Łuczyńska Elżbieta, Niemiec Joanna, Hendrick Edward, Heinze Sylwia, Jaszczyński Janusz, Jakubowicz Jerzy, Sas-Korczyńska Beata, Rys Janusz
Department of Radiology, Maria Skłodowska-Curie Memorial Cancer Centre and Institute of Oncology, Cracow Branch, Cracow, Poland.
Department of Applied Radiobiology, Maria Skłodowska-Curie Memorial Cancer Centre and Institute of Oncology, Cracow Branch, Cracow, Poland.
Med Sci Monit. 2016 Oct 21;22:3886-3893. doi: 10.12659/msm.900371.
BACKGROUND Contrast enhanced spectral mammography (CESM) is a new method of breast cancer diagnosis in which an iodinated contrast agent is injected and dual-energy mammography is obtained in multiple views of the breasts. The aim of this study was to compare the degree of enhancement on CESM with lesion characteristics on mammography (MG) and lesion histology in women with suspicious breast lesions. MATERIAL AND METHODS The degree of enhancement on CESM (absent, weak, medium, or strong) was compared to lesion characteristics on MG (mass, mass with microcalcifications, or microcalcifications alone) and histology (infiltrating carcinoma, intraductal carcinoma, or benign) to compare sensitivity of the two modalities and to establish correlations that might improve diagnostic accuracy. RESULTS Among 225 lesions identified with CESM and MG, histological evaluation revealed 143 carcinomas (127 infiltrating, 16 intraductal) and 82 benign lesions. This is the largest cohort investigated with CESM to date. The sensitivity of CESM was higher than that of MG (100% and 90%, respectively, p=0.010). Medium or strong enhancement on CESM and the presence of a mass on MG was the most likely indictor of malignancy (55.1% p=0.002). Among benign lesions, 60% presented as enhancement on CESM (were false-positive), and most frequently as medium or weak enhancement, together with a mass on MG (53%, p=0.047). Unfortunately, the study did not find combinations of MG findings and CESM enhancement patterns that would be helpful in defining false-positive lesions. We observed systematic overestimation of maximum lesion diameter on CESM compared to histology (mean difference: 2.29 mm). CONCLUSIONS Strong or medium enhancement on CESM and mass or mass with microcalcifications on MG were strong indicators of malignant transformation. However, we found no combination of MG and CESM characteristics helpful in defining false-positive lesions.
背景 对比增强光谱乳腺造影(CESM)是一种乳腺癌诊断的新方法,该方法通过注射碘化造影剂并在乳房的多个视图中获取双能乳腺造影。本研究的目的是比较CESM上的强化程度与乳腺钼靶(MG)上的病变特征以及可疑乳腺病变女性的病变组织学。
材料与方法 将CESM上的强化程度(无、弱、中等或强)与MG上的病变特征(肿块、伴有微钙化的肿块或仅微钙化)和组织学(浸润性癌、导管内癌或良性)进行比较,以比较两种检查方式的敏感性,并建立可能提高诊断准确性的相关性。
结果 在通过CESM和MG识别出的225个病变中,组织学评估显示有143例癌(127例浸润性、16例导管内癌)和82例良性病变。这是迄今为止用CESM研究的最大队列。CESM的敏感性高于MG(分别为100%和90%,p = 0.010)。CESM上中等或强烈强化以及MG上存在肿块是最可能的恶性指标(55.1%,p = 0.002)。在良性病变中,60%在CESM上表现为强化(为假阳性),最常见的是中等或弱强化,同时伴有MG上的肿块(53%,p = 0.047)。遗憾的是,该研究未发现MG表现和CESM强化模式的组合有助于定义假阳性病变。与组织学相比,我们观察到CESM上病变最大直径存在系统性高估(平均差异:2.29 mm)。
结论 CESM上的强烈或中等强化以及MG上的肿块或伴有微钙化的肿块是恶性转化的有力指标。然而,我们未发现MG和CESM特征的组合有助于定义假阳性病变。