Journal of Breast Imaging最新文献

Image-guided biopsy is an integral step in the diagnosis and management of suspicious image-detected breast or axillary lesions, allowing for accurate diagnosis and, if indicated, treatment planning. Tissue sampling can be performed under guidance of a full spectrum of breast imaging modalities, including stereotactic, tomosynthesis, sonographic, and MRI, each with its own set of advantages and limitations. Procedural planning, which includes consideration of technical, patient, and lesion factors, is vital for diagnostic accuracy and limitation of complications. The purpose of this paper is to review and provide guidance for breast imaging radiologists in selecting the best procedural approach for the individual patient to ensure accurate diagnosis and optimal patient outcomes. Common patient and lesion factors that may affect successful sampling and contribute to postbiopsy complications are reviewed and include obesity, limited patient mobility, patient motion, patients prone to vasovagal reactions, history of anticoagulation, and lesion location, such as proximity to vital structures or breast implant.

Objective: The performance of a commercially available artificial intelligence (AI)-based software that detects breast arterial calcifications (BACs) on mammograms is presented.

Methods: This retrospective study was exempt from IRB approval and adhered to the HIPAA regulations. Breast arterial calcification detection using AI was assessed in 253 patients who underwent 314 digital mammography (DM) examinations and 143 patients who underwent 277 digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) examinations between October 2004 and September 2022. Artificial intelligence performance for binary BAC detection was compared with ground truth (GT) determined by the majority consensus of breast imaging radiologists. Area under the receiver operating curve (AUC), sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value (NPV), accuracy, and BAC prevalence rates of the AI algorithm were compared.

Results: The case-level AUCs of AI were 0.96 (0.93-0.98) for DM and 0.95 (0.92-0.98) for DBT. Sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy were 87% (79%-93%), 92% (88%-96%), and 91% (87%-94%) for DM and 88% (80%-94%), 90% (84%-94%), and 89% (85%-92%) for DBT. Positive predictive value and NPV were 82% (72%-89%) and 95% (92%-97%) for DM and 84% (76%-90%) and 92% (88%-96%) for DBT, respectively. Results are 95% confidence intervals. Breast arterial calcification prevalence was similar for both AI and GT assessments.

Conclusion: Breast AI software for detection of BAC presence on mammograms showed promising performance for both DM and DBT examinations. Artificial intelligence has potential to aid radiologists in detection and reporting of BAC on mammograms, which is a known cardiovascular risk marker specific to women.

Secretory carcinoma is a rare, low-grade, special histological type of invasive breast carcinoma. Although it is the most common primary breast cancer in the pediatric population, most cases are diagnosed in adults, with a median age of 48 years (range 3 to 91 years). It most often presents as a painless and slowly growing palpable lump. Imaging findings are nonspecific. Secretory carcinomas have abundant periodic acid-Schiff positive intracytoplasmic and extracellular secretions on histopathology. Nearly all secretory carcinomas have mild to moderate nuclear pleomorphism with low mitotic activity. Over 80% (86/102) of secretory carcinomas display the translocation of t(12;15)(p13;q25), resulting in ETV6::NTRK3 gene fusion. Secretory carcinoma generally has an indolent course and has a better prognosis and overall survival than invasive breast carcinoma of no special type. A good prognosis is associated with age <20 years, tumor size <2 cm, and ≤3 axillary lymph node metastases. Metastases beyond the ipsilateral axillary lymph nodes are rare, with the most common sites involving the lung and liver. Except for the potential addition of targeted drug therapy for NTRK fusion-positive tumors, the treatment approach is otherwise similar to invasive breast carcinomas of similar receptor status.

Objective: The Food and Drug Administration approved the MRI-compatible wireless SCOUT localization system in April 2022. The purpose of this study was to evaluate feasibility of SCOUT localization under MRI guidance. We present our initial experience adopting MRI-guided SCOUT localization and compare it to MRI-guided wire localization.

Methods: Electronic medical records and imaging were retrospectively reviewed for all patients who underwent MRI-guided SCOUT or wire localization at our institution between October 2022 and July 2023. Statistical analysis was performed using 2-sample proportion and Wilcoxon rank-sum tests.

Results: There were 14 MRI-guided SCOUT and 23 MRI-guided wire localization cases during the study period. All SCOUTs were placed without complication and were considered to be in adequate proximity to the target. There was no significant difference in complication rate (P = .25) or days lapsed from MRI-detected abnormality to surgery (P = .82) between SCOUT and wire cases. SCOUT was placed at time of biopsy for 71% (10/14) of cases. 57% (8/14) of SCOUT cases were used for breast conservation surgery (BCS) compared to 100% (23/23) of wire cases (P <.01), with all 6 SCOUTs not used for BCS placed at time of biopsy.

Conclusion: MRI-guided SCOUT localization is feasible and offers an alternative to MRI-guided wire localization, with no SCOUT complications reported. SCOUT placement at time of biopsy obviates the need for an additional procedure, but predicting appropriateness is challenging, with 60% (6/10) of SCOUTs placed at time of MRI-guided biopsy not used for subsequent localization surgery.

Objective: To evaluate the clinical performance and financial costs of breast-specific gamma imaging (BSGI) as a biopsy-reducing problem-solving strategy in patients with inconclusive diagnostic imaging findings.

Methods: A retrospective analysis of all patients for whom BSGI was utilized for inconclusive imaging findings following complete diagnostic mammographic and sonographic evaluation between January 2013 and December 2018 was performed. Positive BSGI findings were correlated and biopsied with either US or stereotactic technique with confirmation by clip location and pathology. After a negative BSGI result, patients were followed for a minimum of 24 months or considered lost to follow-up and excluded (22 patients). Results of further imaging studies, biopsies, and pathology results were analyzed. Net savings of avoided biopsies were calculated based on average Medicare charges.

Results: Four hundred and forty female patients from 30 to 95 years (mean 55 years) of age were included in our study. BSGI demonstrated a negative predictive value (NPV) of 98.4% (314/319) and a positive predictive value for biopsy of 35.5% (43/121). The overall sensitivity was 89.6% (43/48), and the specificity was 80.1% (314/392). In total, 78 false positive but only 5 false negative BSGI findings were identified. Six hundred and twenty-one inconclusive imaging findings were analyzed with BSGI and a total of 309 biopsies were avoided. Estimated net financial savings from avoided biopsies were $646 897.

Conclusion: In the management of patients with inconclusive imaging findings on mammography or ultrasonography, BSGI is a problem-solving imaging modality with high NPV that helps avoid costs of image-guided biopsies.

Early detection decreases deaths from breast cancer. Yet, there are conflicting recommendations about screening mammography by major professional medical organizations, including the age and frequency with which women should be screened. The controversy over breast cancer screening is centered on 3 main points: the impact on mortality, overdiagnosis, and false positive results. Some studies claim that adverse psychological effects such as anxiety or distress are caused by screening mammography. The purpose of this article is to address negative breast cancer screening concerns including overdiagnosis and overtreatment, effect on mortality, false positive results, mammography-related anxiety, and fear of radiation.

South Asians are a rapidly growing subset of the Asian population in the United States. They comprise people from multiple countries with diverse beliefs, languages, and cultural identities and values. The incidence of breast cancer is rising in South Asian women in the United States, with earlier onset and predilection for HER2-enriched tumors. Despite the rising incidence of breast cancer, participation in screening remains lower than other populations. Health care inequities in South Asian women are multifactorial and may be due to traditional health beliefs and practices, language barriers, cultural differences, and lack of overall awareness. Developing a culturally sensitive environment in breast imaging clinic practice can lead to improved patient care and adherence. Given the scarcity of data specific to the South Asian population in United States, there is a need for health service researchers and practice leaders to obtain more high-quality data to understand the needs of South Asian patient populations.

Improving the status of women in radiology is crucial to better work environments. There is strong evidence in the business world that women leaders improve the workplace by making it more financially viable and by increasing collaboration, job satisfaction, and engagement. Diverse leadership fosters innovation, and women approach problem-solving with unique insights and collaborative styles. Gender diversity in leadership correlates with improved patient outcomes because women leaders prioritize patient-centered care and communication. Women create sustainable, productive work and improve radiology. Women serve as powerful role models, inspiring the next generation of women in radiology and addressing gender disparities. Increasing women leaders in radiology is essential to increase the number of women in radiology. This article summarizes many challenges women face when taking leadership roles: organizational biases prioritizing male viewpoints and marginalizing women's voices and contributions, a lack of role models, a lack of time ("second shift"), a lack of confidence, a lack of interest or perceived benefit, a lack of support, burnout, and previous poor experiences. While systemic issues are difficult to overcome, this article assists in the training and development of women radiologists by offering strategies to enhance job satisfaction and bring new and valuable perspectives to leadership.