Keywords:
Image verification, Cancer, Diagnostic procedure, Decision analysis, MR, Mammography, Oncology, Breast
Authors:
D. LA FORGIA1, R. Dentamaro2, V. Didonna2, A. Fanizzi3, L. Losurdo2, M. Raffaella2, P. Tamborra2, M. Telegrafo2, M. Moschetta2; 1BARI, BA/IT, 2BARI/IT, 3Bari, Italy/IT
DOI:
10.26044/ecr2019/C-3045
Results
For each patient,
the BPE degree was considered both in CESM and MRI images (Fig.
3): no evident correlation between BPE degree and menstrual cycle,
patter and breast density were found in CESM.
Then,
a BIRADS score was assigned to all of detected lesions for both CESM and MRI findings.
As result,
the BIRADS distributions,
shown in Figure 4,
were obtained. Moreover,
4 findings were detected and affected by a high BPE in degree for both methods.
All of the 74 malignancy suspicious lesions detected on CESM images were found to be tumors after a histological examination (60 invasive,
14 intraductal cancers).
An example of intraductal cancer is shown in Figure 5 as CESM image,
while the corresponding RM images are shown in Figures 7 and 8 (on the right).
The 7 lesions overestimated by MRI were found to be 2 radial scar,
3 fibroadenomas (an example is shown in Figures 6 and 7,
on the left),
1 atypical hyperplasia,
1 papilloma.
After a second look by ultrasound,
all doubtful cases of both techniques,
classified as BIRADS 3,
and 13 out 26 benign lesions in MRI became negative or not lesion (BIRADS 1).
The cases without malignant histology were placed in instrumental follow-up at 6 and 12 months,
currently unchanged.