Abstract
The aim of this study was the evaluation of the diagnostic usefulness of ductal or segmental enhancement in dynamic breast MRI. Segmental and ductal enhancement have been established as the breast MRI hallmarks of intraductal breast cancer (DCIS); however, the positive predictive value of this imaging finding is still unknown. In our study, we analysed the overall prevalence of a segmental or a linear enhancement pattern on breast MRI for an unselected cohort of patients. The aim was to evaluate the diagnostic usefulness of segmental or linear enhancement. Second, we asked whether biopsy was necessary also in the absence of mammographic findings suggestive of DCIS. Prospective, consecutive evaluation of 1,003 patients undergoing bilateral dynamic breast MRI. Studies were interpreted by two experienced breast radiologists. A diagnostic or screening two-view mammogram was available for all patients. Biopsy or short-term breast MRI follow-up was recommended for patients showing a segmental or a linear enhancement pattern on breast MRI. The patients’ final diagnoses were established by imaging guided excisional or core biopsy or by clinical plus conventional imaging follow-up for a period of 2 years. The prevalence of segmental or linear enhancement was determined for patients with a final diagnosis of benign breast disease compared with those with a diagnosis of breast cancer. One hundred twenty patients had invasive breast cancer, 24 patients had DCIS and 859 patients had unsuspicious breast MRI or benign breast disease. A segmental or a linear enhancement pattern was found for 50/1,003 (5%) patients (17 DCIS, 33 benign breast diseases). Accordingly, the positive predictive value of segmental and linear enhancement is 34% (17/50); the specificity of this criterion is 96% (826/859). For 4/24 (17%) patients, DCIS was visible as segmental or linear enhancement on dynamic breast MRI, whereas no abnormalities were visible on the corresponding mammogram. The overall prevalence of a ductal or a segmental enhancement pattern on breast MRI is low. But this finding has a high specificity and a moderate positive predictive value for intraductal neoplastic changes. We conclude that if segmental or linear enhancement is identified on breast MRI further work-up is necessary. We recommend either direct MR-guided vacuum-assisted core biopsy or short-term follow-up breast MRI within 3 months. If ductal enhancement then persists, MR-guided biopsy should be recommended even in the absence of mammographically visible signs of DCIS
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Kuhl CK (2000) MRI of breast tumors. Review article. Eur Radiol 10:46–58
Wasser K, Sinn HP, Fink C et al (2003) Accuracy of tumor size measurement in breast cancer using MRI is influenced by histological regression induced by neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Eur Radiol 13:1213–1223. Epub 2002 Nov 30
Kristofferson Wiberg M, Aspelin P, Sylvan M, Bone B (2003) Comparison of lesion size estimated by dynamic MR imaging, mammography and histopathology in neoplasms. Eur Radiol 13:1207–1212. Epub 2002 Nov 19
Dao TH, Rahmouni A, Campana F (1993) Tumor recurrence versus fibrosis in the irradiated breast: differentiation with dynamic gadolinium-enhanced MR imaging. Radiology 751:187
Fischer U, Kopka L, Grabbe E (1999) Breast carcinoma: effect of preoperative contrast-enhanced MR imaging on the therapeutic approach. Radiology 213:881–888
Liberman L, Morris EA, Kim CM, Kaplan JB, Abramson AF, Menell JH, Van Zee KJ, Dershaw DD (2003) MR imaging findings in the contralateral breast of women with recently diagnosed breast cancer. Am J Roentgenol 180:333–341
Lee SG, Orel SG, Woo IJ, Cruz-Jove E, Putt ME, Solin LJ, Czerniecki B, Schnall MD (2003) MR imaging screening of the contralateral breast in patients with newly diagnosed breast cancer: preliminary results. Radiology 226:773–778
Schelfout K, Van Goethem M, Kersschot E et al (2004) Preoperative breast MRI in patients with invasive lobular breast cancer. Eur Radiol 14:1209–1216. Epub 2004 Mar 18
Kuhl CK, Schmutzler RK, Leutner CK, Kempe A, Wardelmann E, Hocke A, Maringa M, Pfeifer U, Krebs D, Schild HH (2000) Breast MR imaging screening in 192 women proved or suspected to be carriers of a breast cancer susceptibility gene: preliminary results. Radiology 215:267–279
Gilles R, Zafrani B, Guinebretiere JM et al (1995) Ductal carcinoma in situ: MR-imaging–histopathologic correlation. Radiology 196:415–419
Heywang SH (1994) Contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging of the breast. Invest Radiol 29:94–104
Harms SE, Flaming DP, Hesley KL et al (1993) MR imaging of the breast with rotating delivery of excitation off resonance: clinical experience with pathologic correlation. Radiology 187:493–501
Tesoro-Tess JD, Amusoro A, Rovini D et al (1995) Microcalcifications in clinically normal breasts: the value of high field, surface coil, Gd-DTPA-enhanced MRI. Eur Radiol 5:417–422
Sonderstrom CE, Harms SE, Copit DS et al (1996) Three-dimensional RODEO breast MR imaging of lesions containing ductal carcinoma in situ. Radiology 201:427–431
Neubauer H, Li M, Kuehne-Heid R, Schneider A, Kaiser WA (2003) High grade and non-high-grade ductal carcinoma in situ on dynamic MR mammography: characteristic findings for sign increase and morphological pattern of enhancement. Br J Radiol 76:3–12
Gilles R, Meunier M, Lucidarme O et al (1996) Clustered breast microcalcifications: evaluation by dynamic contrast-enhanced subtraction MRI. J Comput Assist Tomogr 20:9–14
Kuhl CK, Mielcarek P, Leutner CC, Schild HH. Diagnostic criteria of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) in dynamic contrast-enhanced breast MRI: comparison with invasive breast cancer (IBC) and benign lesions. Proc. Int. Soc. Magn Reson Med 1998 p 93
Fischer U, Westerhof JP, Brinck U, Korabiowska M, Schauer A, Grabbe E (1996) The ductal carcinoma in situ in contrast enhanced dynamic MR mammography. RöFo 164:290–294
Westerhof JP, Fischer U, Mortiz JD, Oestmann JW (1998) MR imaging of mammographically detected clustered microcalcifications: is there any value? Radiology 207:675–681
Liberman L, Morris EA, Dershaw DD, Abramson AF, Tan LK (2003) Ductal enhancement on MR imaging of the breast. Am J Roentgenol 181(2):519–525
Orel S, Medonca MH, Reynolds C, Schnall M, Lawrence JS, Sullivan DC (1997) MR imaging of ductal carcinoma in situ. Radiology 202:413–420
Liberman L, Morris EA, Lee M, Kaplan JB, La Trenta LR, Menell JH, Abramson AF, Dashnow SM, Ballon DJ, Dershaw DD (2002) Breast lesions detected on MR imaging: features and positive predictive value. Am J Roentgenol 179:171–178
Van Goethem M, Schelfout K, Kersschot E et al (2004) Enhancing area surrounding breast carcinoma on MR mammography: comparison with pathological examination. Eur Radiol 14:1363–1370; Epub 2004 Mar 26
Kuhl CK, Mielcarek P, Klaschik S, Leutner C, Wardelmann E, Gieseke J, Schild HH (1999) Dynamic breast MR imaging: are signal intensity time course data useful for differential diagnosis of enhancing lesions? Radiology 211:101–110
Liberman L, Abramson AF, Squires FB, Glassman JR, Morris EA, Dershaw DD (1998) The breast imaging and reporting data system: positive predictive value of mammographic features and final assessment categories. Am J Roentgenol 171:35–40
Morakkabati N, Schmiedel A, Leutner C, Kuhl CK (2000) Diagnostic usefulness of ductal or segmental enhancement in dynamic breast MR imaging. Radiology 217(P):526–527
Gulsun M, Demirkazik FB, Ariyurek M (2003) Evaluation of breast microcalcifications according to breast imaging reporting and data system and Le Gal’s classification. Eur Radiol 32:227–231
Lehman CD, Aikawa T (2004) MR-guided vacuum-assisted breast biopsy: accuracy of targeting and success in sampling in a phantom model. Radiology. 232:911–914
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Morakkabati-Spitz, N., Leutner, C., Schild, H. et al. Diagnostic usefulness of segmental and linear enhancement in dynamic breast MRI. Eur Radiol 15, 2010–2017 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-005-2755-4
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-005-2755-4