Rodríguez RME, Barragán PDL, Villafañe MNF, Palacios MMÁ, Alva LLF

Language: Spanish
References: 25
Page: 67-75
PDF size: 526.60 Kb.

ABSTRACT

The use of magnetic resonance for the study of mammary lesions helps detect the morphological characteristics of the findings and also determine if the lesion features fibrous tissue, grease or liquid. The term «dynamic» is applied for the use of contrast agents to evaluate the lesion enhanced included to determine the type of curve obtained as well as its characteristics. The spectroscopy objective is to demonstrate the metabolic differences between normal and malignant tissues. Objective: To characterize through magnetic resonance BIRADS 3 and 4 criteria, correlating the findings with histologic results. Material and methods: Patients with BIRADS 3 and 4 findings, who will have biopsy taken. The number of patients was calculated by a ROC curve, mammography against magnetic resonance that determined a minimum of 66 patients. Results: 34 complete sequence studies took place; 24 from BIRADS 3 group and 8 from BIRADS 4, correlating the image findings with histologic results. Conclusion: The results confirm that the magnetic resonance can characterize lesions which through mammography are undetermined. The results related to malignant findings from mammography were analyzed by magnetic resonance, proving that its characteristics featured malignant data through the image.

REFERENCES

1. McNeil HJA. Meaning and use of area under an ROC curve diagnostic. Radiology 1982; 143(1): 29-36.

2. Mei SS. Adding in vivo quantitative 1h MR spectroscopy to improve diagnostic accurancy of breast MR imaging. Radiology 2005; 236 (3): 465-475.

3. Bolan PJ, Nelson MT, Yee D. Imaging in breast cancer: Magnetic resonance spectroscopy. Breast Cancer Res 2005; 7 (4): 149-152.

4. Garwood M. MR spectroscopy aids breast MR imaging. Radiology 2005; 11 (236) 465-475.

5. Chance B, Nioka S, Zhang J. Breast cancer detection based on incremental biochemical and physiological properties of breast cancers: A six-year, two-site study. Acad Radial 2005; 12 (8): 925-933.

6. Thomas MA, Wyckoff N, Yue K, Binesh N. Two-dimensional MR spectroscopic characterization of breast cancer in vivo. Technol Cancer Res Treat 2005; 4 (1): 99-106.

7. Jacobs M, Barker P, Argani P, Ouwerkerk R. Combined dynamic contrast enhanced breast MR and proton spectroscopic imaging: A feasibility study. J Magn Res Imaging 2005; 21 (1): 23-28.

8. Ruth M, Warren L, Pointon L. Reading protocol for dynamic contrast-enhanced MR images of the breast: Sensitivity and specificity analysis. Radiology 2005; 236 (10): 779-788.

9. 8b. Wei Huang, Fisher R, Dulaimy K. Detection of breast malignancy: Diagnostic protocol for improved specificity. Radiology 2004; 232 (10 ): 585–591.

10. Pavic D, Koomen M, Kuzmiak C. The role of magnetic resonance imaging in diagnosis and management of breast cancer. Technol Cancer Res Treat 2004; 3(6): 527-541.

11. Belkic K. Current dilemmas and future perspectives for breast cancer screening with a focus on optimization of magnetic resonance spectroscopic imaging by advances in signal processing. Isr Med Assoc J 2004; 6 (10): 610-618.

12. Stanwell P, Gluch L, Clark D. Specificity of choline metabolites for in vivo diagnosis of breast cancer using1H MRS at 1.5 T. Eur Radiol 2005; 15 (5): 1037-1043.

13. Huang W, Fisher PR, Dulaimy K. Detection of breast malignancy: Diagnostic MR protocol for improved specificity. Radiology 2004; 232 (2): 585-591.

14. Jacobs MA, Barker PB, Bottomley PA. Proton magnetic resonance spectroscopic imaging of human breast cancer: A preliminary study. J Magn Res Imaging 2004; 19 (1): 68-75.

15. Gandjbakhche AH, Chernomordik V, Hattery D. Tissue characterization by quantitative optical imaging methods. Technol Cancer Res Treat 2003; 2 (6): 537-551.

16. Katz-Brull R, Lavin P, Lenkinski R. Clinical utility of proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy in characterizing breast lesions. J Natl Cancer Inst 2002; 94 (16): 1197-1203.

17. Gribbestad IS, Singstad TE, Nilsen G. In vivo 1H MRS of normal breast and breast tumors using a dedicated double breast coil. J Magn Res Imaging. 1998; 8 (6): 1191-1197.

18. Sinha S, Sinha U. Functional magnetic resonance of human breast tumors: Diffusion and perfusion imaging. Ann NY Acad Sci 2002; 980: 95-115.

19. Huang W, Fisher PR, Dulaimy K, Tudorica L. Detection of breast malignancy: Diagnostic MR protocol for improved specificity. Radiology 2004; 232 (2): 585-591.

20. Zhu DC, Buonocore M. Breast tissue differentiation using arterial spin tagging. Magn Res Med 2003; 50 (5): 966-975.

21. Siegmann K, Muller-SChimpfle M, Shick F. MR imaging-detected breast lesions: Histopathologic correlation of lesion characteristic and signal intensity data. Am J Roentol 2002; 178 (6): 1403-1409.

22. Jackman J, Birdwell L. Atypical ductal hyperplasia: Can some lesions be defined stereotactic 11 gauge vacuum assisted biopsy, eliminating the recommendation for surgical excision? Radiology 2002; 224: 548-554.

23. Harmindar K Gill, Loffe B. When is a diagnosis of sclerosing adenosis acceptable at core biopsy? Radiology 2003; 228: 50-57.

24. Morris A, Liberman L. Breast MRI, diagnosis and intervention. Springer; 2005.

25. Diario Oficial de la Federación, Norma Oficial Mexicana: NOM-041-SSA2-2002, para la prevención, diagnóstico, tratamiento, control y vigilancia epidemiológica del cáncer de mama.