Contrast-Enhanced Mammography-Guided Biopsy in Patients with Extensive Suspicious Microcalcifications.

IF 4.4 2区 医学 Q1 ONCOLOGY
Cancers Pub Date : 2025-09-22 DOI:10.3390/cancers17183086
Yun-Chung Cheung, Wai-Shan Chung, Ya-Chun Tang, Chia-Wei Li
{"title":"Contrast-Enhanced Mammography-Guided Biopsy in Patients with Extensive Suspicious Microcalcifications.","authors":"Yun-Chung Cheung, Wai-Shan Chung, Ya-Chun Tang, Chia-Wei Li","doi":"10.3390/cancers17183086","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Objectives</b>: To investigate the feasibility of contrast-enhanced mammography-guided biopsy (CEM-Bx) to diagnose cancer via targeting the associated enhancements in the patients with extensive suspicious microcalcifications. <b>Methods</b>: All the women with extensive suspicious microcalcifications were mammographically screened. Contrast-enhanced mammography was first examined, followed by CEM-Bx if there was any relevant enhancement; otherwise, patients without enhancement were submitted to conventional mammography-guided biopsy (MG-Bx). We recorded and analyzed the histological results, morphologies and distributions of the microcalcifications. The outcomes were also compared to those patients (control group) who did not assess with CEM and received MG-Bx only by the Wilcoxon rank-sum test. <b>Results</b>: Between November 2021 and November 2023, a total of 61 participants participated in the test. A total of 26 women underwent CEM-Bx, and 35 underwent MG-Bx. In total, 19 of the 26 CEM-Bx were diagnosed as cancer, and none by MG-Bx. The cancer diagnostic rates (CDRs) identified by CEM-Bx were 81.8% for regional microcalcifications and 66.7% for segmental or diffuse distributions. The CDR of the test group was higher than the control group, 31.4% to 20%, respectively. Otherwise, the CDR of CEM-Bx was significantly higher than MG-Bx in the control group (73.08% to 20%, <i>p</i>-valve < 0.01). <b>Conclusions</b>: CEM-Bx was a safe and feasible procedure. With identification of the enhanced target, CEM-Bx faithfully performed among the extensive distributed suspicious microcalcifications. Although CEM-Bx improves CDR, larger prospective trials with surgical validation of all lesions are needed before widespread adoption.</p>","PeriodicalId":9681,"journal":{"name":"Cancers","volume":"17 18","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12468424/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cancers","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers17183086","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: To investigate the feasibility of contrast-enhanced mammography-guided biopsy (CEM-Bx) to diagnose cancer via targeting the associated enhancements in the patients with extensive suspicious microcalcifications. Methods: All the women with extensive suspicious microcalcifications were mammographically screened. Contrast-enhanced mammography was first examined, followed by CEM-Bx if there was any relevant enhancement; otherwise, patients without enhancement were submitted to conventional mammography-guided biopsy (MG-Bx). We recorded and analyzed the histological results, morphologies and distributions of the microcalcifications. The outcomes were also compared to those patients (control group) who did not assess with CEM and received MG-Bx only by the Wilcoxon rank-sum test. Results: Between November 2021 and November 2023, a total of 61 participants participated in the test. A total of 26 women underwent CEM-Bx, and 35 underwent MG-Bx. In total, 19 of the 26 CEM-Bx were diagnosed as cancer, and none by MG-Bx. The cancer diagnostic rates (CDRs) identified by CEM-Bx were 81.8% for regional microcalcifications and 66.7% for segmental or diffuse distributions. The CDR of the test group was higher than the control group, 31.4% to 20%, respectively. Otherwise, the CDR of CEM-Bx was significantly higher than MG-Bx in the control group (73.08% to 20%, p-valve < 0.01). Conclusions: CEM-Bx was a safe and feasible procedure. With identification of the enhanced target, CEM-Bx faithfully performed among the extensive distributed suspicious microcalcifications. Although CEM-Bx improves CDR, larger prospective trials with surgical validation of all lesions are needed before widespread adoption.

广泛可疑微钙化患者的造影增强乳房x线摄影引导活检。
目的:探讨对比增强乳房x线造影引导活检(CEM-Bx)在广泛可疑微钙化患者中通过靶向相关增强来诊断癌症的可行性。方法:对所有有广泛可疑微钙化的妇女进行乳房x线检查。首先检查对比增强乳房x线照相术,如果有任何相关增强,则进行CEM-Bx检查;否则,没有增强的患者接受常规乳房x线摄影引导活检(MG-Bx)。我们记录并分析了微钙化的组织学结果、形态和分布。结果也通过Wilcoxon秩和检验与未进行CEM评估且仅接受MG-Bx的患者(对照组)进行比较。结果:在2021年11月至2023年11月期间,共有61名参与者参加了测试。共有26名妇女接受了CEM-Bx检查,35名接受了MG-Bx检查。26例CEM-Bx中有19例被诊断为癌症,MG-Bx中没有一例被诊断为癌症。CEM-Bx对局部微钙化的诊断率为81.8%,对节段性或弥漫性分布的诊断率为66.7%。试验组CDR高于对照组,分别为31.4% ~ 20%。对照组CEM-Bx的CDR明显高于MG-Bx (73.08% ~ 20%, p值< 0.01)。结论:CEM-Bx手术安全可行。随着增强靶标的识别,CEM-Bx忠实地在广泛分布的可疑微钙化中执行。虽然CEM-Bx改善了CDR,但在广泛采用之前,需要对所有病变进行手术验证的更大规模的前瞻性试验。
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
Cancers
Cancers Medicine-Oncology
CiteScore
8.00
自引率
9.60%
发文量
5371
审稿时长
18.07 days
期刊介绍: Cancers (ISSN 2072-6694) is an international, peer-reviewed open access journal on oncology. It publishes reviews, regular research papers and short communications. Our aim is to encourage scientists to publish their experimental and theoretical results in as much detail as possible. There is no restriction on the length of the papers. The full experimental details must be provided so that the results can be reproduced.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信