poliklinik am Klinikum Südstadt, Rostock, Germany
| | - Wolfgang Janni
- Brustzentrum, Evangelisches Krankenhaus Bethesda, Mönchengladbach, Germany
| | - Marc Thill
- Brustzentrum, Klinik für Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe, Klinikum der Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität, Munich, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Abstract
Early detection is of great importance for the successful treatment of breast cancer and for a good prognosis. Contrast-enhanced mammography and especially contrast-enhanced spectral mammography (CESM) show promising initial results and are a valuable addition to currently available methods. The advantage of these methods is that imaging of both breasts can be performed in a single examination with a single contrast agent application. The accuracy of CESM is similar to that of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), easily available at low costs, which is why this procedure is increasingly used in the diagnostic work up of breast cancer. CESM is also a good alternative to MRI if this cannot be performed due to contraindications.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Eva M Fallenberg
- Bereichsleitung: Diagnostische und interventionelle Senologie LMU, Klinik und Poliklinik für Radiologie, Campus Innenstadt/Großhadern, LMU Klinikum, Marchioninistr. 15, 81377, München, Deutschland.
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Bick U, Trimboli RM, Athanasiou A, Balleyguier C, Baltzer PAT, Bernathova M, Borbély K, Brkljacic B, Carbonaro LA, Clauser P, Cassano E, Colin C, Esen G, Evans A, Fallenberg EM, Fuchsjaeger MH, Gilbert FJ, Helbich TH, Heywang-Köbrunner SH, Herranz M, Kinkel K, Kilburn-Toppin F, Kuhl CK, Lesaru M, Lobbes MBI, Mann RM, Martincich L, Panizza P, Pediconi F, Pijnappel RM, Pinker K, Schiaffino S, Sella T, Thomassin-Naggara I, Tardivon A, Ongeval CV, Wallis MG, Zackrisson S, Forrai G, Herrero JC, Sardanelli F. Image-guided breast biopsy and localisation: recommendations for information to women and referring physicians by the European Society of Breast Imaging. Insights Imaging 2020; 11:12. [PMID: 32025985 PMCID: PMC7002629 DOI: 10.1186/s13244-019-0803-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 71] [Impact Index Per Article: 17.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/27/2019] [Accepted: 10/10/2019] [Indexed: 12/13/2022] Open
Abstract
We summarise here the information to be provided to women and referring physicians about percutaneous breast biopsy and lesion localisation under imaging guidance. After explaining why a preoperative diagnosis with a percutaneous biopsy is preferred to surgical biopsy, we illustrate the criteria used by radiologists for choosing the most appropriate combination of device type for sampling and imaging technique for guidance. Then, we describe the commonly used devices, from fine-needle sampling to tissue biopsy with larger needles, namely core needle biopsy and vacuum-assisted biopsy, and how mammography, digital breast tomosynthesis, ultrasound, or magnetic resonance imaging work for targeting the lesion for sampling or localisation. The differences among the techniques available for localisation (carbon marking, metallic wire, radiotracer injection, radioactive seed, and magnetic seed localisation) are illustrated. Type and rate of possible complications are described and the issue of concomitant antiplatelet or anticoagulant therapy is also addressed. The importance of pathological-radiological correlation is highlighted: when evaluating the results of any needle sampling, the radiologist must check the concordance between the cytology/pathology report of the sample and the radiological appearance of the biopsied lesion. We recommend that special attention is paid to a proper and tactful approach when communicating to the woman the need for tissue sampling as well as the possibility of cancer diagnosis, repeat tissue sampling, and or even surgery when tissue sampling shows a lesion with uncertain malignant potential (also referred to as "high-risk" or B3 lesions). Finally, seven frequently asked questions are answered.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ulrich Bick
- Clinic of Radiology, Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, 10117, Berlin, Germany
| | - Rubina M Trimboli
- PhD Course in Integrative Biomedical Research, Department of Biomedical Science for Health, Università degli Studi di Milano, Via Mangiagalli, 31, 20133, Milan, Italy
| | - Alexandra Athanasiou
- Breast Imaging Department, MITERA Hospital, 6, Erithrou Stavrou Str. 151 23 Marousi, Athens, Greece
| | - Corinne Balleyguier
- Department of Radiology, Gustave-Roussy Cancer Campus, 114 Rue Edouard Vaillant, 94800, Villejuif, France
| | - Pascal A T Baltzer
- Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-guided Therapy, Division of Molecular and Gender Imaging, Medical University of Vienna, Waehringer Guertel 18-20, 1090, Wien, Austria
| | - Maria Bernathova
- Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-guided Therapy, Division of Molecular and Gender Imaging, Medical University of Vienna, Waehringer Guertel 18-20, 1090, Wien, Austria
| | | | - Boris Brkljacic
- Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Dubrava, University of Zagreb School of Medicine, Zagreb, Croatia
| | - Luca A Carbonaro
- Unit of Radiology, IRCCS Policlinico San Donato, San Donato Milanese, Milan, Italy
| | - Paola Clauser
- Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-guided Therapy, Division of Molecular and Gender Imaging, Medical University of Vienna, Waehringer Guertel 18-20, 1090, Wien, Austria
| | - Enrico Cassano
- Breast Imaging Division, European Institute of Oncology, Milan, Italy
| | - Catherine Colin
- Radiology Unit, Hospices Civils de Lyon, Centre Hospitalo-Universitaire Femme Mère Enfant, 59 Boulevard Pinel, 69 677, Bron Cedex, France
| | - Gul Esen
- School of Medicine, Department of Radiology, Acıbadem Mehmet Ali Aydınlar University, Istanbul, Turkey
| | - Andrew Evans
- Dundee Cancer Centre, Clinical Research Centre, Ninewells Hospital and Medical School, Tom McDonald Avenue, Dundee, UK
| | - Eva M Fallenberg
- Diagnostic and Interventional Breast Imaging, Department of Radiology, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Marchioninistr. 15, 81377, Munich, Germany
| | - Michael H Fuchsjaeger
- Division of General Radiology, Department of Radiology, Medical University Graz, Auenbruggerplatz 9, 8036, Graz, Austria
| | - Fiona J Gilbert
- Department of Radiology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge Biomedical Campus, Hills road, Cambridge, CB2 0QQ, UK
| | - Thomas H Helbich
- Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-guided Therapy, Division of Molecular and Gender Imaging, Medical University of Vienna, Waehringer Guertel 18-20, 1090, Wien, Austria
| | | | - Michel Herranz
- CyclotronUnit, GALARIA-SERGAS, Nuclear Medicine Department and Molecular ImagingGroup, Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria (IDIS), Santiago de Compostela, Spain
| | - Karen Kinkel
- Institut de Radiologie, Clinique des Grangettes, Chemin des Grangettes 7, 1224 Chêne-Bougeries, Genève, Switzerland
| | - Fleur Kilburn-Toppin
- Department of Radiology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge Biomedical Campus, Hills road, Cambridge, CB2 0QQ, UK
| | - Christiane K Kuhl
- University Hospital of Aachen, Rheinisch-Westfälische Technische Hochschule, Pauwelsstraße 30, 52074, Aachen, Germany
| | - Mihai Lesaru
- Radiology and Imaging Laboratory, Fundeni Institute, Bucharest, Romania
| | - Marc B I Lobbes
- Department of Radiology, Zuyderland Medical Center, Dr. H. van der Hoffplein 1, PO Box 5500, 6130 MB, Sittard-Geleen, The Netherlands
| | - Ritse M Mann
- Department of Radiology, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Centre, Geert Grooteplein Zuid 10, 6525 GA, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Laura Martincich
- Unit of Radiodiagnostics ASL AT, Via Conte Verde 125, 14100, Asti, Italy
| | - Pietro Panizza
- Breast Imaging Unit, Scientific Institute (IRCCS) Ospedale San Raffaele, Via Olgettina, 60, 20132, Milan, Italy
| | - Federica Pediconi
- Department of Radiological, Oncological and Pathological Sciences, Sapienza University of Rome, Viale Regina Elena, 324, 00161, Rome, Italy
| | - Ruud M Pijnappel
- Department of Imaging, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht University, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584 CX, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Katja Pinker
- Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-guided Therapy, Division of Molecular and Gender Imaging, Medical University of Vienna, Waehringer Guertel 18-20, 1090, Wien, Austria.,Department of Radiology, Breast Imaging Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 300 E 66th Street, New York, NY, 10065, USA
| | - Simone Schiaffino
- Unit of Radiology, IRCCS Policlinico San Donato, San Donato Milanese, Milan, Italy
| | - Tamar Sella
- Department of Diagnostic Imaging, Hadassah Hebrew University Medical Center, Jerusalem, Israel
| | - Isabelle Thomassin-Naggara
- Department of Radiology, Sorbonne Université, APHP, Hôpital Tenon, 4, rue de la Chine, 75020, Paris, France
| | - Anne Tardivon
- Department of Radiology, Institut Curie, Paris, France
| | - Chantal Van Ongeval
- Department of Radiology, University Hospitals Leuven, Herestraat 49, 3000, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Matthew G Wallis
- Cambridge Breast Unit and NIHR Biomedical Research Unit, Box 97, Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge Biomedical Campus, Hills Road, Cambridge, CB2 0QQ, UK
| | - Sophia Zackrisson
- Diagnostic Radiology, Department of Translational Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Lund University, Skåne University Hospital Malmö, SE-205 02, Malmö, Sweden
| | - Gabor Forrai
- Department of Radiology, Duna Medical Center, Budapest, Hungary
| | | | - Francesco Sardanelli
- Unit of Radiology, IRCCS Policlinico San Donato, San Donato Milanese, Milan, Italy. .,Department of Biomedical Sciences for Health, Università degli Studi di Milano, Via Morandi 30, 20097 San Donato Milanese, Milan, Italy.
| | | |
Collapse
|
14
|
Engel C, Fischer C, Zachariae S, Bucksch K, Rhiem K, Giesecke J, Herold N, Wappenschmidt B, Hübbel V, Maringa M, Reichstein-Gnielinski S, Hahnen E, Bartram CR, Dikow N, Schott S, Speiser D, Horn D, Fallenberg EM, Kiechle M, Quante AS, Vesper AS, Fehm T, Mundhenke C, Arnold N, Leinert E, Just W, Siebers-Renelt U, Weigel S, Gehrig A, Wöckel A, Schlegelberger B, Pertschy S, Kast K, Wimberger P, Briest S, Loeffler M, Bick U, Schmutzler RK. Breast cancer risk in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers and noncarriers under prospective intensified surveillance. Int J Cancer 2019; 146:999-1009. [PMID: 31081934 DOI: 10.1002/ijc.32396] [Citation(s) in RCA: 18] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/06/2018] [Revised: 03/17/2019] [Accepted: 04/25/2019] [Indexed: 01/15/2023]
Abstract
Comparably little is known about breast cancer (BC) risks in women from families tested negative for BRCA1/2 mutations despite an indicative family history, as opposed to BRCA1/2 mutation carriers. We determined the age-dependent risks of first and contralateral breast cancer (FBC, CBC) both in noncarriers and carriers of BRCA1/2 mutations, who participated in an intensified breast imaging surveillance program. The study was conducted between January 1, 2005, and September 30, 2017, at 12 university centers of the German Consortium for Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer. Two cohorts were prospectively followed up for incident FBC (n = 4,380; 16,398 person-years [PY], median baseline age: 39 years) and CBC (n = 2,993; 10,090 PY, median baseline age: 42 years). Cumulative FBC risk at age 60 was 61.8% (95% CI 52.8-70.9%) for BRCA1 mutation carriers, 43.2% (95% CI 32.1-56.3%) for BRCA2 mutation carriers and 15.7% (95% CI 11.9-20.4%) for noncarriers. FBC risks were significantly higher than in the general population, with incidence rate ratios of 23.9 (95% CI 18.9-29.8) for BRCA1 mutation carriers, 13.5 (95% CI 9.2-19.1) for BRCA2 mutation carriers and 4.9 (95% CI 3.8-6.3) for BRCA1/2 noncarriers. Cumulative CBC risk 10 years after FBC was 25.1% (95% CI 19.6-31.9%) for BRCA1 mutation carriers, 6.6% (95% CI 3.4-12.5%) for BRCA2 mutation carriers and 3.6% (95% CI 2.2-5.7%) for noncarriers. CBC risk in noncarriers was similar to women with unilateral BC from the general population. Further studies are needed to confirm whether less intensified surveillance is justified in women from BRCA1/2 negative families with elevated risk.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Christoph Engel
- Institute for Medical Informatics, Statistics and Epidemiology, University of Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany
| | - Christine Fischer
- Institute of Human Genetics, Ruprecht-Karls University, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Silke Zachariae
- Institute for Medical Informatics, Statistics and Epidemiology, University of Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany
| | - Karolin Bucksch
- Institute for Medical Informatics, Statistics and Epidemiology, University of Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany
| | - Kerstin Rhiem
- Center for Familial Breast and Ovarian Cancer, Center for Integrated Oncology (CIO), Medical Faculty, University Hospital Cologne, Cologne, Germany
| | - Jutta Giesecke
- Center for Familial Breast and Ovarian Cancer, Center for Integrated Oncology (CIO), Medical Faculty, University Hospital Cologne, Cologne, Germany
| | - Natalie Herold
- Center for Familial Breast and Ovarian Cancer, Center for Integrated Oncology (CIO), Medical Faculty, University Hospital Cologne, Cologne, Germany
| | - Barbara Wappenschmidt
- Center for Familial Breast and Ovarian Cancer, Center for Integrated Oncology (CIO), Medical Faculty, University Hospital Cologne, Cologne, Germany
| | - Verena Hübbel
- Center for Familial Breast and Ovarian Cancer, Center for Integrated Oncology (CIO), Medical Faculty, University Hospital Cologne, Cologne, Germany
| | - Monika Maringa
- Center for Familial Breast and Ovarian Cancer, Center for Integrated Oncology (CIO), Medical Faculty, University Hospital Cologne, Cologne, Germany
| | - Simone Reichstein-Gnielinski
- Center for Familial Breast and Ovarian Cancer, Center for Integrated Oncology (CIO), Medical Faculty, University Hospital Cologne, Cologne, Germany
| | - Eric Hahnen
- Center for Familial Breast and Ovarian Cancer, Center for Integrated Oncology (CIO), Medical Faculty, University Hospital Cologne, Cologne, Germany
| | - Claus R Bartram
- Institute of Human Genetics, Ruprecht-Karls University, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Nicola Dikow
- Institute of Human Genetics, Ruprecht-Karls University, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Sarah Schott
- Department of Gynaecology, Ruprecht-Karls University, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Dorothee Speiser
- Department of Gynecology with Breast Center, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, and Berlin Institute of Health, Berlin, Germany
| | - Denise Horn
- Institute of Medical Genetics and Human Genetics, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, and Berlin Institute of Health, Berlin, Germany
| | - Eva M Fallenberg
- Department of Radiology, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Marion Kiechle
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital Rechts der Isar, Technical University Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Anne S Quante
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital Rechts der Isar, Technical University Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Anne-Sophie Vesper
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University Hospital and Medical Faculty of the Heinrich-Heine University Duesseldorf, Duesseldorf, Germany
| | - Tanja Fehm
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University Hospital and Medical Faculty of the Heinrich-Heine University Duesseldorf, Duesseldorf, Germany
| | - Christoph Mundhenke
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital of Schleswig-Holstein, Christian-Albrechts-University Kiel, Kiel, Germany
| | - Norbert Arnold
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Institute of Clinical Molecular Biology, University Hospital of Schleswig-Holstein, Christian-Albrechts-University Kiel, Kiel, Germany
| | - Elena Leinert
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Ulm University Hospital, Ulm, Germany
| | - Walter Just
- Institute of Human Genetics, University of Ulm, Ulm, Germany
| | | | - Stefanie Weigel
- Institute of Clinical Radiology, Medical Faculty, University of Muenster, University Hospital Muenster, Muenster, Germany
| | - Andrea Gehrig
- Institute of Human Genetics, Würzburg University, Würzburg, Germany
| | - Achim Wöckel
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Würzburg University Hospital, Würzburg, Germany
| | | | - Stefanie Pertschy
- Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany
| | - Karin Kast
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Medical Faculty and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany.,National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Partner Site Dresden, Dresden, Germany.,German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Dresden and German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Pauline Wimberger
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Medical Faculty and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany.,National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Partner Site Dresden, Dresden, Germany.,German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Dresden and German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Susanne Briest
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University Hospital Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany
| | - Markus Loeffler
- Institute for Medical Informatics, Statistics and Epidemiology, University of Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany
| | - Ulrich Bick
- Department of Radiology, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Rita K Schmutzler
- Center for Familial Breast and Ovarian Cancer, Center for Integrated Oncology (CIO), Medical Faculty, University Hospital Cologne, Cologne, Germany
| | | |
Collapse
|
15
|
Evans A, Trimboli RM, Athanasiou A, Balleyguier C, Baltzer PA, Bick U, Camps Herrero J, Clauser P, Colin C, Cornford E, Fallenberg EM, Fuchsjaeger MH, Gilbert FJ, Helbich TH, Kinkel K, Heywang-Köbrunner SH, Kuhl CK, Mann RM, Martincich L, Panizza P, Pediconi F, Pijnappel RM, Pinker K, Zackrisson S, Forrai G, Sardanelli F. Breast ultrasound: recommendations for information to women and referring physicians by the European Society of Breast Imaging. Insights Imaging 2018; 9:449-461. [PMID: 30094592 PMCID: PMC6108964 DOI: 10.1007/s13244-018-0636-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 67] [Impact Index Per Article: 11.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/05/2018] [Revised: 04/28/2018] [Accepted: 05/14/2018] [Indexed: 11/09/2022] Open
Abstract
This article summarises the information that should be provided to women and referring physicians about breast ultrasound (US). After explaining the physical principles, technical procedure and safety of US, information is given about its ability to make a correct diagnosis, depending on the setting in which it is applied. The following definite indications for breast US in female subjects are proposed: palpable lump; axillary adenopathy; first diagnostic approach for clinical abnormalities under 40 and in pregnant or lactating women; suspicious abnormalities at mammography or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI); suspicious nipple discharge; recent nipple inversion; skin retraction; breast inflammation; abnormalities in the area of the surgical scar after breast conserving surgery or mastectomy; abnormalities in the presence of breast implants; screening high-risk women, especially when MRI is not performed; loco-regional staging of a known breast cancer, when MRI is not performed; guidance for percutaneous interventions (needle biopsy, pre-surgical localisation, fluid collection drainage); monitoring patients with breast cancer receiving neo-adjuvant therapy, when MRI is not performed. Possible indications such as supplemental screening after mammography for women aged 40-74 with dense breasts are also listed. Moreover, inappropriate indications include screening for breast cancer as a stand-alone alternative to mammography. The structure and organisation of the breast US report and of classification systems such as the BI-RADS and consequent management recommendations are illustrated. Information about additional or new US technologies (colour-Doppler, elastography, and automated whole breast US) is also provided. Finally, five frequently asked questions are answered. TEACHING POINTS • US is an established tool for suspected cancers at all ages and also the method of choice under 40. • For US-visible suspicious lesions, US-guided biopsy is preferred, even for palpable findings. • High-risk women can be screened with US, especially when MRI cannot be performed. • Supplemental US increases cancer detection but also false positives, biopsy rate and follow-up exams. • Breast US is inappropriate as a stand-alone screening method.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Andrew Evans
- Dundee Cancer Centre, Clinical Research Centre, Ninewells Hospital and Medical School, Tom McDonald Avenue, Dundee, UK
| | - Rubina M Trimboli
- PhD Course in Integrative Biomedical Research, Department of Biomedical Science for Health, Università degli Studi di Milano, Via Mangiagalli, 31, 20133, Milan, Italy
| | - Alexandra Athanasiou
- Breast Imaging Department, MITERA Hospital, 6, Erithrou Stavrou Str. 151 23 Marousi, Athens, Greece
| | - Corinne Balleyguier
- Department of Radiology, Gustave-Roussy Cancer Campus, 114 Rue Edouard Vaillant, 94800, Villejuif, France
| | - Pascal A Baltzer
- Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-guided Therapy, Division of Molecular and Gender Imaging, Medical University of Vienna, Währinger Gürtel 18-20, 1090, Wien, Austria
| | - Ulrich Bick
- Clinic of Radiology, Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, 10117, Berlin, Germany
| | - Julia Camps Herrero
- Department of Radiology, University Hospital of La Ribera, Carretera de Corbera, Km 1, 46600, Alzira, Valencia, Spain
| | - Paola Clauser
- Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-guided Therapy, Division of Molecular and Gender Imaging, Medical University of Vienna, Währinger Gürtel 18-20, 1090, Wien, Austria
| | - Catherine Colin
- Radiology Unit, Hospices Civils de Lyon, Centre Hospitalo-Universitaire Femme Mère Enfant, 59 Boulevard Pinel, 69 677, Bron Cedex, France
| | - Eleanor Cornford
- Thirlestaine Breast Centre, Cheltenham General Hospital, Thirlestaine Road, Cheltenham, GL53 7AP, UK
| | - Eva M Fallenberg
- Clinic of Radiology, Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, 10117, Berlin, Germany
| | - Michael H Fuchsjaeger
- Division of General Radiology, Department of Radiology, Medical University Graz, Auenbruggerplatz 9, 8036, Graz, Austria
| | - Fiona J Gilbert
- Department of Radiology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge Biomedical Campus, Hills road, Cambridge, CB2 0QQ, UK
| | - Thomas H Helbich
- Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-guided Therapy, Division of Molecular and Gender Imaging, Medical University of Vienna, Währinger Gürtel 18-20, 1090, Wien, Austria
| | - Karen Kinkel
- Institut de Radiologie, Clinique des Grangettes, Chemin des Grangettes 7, 1224, Chêne-Bougeries, Genève, Switzerland
| | | | - Christiane K Kuhl
- University Hospital of Aachen, Rheinisch-Westfälische Technische Hochschule, Pauwelsstraße 30, 52074, Aachen, Germany
| | - Ritse M Mann
- Department of Radiology, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Centre, Geert Grooteplein Zuid 10, 6525 GA, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Laura Martincich
- Unità Operativa Radiodiagnostica, Candiolo Cancer Institute - FPO, IRCCS, Str. Prov. 142, km 3.95, 10060, Candiolo, Turin, Italy
| | - Pietro Panizza
- Breast Imaging Unit, Scientific Institute (IRCCS) Ospedale San Raffaele, Via Olgettina, 60, 20132, Milan, Italy
| | - Federica Pediconi
- Department of Radiological, Oncological and Pathological Sciences, Sapienza University, Viale Regina Elena, 324, 00161, Rome, Italy
| | - Ruud M Pijnappel
- Department of Imaging, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584 CX, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Katja Pinker
- Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-guided Therapy, Division of Molecular and Gender Imaging, Medical University of Vienna, Währinger Gürtel 18-20, 1090, Wien, Austria
- Department of Radiology, Breast Imaging Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 300 E 66th Street, New York, NY, 10065, USA
| | - Sophia Zackrisson
- Diagnostic Radiology, Department of Translational Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Lund University, Skåne University Hospital Malmö, SE-205 02, Malmö, Sweden
| | - Gabor Forrai
- Department of Radiology, Duna Medical Center, Budapest, Hungary
| | - Francesco Sardanelli
- Department of Biomedical Sciences for Health, Università degli Studi di Milano, Via Morandi 30, 20097, San Donato Milanese, Milan, Italy.
- Unit of Radiology, IRCCS Policlinico San Donato, Via Morandi 30, 20097, San Donato Milanese, Milan, Italy.
| |
Collapse
|
16
|
Adams LC, Böker SM, Bender YY, Fallenberg EM, Wagner M, Liebig T, Hamm B, Makowski MR. Detection of vessel wall calcifications in vertebral arteries using susceptibility weighted imaging. Neuroradiology 2017; 59:861-872. [PMID: 28730268 DOI: 10.1007/s00234-017-1878-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/13/2017] [Accepted: 06/30/2017] [Indexed: 01/01/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE Calcification of the brain supplying arteries has been linked to an increased risk for cerebrovascular disease. The purpose of this study was to test the potential of susceptibility weighted MR imaging (SWMR) for the detection of vertebral artery calcifications, based on CT as a reference standard. METHODS Four hundred seventy-four patients, who had received head CT and 1.5 T MR scans with SWMR, including the distal vertebral artery, between January 2014 and December 2016, were retrospectively evaluated and 389 patients were included. Sensitivity and specificity for the detection of focal calcifications and intra- and interobserver agreement were calculated for SWMR and standard MRI, using CT as a standard of reference. The diameter of vertebral artery calcifications was used to assess correlations between imaging modalities. Furthermore, the degree of vessel stenosis was determined in 30 patients, who had received an additional angiography. RESULTS On CT scans, 40 patients showed a total of 52 vertebral artery calcifications. While SWMR reached a sensitivity of 94% (95% CI 84-99%) and a specificity of 97% (95% CI 94-98%), standard MRI yielded a sensitivity of 33% (95% CI 20-46%), and a specificity of 93% (95% CI 90-96%). Linear regression analysis of size measurements confirmed a close correlation between SWMR and CT measurements (R 2 = 0.74, p < 0.001). Compared to standard MRI (ICC = 0.52; CI 0.45-0.59), SWMR showed a higher interobserver agreement for calcification measurements (ICC = 0.84; CI 0.81-0.87). CONCLUSIONS For detection of distal vertebral artery calcifications, SWMR demonstrates a performance comparable to CT and considerably higher than conventional MRI.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lisa C Adams
- Department of Radiology, Charité, Charitéplatz 1, 10117, Berlin, Germany.
| | - Sarah M Böker
- Department of Radiology, Charité, Charitéplatz 1, 10117, Berlin, Germany
| | - Yvonne Y Bender
- Department of Radiology, Charité, Charitéplatz 1, 10117, Berlin, Germany
| | - Eva M Fallenberg
- Department of Radiology, Charité, Augustenburger Platz 1, 13353, Berlin, Germany
| | - Moritz Wagner
- Department of Radiology, Charité, Charitéplatz 1, 10117, Berlin, Germany
| | - Thomas Liebig
- Department of Neuroradiology, Charité, Charitéplatz 1, 10117, Berlin, Germany
| | - Bernd Hamm
- Department of Radiology, Charité, Charitéplatz 1, 10117, Berlin, Germany
| | - Marcus R Makowski
- Department of Radiology, Charité, Charitéplatz 1, 10117, Berlin, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
Amer HA, Schmitzberger F, Ingold-Heppner B, Kussmaul J, El Tohamy MF, Tantawy HI, Hamm B, Makowski M, Fallenberg EM. Digital breast tomosynthesis versus full-field digital mammography-Which modality provides more accurate prediction of margin status in specimen radiography? Eur J Radiol 2017; 93:258-264. [PMID: 28668424 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2017.05.041] [Citation(s) in RCA: 14] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/26/2016] [Revised: 05/25/2017] [Accepted: 05/29/2017] [Indexed: 02/01/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES To evaluate the reliability of tumor margin assessment in specimen radiography (SR) using digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) and full-field digital mammography (FFDM) in comparison to postoperative histopathology margin status as the gold standard. METHODS After ethics committee approval, 102 consecutive patients who underwent breast conservative surgery for nonpalpable proven breast cancer were prospectively included. All patients underwent ultrasound/mammography-guided wire localization of their lesions. After excision, each specimen was marked for orientation and imaged using FFDM and DBT. Two blinded radiologists (R1, R2) independently analyzed images acquired with both modalities. Readers identified in which direction the lesion was closest to the specimen margin and to measure the margin width. Their findings were compared with the final histopathological analysis. True positive margin status was defined as a margin measuring <1mm for invasive cancer and 5mm for ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) at imaging and pathology. RESULTS For FFDM, correct margin direction was identified in 45 cases (44%) by R1 and in 37 cases (36%) by R2. For DBT, 69 cases (68%) were correctly identified by R1 and 70 cases (69%) by R2. Overall accuracy was 40% for FFDM and 69% for DBT; the difference was statistically significant (p<0.0001). Sensitivity in terms of correct assessment of margin status was significantly better for DBT than FFDM (77% versus 62%). CONCLUSION SR using DBT is significantly superior to FFDM regarding identification of the closest margin and sensitivity in assessment of margin status.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Heba A Amer
- Dept of Radiology, Zagazig University Hospitals, Zagazig, Egypt; Clinic of Radiology, Charité, Campus Virchow-Klinikum, Augustenburger Platz 1, 13353 Berlin, Germany
| | - Florian Schmitzberger
- Clinic of Radiology, Charité, Campus Virchow-Klinikum, Augustenburger Platz 1, 13353 Berlin, Germany.
| | | | - Julia Kussmaul
- Clinic of Radiology, Charité Campus Mitte, Charitéplatz 1, 10117 Berlin, Germany.
| | | | - Hazim I Tantawy
- Dept of Radiology, Zagazig University Hospitals, Zagazig, Egypt
| | - B Hamm
- Clinic of Radiology, Charité, Campus Virchow-Klinikum, Augustenburger Platz 1, 13353 Berlin, Germany.
| | - M Makowski
- Clinic of Gynacolgy and Breast Center, Charité Campus Mitte, Charitéplatz 1, 10117 Berlin, Germany.
| | - Eva M Fallenberg
- Clinic of Radiology, Charité, Campus Virchow-Klinikum, Augustenburger Platz 1, 13353 Berlin, Germany.
| |
Collapse
|
18
|
Adams LC, Böker SM, Bender YY, Diederichs G, Fallenberg EM, Wagner M, Hamm B, Makowski MR. Diagnostic accuracy of susceptibility-weighted magnetic resonance imaging for the evaluation of pineal gland calcification. PLoS One 2017; 12:e0172764. [PMID: 28278291 PMCID: PMC5344338 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0172764] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/21/2016] [Accepted: 02/09/2017] [Indexed: 12/13/2022] Open
Abstract
Objectives To determine the diagnostic performance of susceptibility-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (SWMR) for the detection of pineal gland calcifications (PGC) compared to conventional magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) sequences, using computed tomography (CT) as a reference standard. Methods 384 patients who received a 1.5 Tesla MRI scan including SWMR sequences and a CT scan of the brain between January 2014 and October 2016 were retrospectively evaluated. 346 patients were included in the analysis, of which 214 showed PGC on CT scans. To assess correlation between imaging modalities, the maximum calcification diameter was used. Sensitivity and specificity and intra- and interobserver reliability were calculated for SWMR and conventional MRI sequences. Results SWMR reached a sensitivity of 95% (95% CI: 91%-97%) and a specificity of 96% (95% CI: 91%-99%) for the detection of PGC, whereas conventional MRI achieved a sensitivity of 43% (95% CI: 36%-50%) and a specificity of 96% (95% CI: 91%-99%). Detection rates for calcifications in SWMR and conventional MRI differed significantly (95% versus 43%, p<0.001). Diameter measurements between SWMR and CT showed a close correlation (R2 = 0.85, p<0.001) with a slight but not significant overestimation of size (SWMR: 6.5 mm ± 2.5; CT: 5.9 mm ± 2.4, p = 0.02). Interobserver-agreement for diameter measurements was excellent on SWMR (ICC = 0.984, p < 0.0001). Conclusions Combining SWMR magnitude and phase information enables the accurate detection of PGC and offers a better diagnostic performance than conventional MRI with CT as a reference standard.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lisa C. Adams
- Department of Radiology, Charité, Berlin, Germany
- * E-mail:
| | | | | | | | | | | | - Bernd Hamm
- Department of Radiology, Charité, Berlin, Germany
| | | |
Collapse
|
19
|
Adams LC, Böker SM, Bender YY, Fallenberg EM, Wagner M, Buchert R, Hamm B, Makowski MR. Assessment of intracranial meningioma-associated calcifications using susceptibility-weighted MRI. J Magn Reson Imaging 2017; 46:1177-1186. [PMID: 28106942 DOI: 10.1002/jmri.25614] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/19/2016] [Accepted: 12/12/2016] [Indexed: 11/08/2022] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE To determine the diagnostic accuracy of susceptibility-weighted MRI (SW-MRI) for the detection of intracranial meningioma-associated calcifications compared with standard MR sequences, using computed tomography (CT) as a reference standard. MATERIALS AND METHODS 354 patients, who had received both a CT and a 1.5 Tesla clinical brain MRI with SW-MRI sequences between January 2014 and July 2016, were retrospectively evaluated and 316 patients were included. Calcification diameter was used to assess correlation between imaging modalities. Sensitivity and specificity as well as intra- and interobserver agreement were calculated for SW-MRI and standard MRI sequences when compared with reference standard CT. RESULTS Fifty patients had positive findings for intracranial meningioma-associated calcifications on CT scans. SW-MRI reached a sensitivity of 94% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 83-99%) and a specificity of 95% (95% CI: 92-98%) for the detection of meningioma-associated calcifications, while standard MRI yielded a sensitivity of 64% (95% CI: 49-77%) and a specificity of 94% (95% CI: 90-96%). Diameter measurements between SW-MRI and CT showed a close correlation (R2 = 0.99; P < 0.001) with a slight overestimation of size, which, however, did not reach significance level (SW-MRI: 8.2 mm ± 7.1; CT: 6.8 mm ± 6.4; P = 0.29). Compared with standard MRI, SW-MRI showed a better interobserver agreement for size measurements of calcifications. CONCLUSION SW-MRI enables a reliable detection of intracranial meningioma-associated calcifications by using CT as a reference and offers a higher diagnostic accuracy than standard MRI. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE 3 Technical Efficacy: Stage 2 J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2017;46:1177-1186.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lisa C Adams
- Department of Radiology, Charité, Charitéplatz, Berlin, Germany
| | - Sarah M Böker
- Department of Radiology, Charité, Charitéplatz, Berlin, Germany
| | - Yvonne Y Bender
- Department of Radiology, Charité, Charitéplatz, Berlin, Germany
| | - Eva M Fallenberg
- Department of Radiology, Charité, Augustenburger Platz, Berlin, Germany
| | - Moritz Wagner
- Department of Radiology, Charité, Charitéplatz, Berlin, Germany
| | - Ralph Buchert
- Department of Radiology, Charité, Charitéplatz, Berlin, Germany
| | - Bernd Hamm
- Department of Radiology, Charité, Charitéplatz, Berlin, Germany
| | | |
Collapse
|
20
|
Fallenberg EM, Schmitzberger FF, Amer H, Ingold-Heppner B, Balleyguier C, Diekmann F, Engelken F, Mann RM, Renz DM, Bick U, Hamm B, Dromain C. Contrast-enhanced spectral mammography vs. mammography and MRI - clinical performance in a multi-reader evaluation. Eur Radiol 2016; 27:2752-2764. [PMID: 27896471 DOI: 10.1007/s00330-016-4650-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 127] [Impact Index Per Article: 15.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/14/2016] [Accepted: 10/17/2016] [Indexed: 11/29/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES To compare the diagnostic performance of contrast-enhanced spectral mammography (CESM) to digital mammography (MG) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in a prospective two-centre, multi-reader study. METHODS One hundred seventy-eight women (mean age 53 years) with invasive breast cancer and/or DCIS were included after ethics board approval. MG, CESM and CESM + MG were evaluated by three blinded radiologists based on amended ACR BI-RADS criteria. MRI was assessed by another group of three readers. Receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curves were compared. Size measurements for the 70 lesions detected by all readers in each modality were correlated with pathology. RESULTS Reading results for 604 lesions were available (273 malignant, 4 high-risk, 327 benign). The area under the ROC curve was significantly larger for CESM alone (0.84) and CESM + MG (0.83) compared to MG (0.76) (largest advantage in dense breasts) while it was not significantly different from MRI (0.85). Pearson correlation coefficients for size comparison were 0.61 for MG, 0.69 for CESM, 0.70 for CESM + MG and 0.79 for MRI. CONCLUSIONS This study showed that CESM, alone and in combination with MG, is as accurate as MRI but is superior to MG for lesion detection. Patients with dense breasts benefitted most from CESM with the smallest additional dose compared to MG. KEY POINTS • CESM has comparable diagnostic performance (ROC-AUC) to MRI for breast cancer diagnostics. • CESM in combination with MG does not improve diagnostic performance. • CESM has lower sensitivity but higher specificity than MRI. • Sensitivity differences are more pronounced in dense and not significant in non-dense breasts. • CESM and MRI are significantly superior to MG, particularly in dense breasts.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Eva M Fallenberg
- Clinic of Radiology, Campus Virchow-Klinikum, Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Augustenburger Platz 1, 13353, Berlin, Germany.
| | - Florian F Schmitzberger
- Clinic of Radiology, Campus Virchow-Klinikum, Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Augustenburger Platz 1, 13353, Berlin, Germany
| | - Heba Amer
- Clinic of Radiology, Campus Virchow-Klinikum, Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Augustenburger Platz 1, 13353, Berlin, Germany
| | | | | | - Felix Diekmann
- Department of Medical Imaging, St. Joseph-Stift Bremen, Bremen, Germany
| | - Florian Engelken
- Clinic of Radiology, Campus Virchow-Klinikum, Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Augustenburger Platz 1, 13353, Berlin, Germany
| | - Ritse M Mann
- Department of Radiology, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Diane M Renz
- Department of Radiology, Universitätsklinikum Jena, Jena, Germany
| | - Ulrich Bick
- Clinic of Radiology, Campus Virchow-Klinikum, Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Augustenburger Platz 1, 13353, Berlin, Germany
| | - Bernd Hamm
- Clinic of Radiology, Campus Virchow-Klinikum, Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Augustenburger Platz 1, 13353, Berlin, Germany
| | - Clarisse Dromain
- Department of Radiology, Gustave Roussy Cancer Campus, Villejuif, France
| |
Collapse
|
21
|
Sardanelli F, Fallenberg EM, Clauser P, Trimboli RM, Camps-Herrero J, Helbich TH, Forrai G. Mammography: an update of the EUSOBI recommendations on information for women. Insights Imaging 2016; 8:11-18. [PMID: 27854006 PMCID: PMC5265195 DOI: 10.1007/s13244-016-0531-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 61] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/27/2016] [Accepted: 10/24/2016] [Indexed: 12/16/2022] Open
Abstract
Abstract This article summarises the information to be offered to women about mammography. After a delineation of the aim of early diagnosis of breast cancer, the difference between screening mammography and diagnostic mammography is explained. The need to bring images and reports from the previous mammogram (and from other recent breast imaging examinations) is highlighted. Mammography technique and procedure are described with particular attention to discomfort and pain experienced by a small number of women who undergo the test. Information is given on the recall during a screening programme and on the request for further work-up after a diagnostic mammography. The logic of the mammography report and of classification systems such as R1-R5 and BI-RADS is illustrated, and brief but clear information is given about the diagnostic performance of the test, with particular reference to interval cancers, i.e., those cancers that are missed at screening mammography. Moreover, the breast cancer risk due to radiation exposure from mammography is compared to the reduction in mortality obtained with the test, and the concept of overdiagnosis is presented with a reliable estimation of its extent. Information about new mammographic technologies (tomosynthesis and contrast-enhanced spectral mammography) is also given. Finally, frequently asked questions are answered. Key Points • Direct digital mammography should be preferred to film-screen or phosphor plates. • Screening (in asymptomatic women) should be distinguished from diagnosis (in symptomatic women). • A breast symptom has to be considered even after a negative mammogram. • Digital breast tomosynthesis increases cancer detection and decreases the recall rate. • Contrast-enhanced spectral mammography can help in cancer detection and lesion characterisation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Francesco Sardanelli
- Department of Biomedical Sciences for Health, University of Milan, Milan, Italy.
- Department of Radiology, Research Hospital (IRCCS) Policlinico San Donato, San Donato Milanese, Milan, Italy.
| | - Eva M Fallenberg
- Department of Radiology, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Campus Virchow-Klinikum, Berlin, Germany
| | - Paola Clauser
- Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-guided Therapy, Division of Molecular and Gender Imaging, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - Rubina M Trimboli
- Integrative Biomedical Research PhD Program, Università degli Studi di Milano, Milan, Italy
| | | | - Thomas H Helbich
- Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-guided Therapy, Division of Molecular and Gender Imaging, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - Gabor Forrai
- Department of Radiology, Duna Medical Center, Budapest, Hungary
| |
Collapse
|
22
|
Abstract
Purpose: To assess patency and lumen visibility of coronary artery stents by multislice-CT angiography (MSCTA) in comparison with conventional coronary angiography as the standard of reference. Material and Methods: 47 stents of 13 different types were evaluated in 29 patients. MSCTA was performed on a 4-slice scanner with a standard coronary protocol (detector collimation 4 × 1 mm; table feed 1.5 mm/rotation, 400 mAs, 120 kV). Image evaluation was performed by two readers who were blinded to the reports from the catheter angiography. MIP reconstructions were evaluated for image quality on a 4-point scale (1 = poor, 4 = excellent) and stent patency (contrast distal to the stent as an indirect patency sign). Axial images and multiplanar reformations through the stents were used for assessment of stent lumen visibility (measurement of the visible stent lumen diameter) and detection of relevant in-stent stenosis (≥50%). Results: Image quality was fair to good on average (score 2.64 ± 1.0) and depended on the heart rate (heart rate 45–60: average score 3.2, heart rate 61–70: average score 2.8, heart rate >71: average score 1.4). Thirty-seven stents were correctly classified as patent, 1 was correctly classified as occluded and 9 stents were not assessible due to insufficient image quality because of triggering artifacts. Parts of the stent lumen could be visualized in 30 cases. On average, 20–40% of the stent lumen diameter was visible. Twenty-five stents were correctly classified as having no stenosis, 1 was falsely classified as stenosed, 1 was correctly classified as occluded. In 20 stents lumen visibility was not sufficient for stenosis evaluation. Conclusion: Although the stent lumen may be partly visualized in most stents, a reliable evaluation of in-stent stenoses does not seem practical by 4-slice MSCT. Nevertheless, for stent patency evaluation, MS-CTA might provide valuable clinical information. With submillimeter MSCT (e.g., 16-slice scanners) and more sophisticated reconstruction algorithms, further improvements may be expected.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- D Maintz
- Department of Clinical Radiology, Department of Cardiology and Angiology, University of Münster, Münster; Germany.
| | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
23
|
Fallenberg EM, Renz DM, Karle B, Schwenke C, Ingod-Heppner B, Reles A, Engelken FJ, Huppertz A, Hamm B, Taupitz M. Intraindividual, randomized comparison of the macrocyclic contrast agents gadobutrol and gadoterate meglumine in breast magnetic resonance imaging. Eur Radiol 2014; 25:837-49. [PMID: 25249313 DOI: 10.1007/s00330-014-3426-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 17] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/27/2014] [Revised: 08/19/2014] [Accepted: 08/29/2014] [Indexed: 11/29/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES To compare intraindividually two macrocyclic contrast agents - gadobutrol and gadoterate meglumine (Gd-DOTA) - for dynamic and quantitative assessment of relative enhancement (RE) in benign and malignant breast lesions. METHODS This was an ethically approved, prospective, single-centre, randomized, crossover study in 52 women with suspected breast lesions referred for magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Each patient underwent one examination with gadobutrol and one with Gd-DOTA (0.1 mmol/kg BW) on a 1.5 T system 1 - 7 days apart. Dynamic, T1-weighted, 3D gradient echo sequences were acquired under identical conditions. Quantitative evaluation with at least three regions of interest (ROI) per lesion was performed. Primary endpoint was RE during the initial postcontrast phase after the first and second dynamic acquisition, and peak RE. All lesions were histologically proven; differences between the examinations were evaluated. RESULTS Forty-five patients with a total of 11 benign and 34 malignant lesions were assessed. Mean RE was significantly higher for gadobutrol than Gd-DOTA (p < 0.0001). Gadobutrol showed significantly less washout (64.4 %) than Gd-DOTA (75.4 %) in malignant lesions (p = 0.048) CONCLUSIONS: Gadobutrol has higher RE values compared with Gd-DOTA, whereas Gd-DOTA shows more marked washout in malignant lesions. This might improve the detection of breast lesions and influence the specificity of breast MRI-imaging.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Eva M Fallenberg
- Department of Radiology, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Campus Virchow-Klinikum, Augustenburger Platz 1, 13353, Berlin, Germany,
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
24
|
Böttcher J, Renz DM, Zahm DM, Pfeil A, Fallenberg EM, Streitparth F, Maurer MH, Hamm B, Engelken FJ. Response to neoadjuvant treatment of invasive ductal breast carcinomas including outcome evaluation: MRI analysis by an automatic CAD system in comparison to visual evaluation. Acta Oncol 2014; 53:759-68. [PMID: 24299492 DOI: 10.3109/0284186x.2013.852688] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/27/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The aim of this study was to evaluate imaging-based response to standardized neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) regimen by dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance mammography (DCE-MRM), whereas MR images were analyzed by an automatic computer-assisted diagnosis (CAD) system in comparison to visual evaluation. MRI findings were correlated with histopathologic response to NACT and also with the occurrence of metastases in a follow-up analysis. PATIENTS AND METHODS Fifty-four patients with invasive ductal breast carcinomas received two identical MRI examinations (before and after NACT; 1.5T, contrast medium gadoteric acid). Pre-therapeutic images were compared with post-therapeutic examinations by CAD and two blinded human observers, considering morphologic and dynamic MRI parameters as well as tumor size measurements. Imaging-assessed response to NACT was compared with histopathologically verified response. All clinical, histopathologic, and DCE-MRM parameters were correlated with the occurrence of distant metastases. RESULTS Initial and post-initial dynamic parameters significantly changed between pre- and post-therapeutic DCE-MRM. Visually evaluated DCE-MRM revealed sensitivity of 85.7%, specificity of 91.7%, and diagnostic accuracy of 87.0% in evaluating the response to NACT compared to histopathology. CAD analysis led to more false-negative findings (37.0%) compared to visual evaluation (11.1%), resulting in sensitivity of 52.4%, specificity of 100.0%, and diagnostic accuracy of 63.0%. The following dynamic MRI parameters showed significant associations to occurring metastases: Post-initial curve type before NACT (entire lesions, calculated by CAD) and post-initial curve type of the most enhancing tumor parts after NACT (calculated by CAD and manually). CONCLUSIONS In the accurate evaluation of response to neoadjuvant treatment, CAD systems can provide useful additional information due to the high specificity; however, they cannot replace visual imaging evaluation. Besides traditional prognostic factors, contrast medium-induced dynamic MRI parameters reveal significant associations to patient outcome, i.e. occurrence of distant metastases.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Joachim Böttcher
- Institute of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, SRH Clinic Gera , Gera , Germany
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
25
|
|
26
|
Renz DM, Zahm DM, Engelken FJ, Pfeil A, Fallenberg EM, Streitparth F, Maurer MH, Hamm B, Böttcher J. Diagnostischer Stellenwert computerassistierter Auswertungen von MR-Mammografien für die Beurteilung des Erfolgs einer neoadjuvanten Chemotherapie. ROFO-FORTSCHR RONTG 2014. [DOI: 10.1055/s-0034-1373587] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/25/2022]
|
27
|
Fallenberg EM, Dromain C, Diekmann F, Engelken F, Krohn M, Singh JM, Ingold-Heppner B, Winzer KJ, Bick U, Renz DM. Contrast-enhanced spectral mammography versus MRI: Initial results in the detection of breast cancer and assessment of tumour size. Eur Radiol 2013; 24:256-64. [PMID: 24048724 DOI: 10.1007/s00330-013-3007-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 194] [Impact Index Per Article: 17.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/20/2013] [Revised: 07/04/2013] [Accepted: 07/25/2013] [Indexed: 11/27/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- E M Fallenberg
- Clinic of Radiology, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Augustenburger Platz 1, 13353, Berlin, Germany,
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
28
|
Fallenberg EM, Dimitrijevic L, Diekmann F, Diekmann S, Kettritz U, Poellinger A, Bick U, Winzer KJ, Engelken F, Renz DM. Impact of magnification views on the characterization of microcalcifications in digital mammography. ROFO-FORTSCHR RONTG 2013; 186:274-80. [PMID: 23999780 DOI: 10.1055/s-0033-1350572] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/26/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE To evaluate the additional benefit of true geometric (air-gap) magnification views for the characterization of microcalcifications in digital mammography. MATERIALS AND METHODS After ethical approval, we retrospectively reviewed patient records to identify 100 patients with suspicious microcalcifications (35 malignant, 65 benign) who had a standard digital mammography and an additional digital magnification view in the same projection within three months. All images were obtained using an amorphous silicon-based full-field digital system (Senographe 2000 D, GE Healthcare, Chalfont St. Giles, UK). Images were independently analyzed by six board-certified radiologists. The probability of malignancy was estimated using first standard contact mammography alone (MG) and then mammography in combination with the magnification view (MG+MAG) using a modified Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) classification system and a percentage scale. Results were compared using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis. In addition, readers assessed the subjective visibility of the calcifications. RESULTS For all six readers combined, the area under the curve (AUC) was 0.664 ± 0.052 for MG and 0.813 ± 0.042 for MG + MAG, resulting in a statistically significant improvement of 0.148 ± 0.120. Each reader had a higher AUC for MG + MAG than MG, with the improvement being statistically significant in four of the six readers. In 76.34 % of the cases, MG + MAG resulted in better visibility of calcifications compared with mammography alone. In 33 % slightly more and in 39 % significantly more calcifications were found. CONCLUSION Even in digital mammography with the option of using electronic magnification (zoom) at the viewing workstation, true geometric (air-gap) magnification views remain important for the visibility and correct classification of microcalcifications and for the assessment of their extent.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- E M Fallenberg
- Clinic of Radiology, Campus Virchow-Klinikum, Charité - Universitätsmedizin, Berlin
| | - L Dimitrijevic
- Institute of diagnostic and interventional Radiology, DRK-Kliniken Berlin-Mitte, Berlin
| | - F Diekmann
- Department of Medical Imaging, St. Joseph-Stift, Bremen
| | | | - U Kettritz
- Reference-Centre of Mammography-Screening, Berlin
| | - A Poellinger
- Clinic of Radiology, Campus Virchow-Klinikum, Charité - Universitätsmedizin, Berlin
| | - U Bick
- Department of Radiology, Campus Charité Mitte, Charité - Universitätsmedizin, Berlin
| | - K J Winzer
- Breast Center, Department of Gynecology, Campus Charité Mitte, Charité - Universitätsmedizin, Berlin
| | - F Engelken
- Department of Radiology, Campus Charité Mitte, Charité - Universitätsmedizin, Berlin
| | - D M Renz
- Clinic of Radiology, Campus Virchow-Klinikum, Charité - Universitätsmedizin, Berlin
| |
Collapse
|
29
|
Bick U, Engelken F, Diederichs G, Dzyuballa R, Ortmann M, Fallenberg EM. MRI of the breast as part of the assessment in population-based mammography screening. ROFO-FORTSCHR RONTG 2013; 185:849-56. [PMID: 23740312 DOI: 10.1055/s-0033-1335518] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/26/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE To evaluate the indications and impact of MRI of the breast as an assessment modality in population-based mammography screening. MATERIALS AND METHODS 135 consecutive contrast-enhanced MRI exams of the breast, which were performed between April 2007 and October 2012 as part of the assessment at one mammography screening unit before issuance of a final management recommendation (e. g. definitely benign or malignant), were retrospectively reviewed. Overall, the cases with an MRI exam of the breast during assessment represent less than 2 % of all assessment cases at this screening unit. All MRI exams were performed as part of the routine clinical care on a 1.5 T or 3 T whole-body magnet using a standard dynamic breast MRI protocol. RESULTS In the 135 study patients, a total of 30 malignancies in 28 patients were found, including two bilateral cancers. One patient was diagnosed with a non-Hodgkin lymphoma, and of the remaining 29 malignant lesions, 3 (10 %) were in-situ cancers (DCIS) and 26 (90 %) were invasive breast cancers including 3 multifocal or multicentric cancers. All 26 detected invasive cancers were lymph-node negative and 25/29 (86 %) of the detected breast cancer were early stage cancers (stage 0 or 1). 53 of the 135 MRI exams (39.3 %) were suspicious for malignancy (BIRADS 4 or 5) with no cancer missed by MRI. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of the MRI on a per patient basis were 100 %, 77 %, 0.53, and 1, respectively. CONCLUSION MRI is a useful problem-solving tool in mammography screening assessment with a high sensitivity and an acceptable positive predictive value.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- U Bick
- Institut für Radiologie, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin.
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
30
|
Renz DM, Diekmann F, Schmitzberger FF, Pietsch H, Fallenberg EM, Durmus T, Huppertz A, Böttcher J, Bick U, Hamm B, Lawaczeck R. Pharmakokinetischer Ansatz in der dynamischen MR-Mammografie zur Simulation von Signalintensitäts-Zeitkurven in Abhängigkeit von der Tumorflussverweildauer. ROFO-FORTSCHR RONTG 2013. [DOI: 10.1055/s-0033-1346599] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/26/2022]
|
31
|
Engelken F, Bremme R, Bick U, Hammann-Kloss S, Fallenberg EM. Factors affecting the rate of false positive marks in CAD in full-field digital mammography. Eur J Radiol 2012; 81:e844-8. [DOI: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2012.02.017] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/01/2011] [Revised: 02/09/2012] [Accepted: 02/29/2012] [Indexed: 11/28/2022]
|
32
|
Dromain C, Thibault F, Diekmann F, Fallenberg EM, Jong RA, Koomen M, Hendrick RE, Tardivon A, Toledano A. Dual-energy contrast-enhanced digital mammography: initial clinical results of a multireader, multicase study. Breast Cancer Res 2012; 14:R94. [PMID: 22697607 PMCID: PMC3446357 DOI: 10.1186/bcr3210] [Citation(s) in RCA: 139] [Impact Index Per Article: 11.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/13/2011] [Revised: 05/15/2012] [Accepted: 06/14/2012] [Indexed: 11/10/2022] Open
Abstract
INTRODUCTION The purpose of this study was to compare the diagnostic accuracy of dual-energy contrast-enhanced digital mammography (CEDM) as an adjunct to mammography (MX) ± ultrasonography (US) with the diagnostic accuracy of MX ± US alone. METHODS One hundred ten consenting women with 148 breast lesions (84 malignant, 64 benign) underwent two-view dual-energy CEDM in addition to MX and US using a specially modified digital mammography system (Senographe DS, GE Healthcare). Reference standard was histology for 138 lesions and follow-up for 12 lesions. Six radiologists from 4 institutions interpreted the images using high-resolution softcopy workstations. Confidence of presence (5-point scale), probability of cancer (7-point scale), and BI-RADS scores were evaluated for each finding. Sensitivity, specificity and ROC curve areas were estimated for each reader and overall. Visibility of findings on MX ± CEDM and MX ± US was evaluated with a Likert scale. RESULTS The average per-lesion sensitivity across all readers was significantly higher for MX ± US ± CEDM than for MX ± US (0.78 vs. 0.71 using BIRADS, p = 0.006). All readers improved their clinical performance and the average area under the ROC curve was significantly superior for MX ± US ± CEDM than for MX ± US ((0.87 vs 0.83, p = 0.045). Finding visibility was similar or better on MX ± CEDM than MX ± US in 80% of cases. CONCLUSIONS Dual-energy contrast-enhanced digital mammography as an adjunct to MX ± US improves diagnostic accuracy compared to MX ± US alone. Addition of iodinated contrast agent to MX facilitates the visualization of breast lesions.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Clarisse Dromain
- Department of Radiology, Institut de cancérologie Gustave-Roussy, 39 rue Camille Desmoulin, Villejuif, 94805 France.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
33
|
Renz DM, Böttcher J, Diekmann F, Poellinger A, Maurer MH, Pfeil A, Streitparth F, Collettini F, Bick U, Hamm B, Fallenberg EM. Detection and classification of contrast-enhancing masses by a fully automatic computer-assisted diagnosis system for breast MRI. J Magn Reson Imaging 2012; 35:1077-88. [DOI: 10.1002/jmri.23516] [Citation(s) in RCA: 40] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/09/2010] [Accepted: 10/26/2011] [Indexed: 12/27/2022] Open
|
34
|
Hewing B, Ghaeni L, Dreger H, Fallenberg EM, Panda A, Baumann G, Borges AC. Echocardiographic diagnosis, management and monitoring of pulmonary embolism with right heart thrombus in a patient with myotonic dystrophy: a case report. Cardiovasc Ultrasound 2010; 8:18. [PMID: 20470437 PMCID: PMC2887806 DOI: 10.1186/1476-7120-8-18] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/26/2010] [Accepted: 05/16/2010] [Indexed: 11/25/2022] Open
Abstract
Acute pulmonary embolism (PE) is a common disease which frequently results in life-threatening right ventricular (RV) failure. High-risk PE, presenting with hypotension, shock, RV dysfunction or right heart thrombus is associated with a high mortality, particularly during the first few hours. Accordingly, it is important to commence effective therapy as soon as possible. In the case described in this report, a 49-year-old woman with myotonic dystrophy type 1 presented with acute respiratory failure and hypotension. Transthoracic echocardiography showed signs of right heart failure and a mobile right heart mass highly suspicious of a thrombus. Based on echocardiographic findings, acute thrombolysis was performed resulting in hemodynamic stabilization of the patient and complete resolution of the right heart thrombus. This case underscores the important role of transthoracic echocardiography for the diagnosis, management and monitoring of PE and underlines the efficacy and safety of thrombolysis in the treatment of PE associated with right heart thrombus.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Bernd Hewing
- Medizinische Klinik für Kardiologie und Angiologie, Campus Mitte, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Germany.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
35
|
Renz DM, Böttcher J, Diekmann F, Pöllinger A, Fallenberg EM, Maurer MH, Hamm B, Bick U. Evaluation eines vollautomatischen CAD-Systems zur Detektion und Klassifikation von Herdbefunden in der MR-Mammographie. ROFO-FORTSCHR RONTG 2010. [DOI: 10.1055/s-0030-1252868] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/19/2022]
|
36
|
Engelken FJ, Meyer H, Fallenberg EM, Juran R, Bick U, Diekmann F. Intraindividueller Vergleich der mittleren Organdosis bei zwei Mammographiegeräten unter Verwendung unterschiedlicher Anoden/Filterkombinationen. ROFO-FORTSCHR RONTG 2009. [DOI: 10.1055/s-0029-1221509] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/20/2022]
|
37
|
Fallenberg EM. Drahtmarkierungen und intraoperative Bildgebung. ROFO-FORTSCHR RONTG 2008. [DOI: 10.1055/s-2008-1073333] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/21/2022]
|
38
|
Beyer F, Zierott L, Fallenberg EM, Juergens KU, Stoeckel J, Heindel W, Wormanns D. Comparison of sensitivity and reading time for the use of computer-aided detection (CAD) of pulmonary nodules at MDCT as concurrent or second reader. Eur Radiol 2007; 17:2941-7. [PMID: 17929026 DOI: 10.1007/s00330-007-0667-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 66] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/04/2006] [Revised: 03/14/2007] [Accepted: 04/17/2007] [Indexed: 11/30/2022]
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to compare sensitivity for detection of pulmonary nodules in MDCT scans and reading time of radiologists when using CAD as the second reader (SR) respectively concurrent reader (CR). Four radiologists analyzed 50 chest MDCT scans chosen from clinical routine two times and marked all detected pulmonary nodules: first with CAD as CR (display of CAD results immediately in the reading session) and later (median 14 weeks) with CAD as SR (display of CAD markers after completion of first reading without CAD). A Siemens LungCAD prototype was used. Sensitivities for detection of nodules and reading times were recorded. Sensitivity of reading with CAD as SR was significantly higher than reading without CAD (p < 0.001) and CAD as CR (p < 0.001). For nodule size of 1.75 mm or above no significant sensitivity difference between CAD as CR and reading without CAD was observed; e.g., for nodules above 4 mm sensitivity was 68% without CAD, 68% with CAD as CR (p = 0.45) and 75% with CAD as SR (p < 0.001). Reading time was significantly shorter for CR (274 s) compared to reading without CAD (294 s; p = 0.04) and SR (337 s; p < 0.001). In our study CAD could either speed up reading of chest CT cases for pulmonary nodules without relevant loss of sensitivity when used as CR, or it increased sensitivity at the cost of longer reading times when used as SR.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- F Beyer
- Department of Clinical Radiology, University Hospital Muenster, Albert-Schweitzer-Str. 33, 48129, Muenster, Germany.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
39
|
Bullmann V, Fallenberg EM, Meier N, Fischbach R, Lerner T, Schulte TL, Osada N, Liljenqvist UR. The position of the aorta relative to the spine before and after anterior instrumentation in right thoracic scoliosis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2006; 31:1706-13. [PMID: 16816767 DOI: 10.1097/01.brs.0000224183.68795.a5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 27] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/01/2023]
Abstract
STUDY DESIGN Preoperative magnetic resonance images (MRI) and postoperative axial computed tomography (CT) scans in 25 consecutive patients with idiopathic right thoracic adolescent scoliosis (AIS) and anterior correction and fusion with a dual rod system were analyzed in a prospective study. OBJECTIVES Evaluation of the spatial relations between the vertebral body and the aorta and the relative migration of the aorta due to the anterior correction and instrumentation in right thoracic scoliosis patients. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA In anterior scoliosis surgery, bicortical screw purchase is performed to increase pullout strength. However, impingement of the aorta due to excessive contralateral screw penetration has been reported, especially after endoscopic instrumentation. For a safe screw placement, knowledge of both the preoperative topographic relation of aorta and vertebral body and its changes due to surgical correction is crucial. Recent studies reported on a more lateral and posterior position of the aorta in AIS patients. However, there are hardly any data on the changes of the aortic position after anterior curve correction available in the current literature. METHODS All 25 patients underwent an identical anterior surgical technique with standard open approach and dual rod instrumentation of the primary curve. Preoperative MRI and postoperative sequential CT scans of 180 vertebrae were analyzed with respect to following parameters: vertebral body width and depth, diameter of the aorta, closest distance between aorta and the vertebral body, the aorta-vertebral angle, and the position of the aorta in relation to the spinal canal. RESULTS Before surgery, the aorta is positioned posterolaterally with an aorta-vertebral angle of between 78 degrees and 92 degrees (between T5 and T10). Between T11 and L2, the aorta is positioned more anteromedially with an aorta-vertebral angle from 62 degrees (T11) to 16 degrees (L2). After surgery, the aorta has migrated from a posterolateral to a more anteromedial position. This migration is maximal at the apex vertebra with an average change of the aorta-vertebral angle of 31.4 degrees . Whereas the distance between the aorta and the vertebral body increases at the upper and lower fusion levels, the aorta moves significantly closer to the vertebral body at the curve apex due to surgical correction. In patients with thoracic hypokyphosis, the aorta is positioned significantly more posterior than in patients with hyperkyphosis. CONCLUSIONS This MRI and CT based study of 25 patients with thoracic AIS treated by standard open dual rod and dual screw instrumentation demonstrates a migration of the aorta by 31 degrees from a more posterolateral position before surgery to a more anteromedial position after surgery at the curve apex. Scoliosis surgeons should be aware of these changes; any excessive contralateral screw penetration must be avoided at any level.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Viola Bullmann
- Department of Orthopaedics, University Hospital of Muenster, Muenster, Germany.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
40
|
Beyer F, Zierott L, Fallenberg EM, Jürgens K, Stoeckel J, Heindel W, Wormanns D. Vergleich von Sensitivität und Befundungszeit bei Verwendung eines Systems zur computerunterstützen Detektion (CAD) von Lungenrundherden im MDCT als „concurrent reader“ oder R. ROFO-FORTSCHR RONTG 2006. [DOI: 10.1055/s-2006-940765] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/20/2022]
|
41
|
Klotz S, Fallenberg EM, Hoffmeier A, Tjan TDT, Scheld HH. Ventricular lateral wall rupture after myocardial infarction detected by means of multislice computed tomography. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2006; 131:226-7. [PMID: 16399317 DOI: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2005.08.044] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/05/2005] [Accepted: 08/17/2005] [Indexed: 11/29/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Stefan Klotz
- Department of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, University Hospital Muenster, Muenster, Germany.
| | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
42
|
Bullmann V, Fallenberg EM, Meier N, Fischbach R, Schulte TL, Heindel WL, Liljenqvist UR. Anterior dual rod instrumentation in idiopathic thoracic scoliosis: a computed tomography analysis of screw placement relative to the aorta and the spinal canal. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2005; 30:2078-83. [PMID: 16166899 DOI: 10.1097/01.brs.0000179083.84421.64] [Citation(s) in RCA: 24] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/01/2023]
Abstract
STUDY DESIGN Axial computed tomography scans (CT) in 20 consecutive patients with idiopathic right thoracic scoliosis and anterior correction and fusion with a dual rod dual screw system. OBJECTIVES CT evaluation of screw position in anterior dual rod instrumentation relative to the aorta and the spinal canal. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA In anterior scoliosis surgery, bicortical screw purchase is used to increase pullout strength. However, impingement of the aorta due to excessive contralateral screw penetration has been reported, especially after endoscopic instrumentation. Data on the accuracy of dual screw instrumentation in thoracic scoliosis are missing. METHODS All 20 patients underwent an identical anterior surgical technique with double thoracotomy approach and dual rod instrumentation of the primary curve. Postoperative sequential CT scans were analyzed with respect to following parameters: vertebral body width and depth, diameter of the aorta, distance from the aorta to the closest point of the vertebral body cortex, distance between the tip of the screws and the aorta, distance between the screw and the spinal canal, and the amount of contralateral screw penetration. A total amount of 226 screws were evaluated. RESULTS All screws were placed correctly without any critical proximity to the aorta or spinal canal. A total of 198 of 226 screws (88%) had a bicortical purchase. Thirteen screw tips (5.8%) were within 1 to 3 mm proximity to the aorta. All other screws were more than 3 mm distant from the aorta. The closest proximity of the screw tips to the thoracic aorta was found at the upper end vertebrae (T5, T6, or T7). There were no screws perforating the spinal canal. CONCLUSION Anterior instrumentation and correction of thoracic scoliosis with a dual rod dual screw system enable a correct and safe screw placement using a standard open approach. Excessive bicortical screw perforation should be avoided in order not to endanger the thoracic aorta.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Viola Bullmann
- Department of Orthopaedics, University Hospital of Muenster, Muenster, Germany.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
43
|
Abstract
We report on our experience with six patients with malignant sarcoma of the heart and show that long-term survival is possible after radical resection. At presentation, the 6 patients (3 male, 3 female) were 45.8 +/- 20 years old. Three patients are alive without evidence of metastases since 29.6 +/- 36.8 months, three patients died after 38 +/- 50.2 months due to distant metastases. Precise preoperative localization of the tumor by means of imaging techniques is very important. In some cases, radical surgery requires an ex situ procedure (autotransplantation). If necessary, the right heart can be resected almost completely, and reconstructed in the form of a Fontan-type circulation. A heart transplantation, as suggested by others, is not justified from our point of view, since prognosis is not better and donor organs are too rare. The results of radical resection are promising, but new concepts for treatment--in particular chemotherapy concepts--for these mostly middle-aged or young patients are required.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- A Hoffmeier
- Department of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, University Hospital of Münster, Muenster, Germany.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
44
|
Juergens KU, Fischbach R, Grude M, Maintz D, Fallenberg EM, Wichter T, Heindel W. Semiautomatisierte linksventrikuläre Funktionsdiagnostik mittels 16-Zeilen-Computertomographie des Herzens im Vergleich zur Steady-State-Free-Precession(SSFP)-Magnetresonanztomographie: Erste Ergebnisse. ROFO-FORTSCHR RONTG 2003. [DOI: 10.1055/s-2003-819924] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/19/2022]
|
45
|
Abstract
PURPOSE To assess patency and lumen visibility of coronary artery stents by multislice-CT angiography (MSCTA) in comparison with conventional coronary angiography as the standard of reference. MATERIAL AND METHODS 47 stents of 13 different types were evaluated in 29 patients. MSCTA was performed on a 4-slice scanner with a standard coronary protocol (detector collimation 4 x 1 mm; table feed 1.5 mm/rotation, 400 mAs, 120 kV). Image evaluation was performed by two readers who were blinded to the reports from the catheter angiography. MIP reconstructions were evaluated for image quality on a 4-point scale (1 = poor, 4 = excellent) and stent patency (contrast distal to the stent as an indirect patency sign). Axial images and multiplanar reformations through the stents were used for assessment of stent lumen visibility (measurement of the visible stent lumen diameter) and detection of relevant in-stent stenosis (> or =50%). RESULTS Image quality was fair to good on average (score 2.64 +/- 1.0) and depended on the heart rate (heart rate 45-60: average score 3.2, heart rate 61-70: average score 2.8, heart rate >71: average score 1.4). Thirty-seven stents were correctly classified as patent, 1 was correctly classified as occluded and 9 stents were not assessible due to insufficient image quality because of triggering artifacts. Parts of the stent lumen could be visualized in 30 cases. On average, 20-40% of the stent lumen diameter was visible. Twenty-five stents were correctly classified as having no stenosis, 1 was falsely classified as stenosed, 1 was correctly classified as occluded. In 20 stents lumen visibility was not sufficient for stenosis evaluation. CONCLUSION Although the stent lumen may be partly visualized in most stents, a reliable evaluation of in-stent stenoses does not seem practical by 4-slice MSCT. Nevertheless, for stent patency evaluation, MS-CTA might provide valuable clinical information. With submillimeter MSCT (e.g., 16-slice scanners) and more sophisticated reconstruction algorithms, further improvements may be expected.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- D Maintz
- Department of Clinical Radiology, Department of Cardiology and Angiology, University of Münster, Münster; Germany.
| | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
46
|
Abstract
The megadolichobasilar artery is a rare vascular disease, which usually becomes apparent either due to cerebral ischemia or due to compression of the brainstem or the cranial nerves, thereby leading to a large variety of neurological symptoms. We report on a patient who suffered a sudden right-sided deafness accompanied by vertigo and vomiting. Initially, an idiopathic sensorineural hearing loss was diagnosed and later on, after no improvement took place in spite of conservative therapy, a rupture of the round window membrane was suspected. Two weeks after the first symptoms had occurred the patient developed a hemiparesis on the left side.Radiology disclosed a dilated and partially thrombosed basilar artery as well as a paramedian pontine infarction. We therefore assumed that the patient's symptoms had been caused by thrombotic occlusion of the labyrinthine artery and several rami ad pontem. The article reviews the great variety of clinical symptoms caused by megadolichobasilar artery and discusses important therapeutic options.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- R Dziewas
- Klinik und Poliklinik für Neurologie, Universitätsklinikum Münster.
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
47
|
Harz C, Fallenberg EM, Schäfer R, Magnusson A, Clauss W, Heindel W, Tombach B. Two-center clinical study on the effect of chronic renal impairment on safety of iopromide 300 mg iodine/ml. Acad Radiol 2002; 9 Suppl 2:S535-9. [PMID: 12188331 DOI: 10.1016/s1076-6332(03)80286-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/26/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- C Harz
- Clinical Development Diagnostics, Schering AG, Berlin, Germany
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
48
|
Hoffmeier A, Semik M, Schmid C, Mesters RM, Castrucci M, Baba HA, Fallenberg EM, Scheld HH. [Primary Burkitt lymphoma of the heart--diagnosis and therapy]. Z Kardiol 2002; 91:347-51. [PMID: 12063708] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/25/2023]
Abstract
An 85-year-old patient suffered from progressive deterioration (NYHA III) for several months. Cardiac disease was suspected. Echocardiography as well as a CT scan of the heart revealed a heart tumor to be the cause. Tumor staging was negative. After transvenous biopsy, the diagnosis of a Burkitt lymphoma could be established. Due to the advanced age of the patient, the intended surgical therapy was turned down and the patient was treated with 6 courses of a potentially therapeutic chemotherapy (CHOP scheme), which was well tolerated by the patient. The following CT scan showed a complete remission of the tumor. Six months after chemotherapy the patient is in NYHA stage I.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- A Hoffmeier
- Klinik und Poliklinik für Thorax-, Herz- und Gefässchirurgie Universitätsklinik Münster Albert-Schweitzer-Str. 33, 48149 Münster, Germany.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
49
|
Reinecke H, Fallenberg EM, Fischbach R, Kerber S, Breithardt G, Scheld HH, Wichter T. Imaging a coronary artery aneurysm. Ann Thorac Surg 2001; 72:2145. [PMID: 11789823 DOI: 10.1016/s0003-4975(01)02732-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/30/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- H Reinecke
- Department of Cardiology and Angiology, Institute for Arteriosclerosis Research, Hospital of the Westfälische Wilhelms-University, Münster, Germany.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
50
|
Abstract
A 60-year-old woman suffered from right-sided pain in the back and dyspnea suspicious for chronic pulmonary thromboembolism. Since computed tomography demonstrated a progressive filling defect within the left pulmonary artery, a transvenous biopsy was taken, which demonstrated malignant sarcoma. The patient underwent left-sided pneumonectomy with the aid of cardiopulmonary bypass. In case of a suspected 'chronic' pulmonary embolism with occlusion of a main pulmonary artery, as may be seen with imaging techniques, a sarcomatous disease should be ruled out, especially if there are no coagulation disorders, and the tumor obliterations progress in serial CT scans despite effective anticoagulation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- A Hoffmeier
- Klinik und Poliklinik für Thorax-, Herz- und Gefässchirurgie, Universitätsklinik Münster, Albert Schweitzer Strasse 33, D-48149, Münster, Germany.
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|