Background Screening mammography has lower sensitivity and specificity in women with dense breasts, who experience higher breast cancer risk. Purpose Systematic review of: reproducibility of BI-RADS density categorization; test performance and clinical outcomes of supplemental screening with breast ultrasound, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) in women with dense breasts and negative mammography. Data Sources MEDLINE, PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane January 2000–July 2015. Study Selection Studies reporting BI-RADS density reproducibility or supplemental screening results for women with dense breasts. Data Extraction Quality assessment and abstraction of twenty-four studies from seven countries; six were good quality. Data Synthesis Three good-quality studies reported reproducibility of BI-RADS density; 13–19% of women were re-categorized between “dense” and “non-dense” at subsequent screening. Two good-quality studies reported ultrasound sensitivity for women with negative mammography ranging from 80–83%; specificity 86–94%; and positive predictive value (PPV) 3–8%. MRI sensitivity ranged from 75–100%, specificity 78–94%, and PPV 3–33% (3 studies). Ultrasound additional cancer detection rates were 4.4 per 1,000 exams (89–93% invasive); recall rates were 14%. MRI detected 3.5–28.6 additional cancers per 1,000 exams (34–86% invasive); recall rates were 12–24 %. DBT cancer detection rates increased by 1.4–2.5 per 1000 exams compared to mammography alone (3 studies). Recall rates ranged from 7–11%, compared to 7–17% with mammography alone. No studies examined breast cancer outcomes. Limitations Good quality evidence was sparse. Studies were small and confidence intervals were wide. Definitions of recall were absent or inconsistent. Conclusions Density ratings may be re-categorized on serial screening mammograms. Supplemental screening of women with dense breasts finds additional breast cancers, but increases false-positives. DBT may reduce recall rates. Supplemental screening impacts on breast cancer outcomes remain unclear. Primary Funding Source Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality

No abstract

Introduction: Paragangliomas (PGL) are extremely rare tumors arising from extra-adrenal neural crest cells with an incidence of 0.8 per 100,000 person-years. Sympathetic chain PGLs usually arise in the abdomen, with about 75% of them arising intra-abdominally [2]. On CT or MRI, PGLs are usually have homogenous enhancement or central areas of low attenuation. The consequences of PGLs are many, and one complication that is rarely noted is glycemic disturbances with catecholamine excess. Here, we present a case of a radiographically unique appearing PGL that resulted in dramatic improvement of diabetes after resection. Case: 41 year old male with a past medical history of diabetes, CKD and developmental delay presented with hyperglycemia. Patient’s home regimen of Glargine 15 units qHS and Humalog 5 units TID AC had run out a few days prior. Patient had Hemoglobin A1c of 11.8% mg/dL and a C-peptide of 0.4 ng/ml. Endocrine was initially consulted for glucose management. Hospital course was complicated by abdominal pain and CT imaging showed low attenuation splenic masses, retroperitoneal lymphadenopathy and a large, necrotic appearing mesenteric mass consistent with lymphoma. MRI reaffirmed mass with peripheral enhancement and central necrosis consistent with neoplasm. Patient underwent biopsy of lymphadenopathy, which came back benign and then went for biopsy of mass. As the needle entered the mass, the patient became acutely hypertensive and tachycardic. He received phentolamine with good response and labs were drawn for catecholamine producing tumor. Plasma norepinephrine level was 6048 pg/ml and a chromogranin level of 4788 ng/ml. An MIBG scan revealed focal uptake at the lesion without evidence of metastasis. In the subsequent weeks, he was alpha- and then beta-blocked and underwent resection of mass that was complicated by transient hypotension and hypoglycemia. Eventually, patient’s blood pressure was controlled and insulin requirements dropped precipitously to just requiring 4 units of glargine by discharge. Discussion: This patient had a mass on CT scan that appeared to be consistent with lymphoma as opposed to PGL that led to biopsy and subsequent catecholamine crisis. Fortunately, this was controlled and subsequent resection led to improvement in the patient’s glycemic control. It has been thought that glucose intolerance in PGL patients is due to impaired insulin release through desensitization of the beta-adrenergic receptor. Furthermore, Catecholamines, as counter-regulatory hormones, have been well documented to raise blood sugar on this basis as well. Fortunately for our patient, he survived an initial biopsy and post-operatively, was able to actually have an improvement in his glycemic control. It also is a reminder to always do a screen for PGL before doing a needle biopsy of a compatible abdominal mass.

No abstract

No abstract