3.0 Tesla vs 1.5 Tesla breast magnetic resonance imaging in newly diagnosed breast cancer patients

被引:9
|
作者
Butler, Reni S. [1 ]
Chen, Christine [1 ]
Vashi, Reena [1 ,2 ]
Hooley, Regina J. [1 ]
Philpotts, Liane E. [1 ]
机构
[1] Yale Univ, Sch Med, Dept Diagnost Radiol, 70 Woodside Rd, New Haven, CT 06437 USA
[2] Mem Hermann Healthcare Syst, Dept Diagnost Radiol, Houston, TX 77074 USA
来源
WORLD JOURNAL OF RADIOLOGY | 2013年 / 5卷 / 08期
关键词
Breast; Breast cancer; Cancer staging; Outcome; Magnetic resonance imaging; Breast magnetic resonance imaging; 3; Tesla; Technical;
D O I
10.4329/wjr.v5.i8.285
中图分类号
R8 [特种医学]; R445 [影像诊断学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100207 ; 1009 ;
摘要
AIM: To compare 3.0 Tesla (T) vs 1.5T magnetic resonance (MR) imaging systems in newly diagnosed breast cancer patients. METHODS: Upon Institutional Review Board approval, a Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act-compliant retrospective review of 147 consecutive 3.0T MR examinations and 98 consecutive 1.5T MR examinations in patients with newly diagnosed breast cancer between 7/2009 and 5/2010 was performed. Eleven patients who underwent neoadjuvant chemotherapy in the 3.0T group were excluded. Mammographically occult suspicious lesions (BIRADS Code 4 and 5) additional to the index cancer in the ipsilateral and contralateral breast were identified. Lesion characteristics and pathologic diagnoses were recorded, and results achieved with both systems compared. Statistical significance was analyzed using Fisher's exact test. RESULTS: In the 3.0T group, 206 suspicious lesions were identified in 55% (75/136) of patients and 96% (198/206) of these lesions were biopsied. In the 1.5T group, 98 suspicious lesions were identified in 53% (52/98) of patients and 90% (88/98) of these lesions were biopsied. Biopsy results yielded additional malignancies in 24% of patients in the 3.0T group vs 14% of patients in the 1.5T group (33/136 vs 14/98, P = 0.07). Average size and histology of the additional cancers was comparable. Of patients who had a suspicious MR imaging study, additional cancers were found in 44% of patients in the 3.0T group vs 27% in the 1.5T group (33/75 vs 14/52, P = 0.06), yielding a higher positive predictive value (PPV) for biopsies performed with the 3.0T system. CONCLUSION: 3.0T MR imaging detected more additional malignancies in patients with newly diagnosed breast cancer and yielded a higher PPV for biopsies performed with the 3.0T system. (c) 2013 Baishideng. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:285 / 294
页数:10
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Spiral magnetic resonance coronary angiography - Direct comparison of 1.5 tesla vs. 3 tesla
    Yang, PC
    Nguyen, P
    Shimakawa, A
    Brittain, J
    Pauly, J
    Nishimura, D
    Hu, B
    McConnell, M
    JOURNAL OF CARDIOVASCULAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE, 2004, 6 (04) : 877 - 884
  • [42] Prostate magnetic resonance spectroscopic imaging at 1.5 tesla with endorectal coil versus 3.0 tesla without endorectal coil: comparison of spectral quality
    De Visschere, Pieter
    Nezzo, Marco
    Pattyn, Eva
    Fonteyne, Valerie
    Van Praet, Charles
    Villeirs, Geert
    CLINICAL IMAGING, 2015, 39 (04) : 636 - 641
  • [43] Diagnosis of temporomandibular dysfunction syndrome-image quality at 1.5 and 3.0 Tesla magnetic resonance imaging
    Schmid-Schwap, Martina
    Drahanowsky, Wolfgang
    Bristela, Margit
    Kundi, Michael
    Piehslinger, Eva
    Robinson, Soraya
    EUROPEAN RADIOLOGY, 2009, 19 (05) : 1239 - 1245
  • [44] Use of a radio frequency shield during 1.5 and 3.0 Tesla magnetic resonance imaging: experimental evaluation
    Favazza, Christopher P.
    King, Deirdre M.
    Edmonson, Heidi A.
    Felmlee, Joel P.
    Rossman, Phillip J.
    Hangiandreou, Nicholas J.
    Watson, Robert E.
    Gorny, Krzysztof R.
    MEDICAL DEVICES-EVIDENCE AND RESEARCH, 2014, 7 (07): : 363 - 370
  • [45] Can 3.0 Tesla diffusion tensor Imaging parameters be prognostic indicators in breast cancer?
    Ozal, Safiye Tokgoz
    Inci, Ercan
    Gemici, Aysegul Akdogan
    Turgut, Hurriyet
    Cikot, Murat
    Karabulut, Mehmet
    CLINICAL IMAGING, 2018, 51 : 240 - 247
  • [46] Which Patients With Newly Diagnosed Breast Cancer Benefit From Preoperative Magnetic Resonance Imaging?
    Lee, Hyun Jeong
    Kim, Woo Young
    Lee, Jae Bok
    Ha, Kee Soo
    Chang, Young Woo
    Lee, Hye Yoon
    Jung, Seung Pil
    Lee, Yeonjoo
    Woo, Ok Hee
    Woo, Sang Uk
    Son, Gil Soo
    INTERNATIONAL SURGERY, 2021, 105 (1-3) : 576 - 584
  • [47] 7.0-Tesla Tesla Magnetic Resonance Imaging of Granulomatous Meningoencephalitis in a Maltese Dog: A Comparison with 0.2 and 1.5-Tesla
    Kang, Min-Hee
    Lim, Chae-Young
    Park, Chul
    Yoo, Jong-Hyun
    Kim, Dae-Young
    Park, Hee-Myung
    JOURNAL OF VETERINARY MEDICAL SCIENCE, 2009, 71 (11): : 1545 - 1548
  • [48] Magnetic resonance imaging at 3.0 Tesla: Challenges and advantages in clinical neurological imaging
    Frayne, R
    Goodyear, BG
    Dickhoff, P
    Lauzon, ML
    Sevick, RJ
    INVESTIGATIVE RADIOLOGY, 2003, 38 (07) : 385 - 402
  • [49] Comparing 0.2 tesla with 1.5 tesla intraoperative magnetic resonance imaging: Analysis of setup, workflow, and efficiency
    Nimsky, C
    Ganslandt, O
    Fahlbusch, R
    ACADEMIC RADIOLOGY, 2005, 12 (09) : 1065 - 1079
  • [50] Magnetic resonance Imaging of Implantable cardiac rhythm devices at 3.0 tesla
    Gimbel, J. Rod
    PACE-PACING AND CLINICAL ELECTROPHYSIOLOGY, 2008, 31 (07): : 795 - 801