Can structured integration of BI-RADS criteria by a clinical decision rule reduce the number of unnecessary biopsies in BI-RADS 4 lesions? A systematic review and meta-analysis.

IF 4.7 2区 医学 Q1 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING
European Radiology Pub Date : 2025-03-01 Epub Date: 2024-12-18 DOI:10.1007/s00330-024-11274-6
Giulia Vatteroni, Matthias Dietzel, Pascal A T Baltzer
{"title":"Can structured integration of BI-RADS criteria by a clinical decision rule reduce the number of unnecessary biopsies in BI-RADS 4 lesions? A systematic review and meta-analysis.","authors":"Giulia Vatteroni, Matthias Dietzel, Pascal A T Baltzer","doi":"10.1007/s00330-024-11274-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aim: </strong>This systematic review and meta-analysis investigate the added value of structured integration of Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) criteria using the Kaiser score (KS) to avoid unnecessary biopsies in BI-RADS 4 lesions.</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted using predefined criteria. Eligible articles, published in English until May 2024, dealt with KS in the context of BI-RADS 4 MRI. Two reviewers extracted study characteristics, including true positives (TP), false positives (FP), true negatives (TN), and false negatives (FN). Sensitivity, specificity, negative likelihood ratio, and positive likelihood ratio were calculated using bivariate random effects. Fagan nomograms identified the maximum pre-test probability at which post-test probabilities of a negative MRI aligned with the 2% malignancy rate benchmark for downgrading BI-RADS 4 to BI-RADS 3. I² statistics and meta-regression explored sources of heterogeneity. p-values < 0.05 were considered significant.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Seven studies with 1877 lesions (833 malignant, 1044 benign) were included. The average breast cancer prevalence was 47.3%. Pooled sensitivity was 94.3% (95%-CI 88.9%-97.1%), and pooled specificity was 68.1% (95%-CI 56.6%-77.7%) using a random effects model. Overall, 52/833 cases were FNs (6.2%). Fagan nomograms showed that KS could rule out breast cancer in BI-RADS 4 lesions at a pre-test probability of 20.3% for all lesions, 25.4% for masses, and 15.2% for non-mass lesions.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In MRI-assessed BI-RADS 4 lesions, applying structured BI-RADS criteria with the KS reduces unnecessary biopsies by 70% with a 6.2% FN rate. Breast cancer can be ruled out up to pre-test probabilities of 20.3%.</p><p><strong>Key points: </strong>Question What, if any, value is added by structured integration of BI-RADS criteria using the Kaiser Score (KS) to avoid unnecessary biopsies in BI-RADS 4 lesions? Findings The structured integration of BI-RADS criteria using the Kaiser Score (KS) reduces unnecessary biopsies in BI-RADS 4 lesions by 70%. Clinical relevance The structured approach offered by the Kaiser Score (KS) avoids unnecessary recalls, potentially reducing patient anxiety, lessening the burden on medical personnel, and the need for further imaging and biopsies due to more objective and thus efficient clinical decision-making in evaluating BI-RADS 4 lesions.</p>","PeriodicalId":12076,"journal":{"name":"European Radiology","volume":" ","pages":"1504-1513"},"PeriodicalIF":4.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11836227/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Radiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-024-11274-6","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/12/18 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Aim: This systematic review and meta-analysis investigate the added value of structured integration of Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) criteria using the Kaiser score (KS) to avoid unnecessary biopsies in BI-RADS 4 lesions.

Material and methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted using predefined criteria. Eligible articles, published in English until May 2024, dealt with KS in the context of BI-RADS 4 MRI. Two reviewers extracted study characteristics, including true positives (TP), false positives (FP), true negatives (TN), and false negatives (FN). Sensitivity, specificity, negative likelihood ratio, and positive likelihood ratio were calculated using bivariate random effects. Fagan nomograms identified the maximum pre-test probability at which post-test probabilities of a negative MRI aligned with the 2% malignancy rate benchmark for downgrading BI-RADS 4 to BI-RADS 3. I² statistics and meta-regression explored sources of heterogeneity. p-values < 0.05 were considered significant.

Results: Seven studies with 1877 lesions (833 malignant, 1044 benign) were included. The average breast cancer prevalence was 47.3%. Pooled sensitivity was 94.3% (95%-CI 88.9%-97.1%), and pooled specificity was 68.1% (95%-CI 56.6%-77.7%) using a random effects model. Overall, 52/833 cases were FNs (6.2%). Fagan nomograms showed that KS could rule out breast cancer in BI-RADS 4 lesions at a pre-test probability of 20.3% for all lesions, 25.4% for masses, and 15.2% for non-mass lesions.

Conclusions: In MRI-assessed BI-RADS 4 lesions, applying structured BI-RADS criteria with the KS reduces unnecessary biopsies by 70% with a 6.2% FN rate. Breast cancer can be ruled out up to pre-test probabilities of 20.3%.

Key points: Question What, if any, value is added by structured integration of BI-RADS criteria using the Kaiser Score (KS) to avoid unnecessary biopsies in BI-RADS 4 lesions? Findings The structured integration of BI-RADS criteria using the Kaiser Score (KS) reduces unnecessary biopsies in BI-RADS 4 lesions by 70%. Clinical relevance The structured approach offered by the Kaiser Score (KS) avoids unnecessary recalls, potentially reducing patient anxiety, lessening the burden on medical personnel, and the need for further imaging and biopsies due to more objective and thus efficient clinical decision-making in evaluating BI-RADS 4 lesions.

通过临床决策规则结构化地整合BI-RADS标准能否减少BI-RADS 4病变中不必要的活检次数?系统回顾和荟萃分析。
目的:本系统综述和荟萃分析探讨了使用Kaiser评分(KS)结构化整合乳腺成像报告和数据系统(BI-RADS)标准的附加价值,以避免不必要的BI-RADS 4病变活检。材料和方法:采用预先确定的标准进行系统评价和荟萃分析。符合条件的文章,在2024年5月之前以英文发表,在BI-RADS 4 MRI的背景下处理KS。两位审稿人提取了研究特征,包括真阳性(TP)、假阳性(FP)、真阴性(TN)和假阴性(FN)。灵敏度、特异性、负似然比和正似然比采用双变量随机效应计算。Fagan图确定了最大测试前概率,即MRI阴性的测试后概率与2%的恶性率基准一致,将BI-RADS 4降级为BI-RADS 3。I²统计和元回归探讨了异质性的来源。p值结果:纳入7项研究,共1877例病变(833例为恶性,1044例为良性)。平均乳腺癌患病率为47.3%。采用随机效应模型,合并敏感性为94.3% (95%-CI 88.9%-97.1%),合并特异性为68.1% (95%-CI 56.6%-77.7%)。833例中52例为FNs(6.2%)。Fagan形态图显示,在BI-RADS 4病变中,KS可以排除乳腺癌,所有病变的检测前概率为20.3%,肿块为25.4%,非肿块为15.2%。结论:在mri评估的BI-RADS 4型病变中,应用结构化BI-RADS标准和KS可减少70%的不必要活检,FN率为6.2%。乳腺癌在检测前被排除的概率高达20.3%。使用Kaiser评分(KS)对BI-RADS标准进行结构化整合,以避免对BI-RADS 4病变进行不必要的活组织检查,如果有的话,增加了什么价值?使用Kaiser评分(KS)对BI-RADS标准进行结构化整合,将BI-RADS 4型病变的不必要活检减少了70%。Kaiser评分(KS)提供的结构化方法避免了不必要的召回,潜在地减少了患者的焦虑,减轻了医务人员的负担,并且由于在评估BI-RADS 4病变时更加客观和有效的临床决策,减少了进一步成像和活检的需要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
European Radiology
European Radiology 医学-核医学
CiteScore
11.60
自引率
8.50%
发文量
874
审稿时长
2-4 weeks
期刊介绍: European Radiology (ER) continuously updates scientific knowledge in radiology by publication of strong original articles and state-of-the-art reviews written by leading radiologists. A well balanced combination of review articles, original papers, short communications from European radiological congresses and information on society matters makes ER an indispensable source for current information in this field. This is the Journal of the European Society of Radiology, and the official journal of a number of societies. From 2004-2008 supplements to European Radiology were published under its companion, European Radiology Supplements, ISSN 1613-3749.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信