Comparison of lesion size estimated by dynamic MR imaging, mammography and histopathology in breast neoplasms

被引:30
作者
Wiberg, MK [1 ]
Aspelin, P
Sylvan, M
Boné, B
机构
[1] Huddinge Univ Hosp, Karolinska Inst, Surg Sci Ctr, Dept Diagnost Radiol, S-14186 Huddinge, Sweden
[2] Huddinge Univ Hosp, Karolinska Inst, Dept Pathol, S-14186 Huddinge, Sweden
关键词
MRI; breast; malignant; histopathology; size;
D O I
10.1007/s00330-002-1718-2
中图分类号
R8 [特种医学]; R445 [影像诊断学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100207 ; 1009 ;
摘要
To evaluate the accordance of size measurements of malignant breast lesions 65 women with 76 malignant lesions were preoperatively examined with triple diagnosis (mammography was performed in three views with additional views if necessary) and dynamic MR imaging using a subtraction technique with a 3D T1-weighted sequence. Maximum lesion size at histopathology was used as gold standard and compared with maximum lesion size at MRI and mammography. All measurements were made independently for each method. Histopathology verified 48 invasive, 5 in situ, and 23 mixed lesions. No significant difference was found for the pure invasive lesions (p=0.366). In the mixed lesions a slightly better result for MRI was indicated (p=0.116), although there was a great spread. Only five pure in situ lesions were assessed, too few to draw any statistical conclusions (p>0.5). An overall difference indicated a slight superiority of MRI (p=0.097). The MR imaging and mammography are both good at measuring the size of detected invasive breast malignancies. The total sizes of mixed lesions are frequently underestimated by both MRI and mammography, although the invasive parts were equally well described and measured with both methods.
引用
收藏
页码:1207 / 1212
页数:6
相关论文
共 19 条
[1]   False-negative MR imaging of malignant breast tumors [J].
Boetes, C ;
Strijk, SP ;
Holland, R ;
Barentsz, JO ;
VanderSluis, RF ;
Ruijs, JHJ .
EUROPEAN RADIOLOGY, 1997, 7 (08) :1231-1234
[2]   BREAST-TUMORS - COMPARATIVE ACCURACY OF MR-IMAGING RELATIVE TO MAMMOGRAPHY AND US FOR DEMONSTRATING EXTENT [J].
BOETES, C ;
MUS, RDM ;
HOLLAND, R ;
BARENTSZ, JO ;
STRIJK, SP ;
WOBBES, T ;
HENDRIKS, JHCL ;
RUYS, SHJ .
RADIOLOGY, 1995, 197 (03) :743-747
[3]  
Bone B, 1996, ACTA RADIOL, V37, P208
[4]  
BONE B, 1995, ACTA RADIOL, V36, P111
[5]  
Davis P L, 1994, Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am, V2, P623
[6]   Breast cancer measurements with magnetic resonance imaging, ultrasonography, and mammography [J].
Davis, PL ;
Staiger, MJ ;
Harris, KB ;
Ganott, MA ;
Klementaviciene, J ;
McCarthy, KS ;
Tobon, H .
BREAST CANCER RESEARCH AND TREATMENT, 1996, 37 (01) :1-9
[7]   Utility of magnetic resonance imaging in the management of breast cancer: Evidence for improved preoperative staging [J].
Esserman, L ;
Hylton, N ;
Yassa, L ;
Barclay, J ;
Frankel, S ;
Sickles, E .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY, 1999, 17 (01) :110-119
[8]  
HEYWANGKOBRUNNE.SH, 1996, CONTRAST ENHANCED MR
[9]   THE PRESENCE OF AN EXTENSIVE INTRADUCTAL COMPONENT FOLLOWING A LIMITED EXCISION CORRELATES WITH PROMINENT RESIDUAL DISEASE IN THE REMAINDER OF THE BREAST [J].
HOLLAND, R ;
CONNOLLY, JL ;
GELMAN, R ;
MRAVUNAC, M ;
HENDRIKS, JHCL ;
VERBEEK, ALM ;
SCHNITT, SJ ;
SILVER, B ;
BOYAGES, J ;
HARRIS, JR .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY, 1990, 8 (01) :113-118
[10]   Accuracy of MR imaging in the work-up of suspicious breast lesions: A diagnostic meta-analysis [J].
Hrung, JM ;
Sonnad, SS ;
Schwartz, JS ;
Langlotz, CP .
ACADEMIC RADIOLOGY, 1999, 6 (07) :387-397