COMMON CLINICAL AND RADIOLOGICAL FINDING OF BREAST CANCER PATIENT PERFORMING BREAST MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING AS DIAGNOSTIC TOOL
Niyaz Mustafa Hama Amin a, Nizar Mohamed Tawfeeq Hamawandi b, and Alla Abulqader Abdullah Shalli c
a Breast Disease Treatment Center Sulaimani, Kurdistan Region, Iraq.
b Department of Surgery, College of Medicine, University of Sulaimani, Kurdistan Region, Iraq.
c Technical Institute, SPU, Sulaimani, Kurdistan Region, Iraq.
Submitted: 2/6/2019; Accepted: 1/11/2019; Published: 21/12/2019
DOI Link: https://doi.org/10.17656/jsmc.10228
Breast cancer is the most commonly diagnosed cancer among women and the second cause of cancer mortality in women.
This study aims to evaluate the role of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in the surgical management of patients with breast cancer.
Materials and Methods
This is an observational descriptive (retrospective and prospective) study, carried out in magnetic resonance imaging department of radiological center in Shahid Hemn teaching hospital and breast disease treatment center, Sulaymaniyah. One hundred sixty one patients screened with different breast complaint during (January of 2014- March of 2019). We focused on cases of breast cancer only were included 32 patients, also we analyzed the findings of the magnetic resonance imaging; Review was performed to determine lesion type (mass or non-mass), lesion descriptors, patient age, and biopsy. Histological findings were reviewed.
Magnetic resonance imaging detected all cases of invasive ductal carcinoma (IDC) 13(40.6%), in which Sensitivity (100.0%), Specificity (54.5%), (PPV) Positive Predictive Value (27.1%), (NPV) Negative Predictive Value (100.0%), and accuracy (61.1%). While invasive lobular carcinoma (ILC) was 10 (31.25%), 9 cases were defined as malignant lesion. It is Sensitivity (90.0%), Specificity (58.8%), Positive Predictive Value (21.4%), Negative Predictive Value (97.9%), and Accuracy (62.2%). Magnetic resonance imaging sensitivity and specificity to differentiate between benign and malignant lesion were (84.8%) and (64.9%) but, Positive Predictive value, Negative Predictive Value, and Accuracy were (58.3%), (88.1%), (72.2%) respectively. False positive were 20 (41.7%), while false negative were 5 (11.9%).
Magnetic resonance imaging is important in the management of breast cancer and accurate in assessing carcinoma extension and multiplicity. It is seen as being too sensitive, less specific.
Breast MRI, Breast cancer, Cancer staging.
MORRIS, Elizabeth; LIBERMAN, Laura. Breast MRI: diagnosis and intervention. Springer Science & Business Media, 2005.
CHEN, Weijie, et al. computerized interpretation of breast MRI: Investigation of enhancement variance dynamics. Medical physics, 2004, 31.5: 1076-1082.
KILIC, Fahrettin, et al. Diagnostic magnetic resonance imaging of the breast. The Eurasian journal of medicine, 2012, 44.2: 106.
BERG, Wendie A., et al. Detection of breast cancer with addition of annual screening ultrasound or a single screening MRI to mammography in women with elevated breast cancer risk. Jama, 2012, 307.13: 1394-1404.
KRIEGE, Mieke, et al. Efficacy of MRI and mammography for breast-cancer screening in women with a familial or genetic predisposition. New England Journal of Medicine, 2004, 351.5: 427-437.
FISCHER, Uwe, et al. The influence of preoperative MRI of the breasts on recurrence rate in patients with breast cancer. European radiology, 2004, 14.10: 1725-1731.
SEPPALA, Nicholas, et al. Rapid MRI of the breast in evaluating lesions discovered on screening. The breast journal, 2018, 24.6: 986-991.
MILLET, I., et al. Pearls and pitfalls in breast MRI. The British journal of radiology, 2012, 85.1011: 197-207.
MOUSSAVI, Nushin, et al. Agreement of breast nodularity on clinical examination and mammographic density. Nursing and Midwifery Studies, 2018, 7.3: 128-132.
WEINREB, Jeffrey C.; NEWSTEAD, Gillian. MR imaging of the breast. Radiology, 1995, 196.3: 593-610.
STOMPER, Paul C., et al. Suspect breast lesions: findings at dynamic gadolinium-enhanced MR imaging correlated with mammographic and pathologic features. Radiology, 1995, 197.2: 387-395.
KELSEY, Jennifer L.; GAMMON, Marilie D.; JOHN, Esther M. Reproductive factors and breast cancer. Epidemiologic reviews, 1993, 15.1: 36.
KUHL, Christiane K., et al. MRI for diagnosis of pure ductal carcinoma in situ: a prospective observational study. The Lancet, 2007, 370.9586: 485-492.
LIBERMAN, Laura, et al. Breast lesions detected on MR imaging: features and positive predictive value. American Journal of Roentgenology, 2002, 179.1: 171-178.
BALTZER, Pascal AT, et al. False-positive findings at contrast-enhanced breast MRI: a BI-RADS descriptor study. American Journal of Roentgenology, 2010, 194.6: 1658-1663.
EBY, Peter R., et al. Characteristics of probably benign breast MRI lesions. American Journal of Roentgenology, 2009, 193.3: 861-867.
SZABÓ, Botond K., et al. Dynamic MR imaging of the breast: analysis of kinetic and morphologic diagnostic criteria. Acta radiologica, 2003, 44.4: 379-386.
BLUEMKE, David A., et al. Magnetic resonance imaging of the breast prior to biopsy. Jama, 2004, 292.22: 2735-2742.
© The Authors, published by University of Sulaimani, College of Medicine
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.