Sensitivity and specificity of unenhanced MR mammography (DWI combined with T2-weighted TSE imaging, ueMRM) for the differentiation of mass lesions

ObjectiveThis study was performed to assess the sensitivity and specificity for malignant and benign mass lesions of a diagnostic approach combining DWI with T2-weighted images (unenhanced MR mammography, ueMRM) and compare the results with contrast-enhanced MR mammography (ceMRM).Materials and methodsConsecutive patients undergoing histopathological verification of mass lesions after MR mammography without prior breast interventions (contrast-enhanced T1-weighted, T2-weighted and DWI sequences) were eligible for this retrospective investigation. Two blinded observers first rated ueMRM and then ceMRM according to the BIRADS scale. Lesion size, ADC values and T2-weighted TSE descriptors were assessed.ResultsThis study examined 81 lesions (27 benign, 54 malignant). Sensitivity of ueMRM was 93% (observer 1) and 86% (observer 2), respectively. Sensitivity of ceMRM was 96.5% (observer 1) and 98.3% (observer 2). Specificity was 85.2% (ueMRM) and 92.6% (ceMRM) for both observers. The differences between both methods and observers were not significant (P ≥ 0.09). Lesion size measurements did not differ significantly among all sequences analyzed. Tumor visibility was worse using ueMRM for both benign (P < 0.001) and malignant lesions (P = 0.004).ConclusionSensitivity and specificity of ueMRM in mass lesions equal that of ceMRM. However, a reduced lesion visibility in ueMRM may lead to more false-negative findings.

[1]  C. Kuhl.  Current status of breast MR imaging. Part 2. Clinical applications. , 2007, Radiology.

[2]  L. Liberman,et al.  Breast lesions detected on MR imaging: features and positive predictive value. , 2002, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[3]  D. Altman,et al.  Statistics Notes: Diagnostic tests 1: sensitivity and specificity , 1994, BMJ.

[4]  Shigeru Nawano,et al.  Detecting breast cancer with non-contrast MR imaging: combining diffusion-weighted and STIR imaging. , 2007, Magnetic resonance in medical sciences : MRMS : an official journal of Japan Society of Magnetic Resonance in Medicine.

[5]  Shigeru Nawano,et al.  Diffusion-weighted imaging of breast cancer with the sensitivity encoding technique: analysis of the apparent diffusion coefficient value. , 2004, Magnetic resonance in medical sciences : MRMS : an official journal of Japan Society of Magnetic Resonance in Medicine.

[6]  R. Vitti,et al.  Gadolinium-based contrast agents and nephrogenic systemic fibrosis. , 2009, Radiology.

[7]  A. Cilotti,et al.  Quantitative diffusion-weighted MR imaging in the differential diagnosis of breast lesion , 2007, European Radiology.

[8]  Tom Fearn,et al.  Sensitivity and Specificity , 2009 .

[9]  N. deSouza,et al.  Diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging and its application to cancer , 2006, Cancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society.

[10]  Jianqiao Luo,et al.  [Application of diffusion weighted magnetic resonance imaging to differential diagnosis of breast diseases]. , 2007, Ai zheng = Aizheng = Chinese journal of cancer.

[11]  Bong Joo Kang,et al.  The Role of Diffusion-Weighted Imaging and the Apparent Diffusion Coefficient (ADC) Values for Breast Tumors , 2007, Korean journal of radiology.

[12]  W. Kaiser,et al.  Echoplanar diffusion-weighted MRI with intravenous gadolinium-DTPA , 2003, Neuroradiology.

[13]  Masahiko Watanabe,et al.  Diffusion-Weighted Imaging of Malignant Breast Tumors: The Usefulness of Apparent Diffusion Coefficient (ADC) Value and ADC Map for the Detection of Malignant Breast Tumors and Evaluation of Cancer Extension , 2005, Journal of computer assisted tomography.

[14]  C. Kuhl,et al.  [The "EVA" Trial: Evaluation of the Efficacy of Diagnostic Methods (Mammography, Ultrasound, MRI) in the secondary and tertiary prevention of familial breast cancer. Preliminary results after the first half of the study period]. , 2005, RoFo : Fortschritte auf dem Gebiete der Rontgenstrahlen und der Nuklearmedizin.

[15]  A R Padhani,et al.  Screening with magnetic resonance imaging and mammography of a UK population at high familial risk of breast cancer: a prospective multicentre cohort study (MARIBS) , 2005, The Lancet.

[16]  Joan Leach,et al.  Expert heads a'rolling Melissa Leach Ian , 2005, The Lancet.

[17]  Marie-France Bellin,et al.  Extracellular gadolinium-based contrast media: an overview. , 2008, European journal of radiology.

[18]  Ning-Yu An,et al.  Differentiation of clinically benign and malignant breast lesions using diffusion‐weighted imaging , 2002, Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI.

[19]  Mariko Goto,et al.  Microperfusion‐induced elevation of ADC is suppressed after contrast in breast carcinoma , 2009, Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI.

[20]  H. Brambs,et al.  Die EVA -Studie: Evaluierung der Leistungsfähigkeit diagnostischer Verfahren (Mammographie, Sonographie, MRT) zur sekundären und tertiären Prävention des familiären Mammakarzinoms - Zwischenergebnisse nach der ersten Hälfte der Förderungsperiode , 2005 .

[21]  Kunihiko Fukuda,et al.  High-spatial-resolution MRI of non-masslike breast lesions: interpretation model based on BI-RADS MRI descriptors. , 2006, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[22]  W. Kaiser,et al.  Potential MRI interpretation model: differentiation of benign from malignant breast masses. , 2005, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[23]  Hiromu Nishitani,et al.  Comparison of 3.0-and 1.5-tesla diffusion-weighted imaging in the visibility of breast cancer , 2008, Radiation Medicine.

[24]  Thierry Metens,et al.  Quantitative diffusion imaging in breast cancer: A clinical prospective study , 2006, Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI.

[25]  Evelyn Wenkel,et al.  Diffusion weighted imaging in breast MRI: comparison of two different pulse sequences. , 2007, Academic radiology.

[26]  C. Kuhl.  The current status of breast MR imaging. Part I. Choice of technique, image interpretation, diagnostic accuracy, and transfer to clinical practice. , 2007, Radiology.

[27]  J. R. Reichenbach,et al.  Diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) in MR mammography (MRM): clinical comparison of echo planar imaging (EPI) and half-Fourier single-shot turbo spin echo (HASTE) diffusion techniques , 2009, European Radiology.

[28]  Hiroshi Honda,et al.  Apparent diffusion coefficients of breast tumors: clinical application. , 2008, Magnetic resonance in medical sciences : MRMS : an official journal of Japan Society of Magnetic Resonance in Medicine.

[29]  M. Van Cauteren,et al.  Effect of Intravenous Gadolinium-DTPA on Diffusion-Weighted Images: Evaluation of Normal Brain and Infarcts , 2002, Stroke.

[30]  Katsuhiro Nasu,et al.  Advances in breast MRI: diffusion-weighted imaging of the breast , 2008, Breast cancer.

[31]  Hans Stødkilde-Jørgensen,et al.  Intravenous administration of Gd-DTPA prior to DWI does not affect the apparent diffusion constant. , 2005, Magnetic resonance imaging.

[32]  Douglas G. Altman,et al.  Practical statistics for medical research , 1990 .

[33]  Naobumi Yashiro,et al.  Diffusion-Weighted Half-Fourier Single-Shot Turbo Spin Echo Imaging in Breast Tumors: Differentiation of Invasive Ductal Carcinoma from Fibroadenoma , 2002, Journal of computer assisted tomography.

[34]  Masanori Ozaki,et al.  ADC mapping of benign and malignant breast tumors. , 2005, Magnetic resonance in medical sciences : MRMS : an official journal of Japan Society of Magnetic Resonance in Medicine.