SHERP

MRI of the breast for the detection and assessment of the size of ductal carcinoma in situ

Cited 0 time in webofscience Cited 49 time in scopus
Authors
Kim, Do Youn; Moon, Woo Kyung; Cho, Nariya; Ko, Eun Sook; Yang, Sang Kyu; Park, Jeong Seon; Kim, Sun Mi; Park, In-Ae; Cha, Joo Hee; Lee, Eun Hye
Issue Date
2007-02-06
Publisher
The Korean Radiological Society
Citation
Korean J Radiol 2007;8(1):32-39.
Keywords
Breast Neoplasms/*diagnosisCarcinoma in Situ/*diagnosisCarcinoma, Ductal, Breast/*diagnosisChi-Square DistributionContrast MediaDiagnosis, DifferentialGadolinium DTPA/diagnostic useMagnetic Resonance Imaging/*methodsMammographyNeoplasm StagingRetrospective Studies
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to compare the accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and mammography for the detection and assessment of the size of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). MATERIALS AND METHODS: The preoperative contrast-enhanced MRI and mammography were analyzed in respect of the detection and assessment of the size of DCIS in 72 patients (age range: 30-67 years, mean age: 47 years). The MRI and mammographic measurements were compared with the histopathologic size with using the Pearson's correlation coefficients and the Mann-Whitney u test. We evaluated whether the breast density, the tumor nuclear grade, the presence of comedo necrosis and microinvasion influenced the MRI and mammographic size estimates by using the chi-square test. RESULTS: Of the 72 DCIS lesions, 68 (94%) were detected by MRI and 62 (86%) were detected by mammography. Overall, the Pearson's correlation of the size between MRI and histopathology was 0.786 versus 0.633 between mammography and histopathology (p < 0.001). MRI underestimated the size by more than 1 cm (including false negative examination) in 12 patients (17%), was accurate in 52 patients (72%) and overestimated the size by more than 1 cm in eight patients (11%) whereas mammography underestimated the size in 25 patients (35%), was accurate in 31 patients (43%) and overestimated the size in 16 patients (22%). The MRI, but not the mammography, showed significant correlation for the assessment of the size of tumor in noncomedo DCIS (p < 0.001 vs p = 0.060). The assessment of tumor size by MRI was affected by the nuclear grade (p = 0.008) and the presence of comedo necrosis (p = 0.029), but not by the breast density (p = 0.747) or microinvasion (p = 0.093). CONCLUSION: MRI was more accurate for the detection and assessment of the size of DCIS than mammography.
ISSN
1229-6929 (Print)
Language
English
URI
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&dopt=Citation&list_uids=17277561

http://hdl.handle.net/10371/10015
Files in This Item:
Appears in Collections:
College of Medicine/School of Medicine (의과대학/대학원)Pathology (병리학전공)Journal Papers (저널논문_병리학전공)
  • mendeley

Items in S-Space are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

Browse