Magnetic resonance imaging features of fibrocystic change of the breast

Chen, Jeon‐Hor; Liu, Hui; Baek, Hyeon‐Man; Nalcioğlu, Orhan; Su, Min‐Ying

doi:10.1016/j.mri.2008.02.004

Cited by 33 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Further, benign lesions manifesting as nonmasslike enhancement may have suspicious kinetic features, including rapid early enhancement or plateau or washout patterns (11,15,16,35). In one series, investigators reviewing the MR imaging features of biopsy-proved fibrocystic changes found a wide spectrum of morphologic and kinetic features, including both focal and more diffuse distributions, with both benign and malignant types of kinetic curves (37). Hence, in the MR imaging interpretation of nonmasslike enhancement, the morphologic characteristics should take precedence over the kinetic features in the BI-RADS assessment and clinical management.…”

Section: Pitfalls In Interpretation Overreliance On Kinetic Informationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Patterns of Nonmasslike Enhancement at Screening Breast MR Imaging of High-Risk Premenopausal Women

Giess¹,

Raza²,

Birdwell³

2013

RadioGraphics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Current U.S. recommendations for breast cancer screening of women with at least a 20%-25% lifetime risk of developing breast cancer include contrast material-enhanced magnetic resonance (MR) imaging of the breasts. The cancer detection rate in high-risk women undergoing screening MR imaging is approximately 10 times higher than that in normal-risk women undergoing screening mammography. Many of these high-risk women commence MR imaging screening while they are premenopausal, when the breasts are most influenced by cyclical hormonal changes. Healthy premenopausal breast tissue enhances in a cyclical and variable manner. This enhancement is described as background enhancement. Typically, enhancement of normal breast tissue occurs in a symmetric and diffuse pattern, and there is little diagnostic difficulty in classifying it as normal background parenchymal enhancement. However, sometimes the pattern is more focal, asymmetric, or regional. It may then be described as nonmasslike enhancement, an observation associated with both benign and malignant breast pathologic conditions. A review of the morphologic features and internal enhancement patterns in normal but nondiffuse background enhancement and abnormal nonmasslike enhancement in high-risk premenopausal women can help improve interpretive specificity and decrease false-positive interpretations. MR imaging pitfalls and interpretation strategies for localized background enhancement and pathologic nonmasslike enhancement in this high-risk population are highlighted. In evaluating nonmasslike enhancement, the use of the Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) lexicon to perform careful analysis of morphologic features, along with an understanding of the role and limitations of kinetic information, will help balance early breast cancer detection against false-positive interpretation.

show abstract

Section: Pitfalls In Interpretation Overreliance On Kinetic Informationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Patterns of Nonmasslike Enhancement at Screening Breast MR Imaging of High-Risk Premenopausal Women

Giess¹,

Raza²,

Birdwell³

2013

RadioGraphics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This feature is highly indicative of fibrocystic mastopathy [36]. We believe that it is not sufficiently used, because many studies in which MRI features of fibrocystic changes were analysed did not report T 2 weighted sequences in their protocol [37,38].…”

Section: Non-mass-like Enhancementmentioning

confidence: 99%

Pearls and pitfalls in breast MRI

Millet¹,

Pagès²,

Hoa³

et al. 2012

BJR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT. At our academic institution, we have noticed repeated examples of both false-positive and false-negative MR diagnoses in breast cancer. The most common diagnostic errors in interpreting MRI of the breast are discussed in this review and experience-based advice is provided to avoid similar mistakes. The most common reasons for false-positive diagnoses are misinterpretation of artefacts, confusion between normal enhancing structures and tumours and, above all, insufficient use of the American College of Radiology breast imaging reporting and data system lexicon, whereas false-negative diagnoses are made as a result of missed tiny enhancement, a background-enhancing breast, or enhancement interpreted as benign rather than malignant.

show abstract

“…However, dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI studies are limited because enhancement patterns are similar for mucinous carcinoma and fi broadenoma 4 and for intraductal papilloma or fi broadenoma containing a rich blood fl ow and a malignant tumor and because normal breast tissue and focal fi brocystic disease show spotty enhancement. 5 Diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) has become widely accepted in body imaging to detect and characterize focal malignant lesions. [6][7][8][9][10] Recent studies have evaluated the suitability of DWI for differentiating benign and malignant tumors using apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) values.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%