Boetes C, Mus R D, Holland R, Barentsz J O, Strijk S P, Wobbes T, Hendriks J H, Ruys S H
Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Saint Radboud University Hospital, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Radiology. 1995 Dec;197(3):743-7. doi: 10.1148/radiology.197.3.7480749.
To evaluate the comparative accuracy of magnetic resonance (MR) imaging relative to mammography and ultrasonography (US) for assessing the extent of breast tumors.
Histologic results and preoperative imaging findings (mammography, US, MR imaging) were analyzed regarding tumor size and multifocality of 61 tumors in 60 women undergoing mastectomy for carcinoma.
In 10% of cases, the index tumor was not seen at mammography. With US, 15% of the index tumors were not recognized, while MR imaging missed 2% of the index tumors. On mammographic and US images, tumor size was underestimated significantly (P < .005), by 14% and 18%, respectively, while MR imaging showed no significant difference in size compared with that found in a pathologic evaluation. Mammography showed 31% of the additional invasive lesions, while US showed 38% and MR imaging showed 100%.
MR imaging was the most accurate of the three preoperative imaging modalities in assessing the size and number of malignant lesions in the breast.
评估磁共振成像（MR）相对于乳腺X线摄影和超声检查（US）在评估乳腺肿瘤范围方面的比较准确性。
对60例因乳腺癌行乳房切除术的女性的61个肿瘤的组织学结果及术前影像学检查结果（乳腺X线摄影、超声检查、MR成像）进行分析，内容包括肿瘤大小和多灶性。
在10%的病例中，乳腺X线摄影未发现索引肿瘤。超声检查中，15%的索引肿瘤未被识别，而MR成像遗漏了2%的索引肿瘤。在乳腺X线摄影和超声图像上，肿瘤大小被显著低估（P <.005），分别低估了14%和18%，而MR成像显示与病理评估结果相比，大小无显著差异。乳腺X线摄影显示了31%的额外浸润性病变，超声检查显示了38%，而MR成像显示了100%。
在评估乳腺恶性病变的大小和数量方面，MR成像是三种术前成像方式中最准确的。
