New Technologies in Breast Imaging

View More View Less
  • 1 From University of Michigan Health System, Department of Radiology, Ann Arbor, Michigan.

Large, randomized controlled trials have proven the efficacy of mammography in reducing breast cancer mortality. However, the known deficiencies of mammography have led to the development of new technologies. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), digital mammography, computer-assisted diagnosis, positron-emission tomography (PET), technetium 99m sestamibi, and expanding roles for breast ultrasound have been explored as tools in breast cancer detection and evaluation. This article discusses these modalities and their current uses.

Correspondence: Stephanie K. Patterson, M.D., Department of Radiology/TC 2808, University of Michigan Health System, 1500 East Medical Center Drive, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109-0326. E-mail: spatters@umich.edu
  • 1

    Tabar L, Vitak B, Chen H-H et al.. The Swedish two-county trial twenty years later. Radiol Clin North Am 2000; 38:625651.

  • 2

    Shapiro S, Venet W, Strax P et al.. Periodic Screening for Breast Cancer: The Health Insurance Plan Project and Its Sequelae, 1963-1986. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press 1988:5983.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 3

    Alexander FG, Anderson TJ, Brown HK et al.. 14 years of follow-up from Edinburgh randomized trial of breast cancer screening. Lancet 1999;353:19031909.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 4

    Basset LW, Kim CH. Breast imaging: Mammography and ultrasonography. MRI Clin North Am 2001;9:251271.

  • 5

    Brenner RJ. False-negative mammograms: Medical, legal, and risk management implications. Radiol Clin North Am 2000;38:741757.

  • 6

    Jackson VP. The current role of ultrasonography in breast imaging. Radiol Clin North Am 1995;33:11611170.

  • 7

    Kolb TM, Lichy J, Newhouse JH. Comparison of the performance of screening mammography, physical examination, and breast US and evaluation of factors that influence them: An analysis of 27,825 patient evaluations. Radiology 2002; 225:165175.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 8

    Buchberger W, Dekoekkoek-Doll P, Springer P et al.. Incidental findings on sonography of the breast: Clinical significance and diagnostic work up. AJR 1999;173: 921927.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 9

    Kaplan SS. Clinical utility of bilateral whole-breast US in the evaluation of women with dense breast tissue. Radiology 2001;221:641649.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 10

    Bassett LW, Hendrick RE, Brassford TL et al.. Quality determinants of mammography. Clinical Practice Guideline No. 13. AHCPR Publication No. 95-0632. Rockville, MD: Agency for Health Care Policy and Research, Public Health Service, US Department of Health and Human Services, October 1994.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 11

    Stavros AT, Thickman D, Rapp CL et al.. Solid breast nodules: Use of sonography to distinguish between benign and malignant lesions Radiology 1995;196:123134.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 12

    Baker JA, Kornguth PJ, Scott Soo M et al.. Sonography of solid breast lesions: Observer variability of lesion description and assessment. AJR 1999;172:16211625.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 13

    Berg WA, Gilbreath PL. Multicentric and multifocal cancer: Whole-breast US in preoperative evaluation. Radiology 2000;214:5966.

  • 14

    Moon WK, Noh D-Y, Im J-G. Multifocal, multicentric, and contralateral breast cancer: Bilateral whole-breast US in the preoperative evaluation of patients. Radiology 2002;224: 569576.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 15

    Orel SG, Schnall MD. MR imaging of the breast for the detection, diagnosis, and staging of breast cancer. Radiology 2001;220:1330.

  • 16

    Teifke A, Hlawatsch A, Beier T et al.. Undetected malignancies of the breast: Dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging at 1.0 T. Radiology 2002;224:881888.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 17

    Harms SE, Flamig DP, Hesley KL et al.. MR imaging of the breast with rotating delivery of excitation off resonance: Clinical experience with pathologic correlation. Radiology 1993;187:493501.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 18

    Boetes C, Barentsz JO, Mus RD et al.. MR characterization of suspicious breast lesions with a gadolinium-enhanced turbo FLASH subtraction technique. Radiology 1994;193: 777781.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 19

    Gilles R, Guinebretiere J-M, Lucidarme O et al.. Nonpalpable breast tumors: Diagnosis with contrast-enhanced subtraction dynamic MR imaging. Radiology 1994;191:625631.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 20

    Orel SG, Schnall MD, LiVolsi VA et al.. Suspicious breast lesions: MR imaging with radiologic-pathologic correlation. Radiology 1994;190:485493.

  • 21

    Kuhl CK, Bieling HB, Gieseke J et al.. Healthy premenopausal breast parenchyma in dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging of the breast: Normal contrast medium enhancement and cyclical-phase dependency. Radiology 1997;203:137144.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 22

    Kuhl CK, Mielcarek P, Klaschik S et al.. Dynamic breast MR imaging: are signal intensity time course data useful for differential diagnosis of enhancing lesions? Radiology 1999; 211:101110.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 23

    Newstead GM. Role of MR in breast imaging. RSNA Categorical Course in Breast Imaging 1999;287293.

  • 24

    Bassett LW. Mammographic analysis of calcifications. Radiol Clin North Am 1992;30:93105.

  • 25

    Westerhof JP, Fischer U, Moritz JD et al.. MR imaging of mammographically detected clustered micro-calcifications: Is there any value? Radiology 1998;207:675681.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 26

    Gilles R, Zafrani B, Guinbretiere J-M et al.. Ductal carcinoma in situ: MR imaging-histopathologic correlation. Radiology 1995;196:415419.

  • 27

    Soderstrom CE, Harms SE, Copit DS et al.. Three-dimensional RODEO breast MR imaging of lesions containing ductal carcinoma in situ. Radiology 1996;201:427432.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 28

    Esserman L, Hylton N, Yassa L et al.. Utility of magnetic resonance imaging in the management of breast cancer: Evidence for improved pre-operative staging. J Clin Oncol 1999;17:110119.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 29

    Orel SG, Schnall MD, Powell CM et al.. Staging of suspected breast cancer: Effect of MR imaging and MR-guided biopsy. Radiology 1995;196:115122.

  • 30

    Fischer U, Kopka L, Grabbe E. Breast carcinoma: Effect of preoperative contrast-enhanced MR imaging on the therapeutic approach. Radiology 1999;213:881888.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 31

    Fourquet A, De La Rochefordiere A, Campana F. Occult Primary Cancer with Axillary Metastases. In: Harris JR, Lippman ME, Morrow M et al., eds. Diseases of the Breast. Philadelphia: Lippincott-Raven, 1996:892896.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 32

    Fortunato L, Sorento JJ, Golab RA et al.. Occult breast cancer. NY State J Med 1992;92:555557.

  • 33

    Orel SG, Weinstein SP, Schnall MD et al.. Breast MR imaging in patients with axillary node metastases and unknown primary malignancy. Radiology 1999;212:543549.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 34

    Morris EA, Schwartz LH, Dershaw DD et al.. MR imaging of the breast in patients with occult primary breast carcinoma. Radiology 1997;205:437440.

  • 35

    Jackson B, Scott-Comer C, Moulder J. Axillary metastasis from occult breast carcinoma: Diagnosis and management. Am Surg 1995;61:431434.

  • 36

    Young KC, Wallis MG, Ramsdale ML. Mammographic film density and detection of small breast cancers. Clin Radiol 1994;49:461465.

  • 37

    Pisano ED, Parham CA. Digital mammography, sestamibi breast scintigraphy, and positron emission tomography breast imaging. Radiol Clin North Am 2000;38:861869.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 38

    Pisano ED, Yaffe MJ, Hemminger BM et al.. Current status of full-field digital mammography. Acad Radiol 2000;7:266280.

  • 39

    Lewin JM, D, Orsi CJ, Hendrick RE et al.. Clinical comparison of full-field digital mammography and screen-film mammography for detection of breast cancer. AJR Am J Radiol 2002;179:671677.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 40

    Kopans DB. Double reading. Radiol Clin North Am 2000; 38:719724.

  • 41

    Giger ML. Computer-aided diagnosis. RSNA Categorical Course in Breast Imaging 1999;249272.

  • 42

    Kegelmeyer WP, Pruneda JM, Bourland PD et al.. Computer-aided mammographic screening for spiculated lesions. Radiology 1994;191:331337.

  • 43

    Chan HP, Doi K, Vyborny CJ et al.. Improvement in radiologists' detection of clustered microcalcifications on mammograms: The potential of computer-aided diagnosis. Invest Radiol 1990;25:11021110.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 44

    Warren-Burhenne LJ, Wood SA, D'Orsi CJ et al.. Potential contribution of computer-aided detection to the sensitivity of screening mammography. Radiology 2000;215: 554562.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 45

    Freer TW, Ulissey MJ. Screening mammography with computer-aided detection: Prospective study of 12,860 patients in a community breast center. Radiology 2001;220:781786.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 46

    Birdwell RL, Ikeda DM, O'shaughnessy KF et al.. Mammographic characteristics of 115 missed cancers later detected with screening mammography and potential utility of computer-aided detection. Radiology 2001;219:192202.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 47

    Jiang Y, Nishikawa RM, Schmidt RA et al.. Potential of computer-aided diagnosis to reduce variability in radiologists' interpretations of mammograms depicting microcalcifications. Radiology 2001;220:787794.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 48

    Chan HP, Sahiner B, Helvie MA et al.. Improvement of radiologists' characterizations of mammographic masses by using computer-aided diagnosis: An ROC study. Radiology 1999;212:817827.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 49

    Huo Z, Giger ML, Vyborny CJ et al.. Breast cancer: Effectiveness of computer-aided diagnosis—observer study with independent database of mammograms. Radiology 2002; 224:560568.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 50

    Wahl RL. Positron emission tomography (PET): An update on applications in breast cancer. Breast Dis 1998;10: 165175.

  • 51

    Brown RS, Leung JY, Fisher SJ et al.. Intratumoral distribution of tritiated-FDG in breast carcinoma: Correlation between Glut-1 expression and FDG uptake. J Nucl Med 1996;37:10421047.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 52

    Higashi K, Clavo AC, Wahl RL. Does FDG uptake measure proliferative activity of human cancer cells? In vitro comparison with DNA flow cytometry and tritiated thymidine uptake. J Nucl Med 1993;34:414419.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 53

    Avril N, Dose J, Jänicke F et al.. Metabolic characterization of breast tumors with positron emission tomography using F-18 fluorodeoxyglucose. J Clin Oncol 1996;14:18481857.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 54

    Dehdashti F, Mortimer JE, Siegel BA et al.. Positron tomographic assessment of estrogen receptors in breast cancer: Comparison with FDG-PET and in vitro receptor assays. J Nucl Med 1995;36:17661774.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 55

    Scheidhaur K, Scharl A, Pietrzyk U et al.. Qualitative [18F] FDG positron emission tomography in primary breast cancer: Clinical relevance and practicability. Eur J Nucl Med 1996;23:618623.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 56

    Adler LP, Crowe JP, Al-Kaisi NK et al.. Evaluation of breast masses and axillary lymph nodes with [F-18] 2-deoxy-2-fluoro-D-glucose PET. Radiology 1993;187:743750.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 57

    Avril N, Dose J, Jänicke F et al.. Assessment of axillary lymph node involvement in breast cancer patients with positron emission tomography using radiolabeled 2-(fluorine-18)-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose. J Natl Cancer Inst 1996;88:12041209.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 58

    Adler LP, Faulhaber PF, Schnur KC et al.. Axillary lymph node metastases: Screening with [F-18] 2-deoxy-2-fluoro-D-glucose (FDG) PET. Radiology 1997;203:323327.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 59

    Utech CI, Young CS, Winter PF. Prospective evaluation of fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in breast cancer for staging of the axilla related to surgery and immunocytochemistry. Eur J Nucl Med 1996;23:15881593.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 60

    Schelling M, Avril N, Nahrig J et al.. Positron emission tomography using [18F] fluorodeoxyglucose for monitoring primary chemotherapy in breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2000;18: 16891695.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 61

    Smith IC, Welch AE, Hutcheon AW et al.. Positron emission tomography using [18F]-fluorodeoxy-D-glucose to predict the pathologic response of breast cancer to primary chemotherapy. J Clin Oncol 2000;18:16761688.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 62

    Khalkhali I, Mena I, Jouanne E et al.. Prone scintimammography in patients with suspicion of carcinoma of the breast. J Am Coll Surg 1994;178:491497.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 63

    Taillefer R. The role of 99m Tc-sestamibi and other conventional radiopharmaceuticals in breast cancer diagnosis. Semin Nucl Med 1999;29:1640.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 64

    Prats E, Aisa F, Abos MD et al.. Mammography and 99m Tc-MIBI scintimammography in suspected breast cancer. J Nucl Med 1999;40:296301.

  • 65

    Buscombe JR, Cwikla JB, Holloway B et al.. Prediction of the usefulness of combined mammography and scintimammography in suspected primary breast cancer using ROC curves. J Nucl Med 2001;42:38.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 66

    Khalkhali I, Baum JK, Villanueva-Meyer J et al.. 99m Tc sestamibi breast imaging for the examination of patients with dense and fatty breasts: multicenter study. Radiology 2002;222:149155.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 67

    Scopinaro F, Schillaci O, Ussof W et al.. A three center study on the diagnostic accuracy of 99m Tc-MIBI scintimammogra-phy. Anticancer Res 1997;17:16311634.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 68

    Imbriaco M, DelVecchio S, Riccardi A et al.. Scintimammography with 99m Tc-MIBI versus dynamic MRI for non-invasive characterization of breast masses. Eur J Nucl Med 2001;28:5663.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 1 0 0
Full Text Views 93 53 0
PDF Downloads 45 15 0
EPUB Downloads 0 0 0