乳房植入体周围增强:影像特征、意义和管理策略。

IF 2 Q3 ONCOLOGY
Santo Maimone, Shweta Srivastava, Olivia S Ho, Kristin A Robinson, Andrey P Morozov, Haley P Letter, Amie Leon, Brian D Rinker
{"title":"乳房植入体周围增强:影像特征、意义和管理策略。","authors":"Santo Maimone, Shweta Srivastava, Olivia S Ho, Kristin A Robinson, Andrey P Morozov, Haley P Letter, Amie Leon, Brian D Rinker","doi":"10.1093/jbi/wbae084","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Peri-implant enhancement can be seen on contrast-enhanced breast MRI, but its association with malignancy has not been described, leading to considerable variability in assessment and recommendations by radiologists. This study evaluated imaging features, management, and outcomes of implant-related enhancement.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This multisite IRB-approved retrospective review queried all breast MRI reports for keywords describing peri-implant enhancement, fluid, and/or masses (plus synonymous descriptions) and implant-associated malignancies, with subsequent imaging and chart review. Peri-implant enhancement and implant features were characterized. Assessments and outcomes were evaluated via clinical and imaging follow-up, aspiration/biopsy, and/or capsulectomy to evaluate for association of peri-implant enhancement with implant-related malignancy.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 100 patients had peri-implant enhancement. Uniform thin peripheral enhancement was most common (79/100, 79%). Capsulectomy was performed in 31/100 (31%), with benign capsular fibrosis/inflammation discovered in 26/31 (83.9%). Breast implant-associated anaplastic large cell lymphoma was present in 2/100 (2%), both with textured implants, while 98/100 (98%) had no implant-related malignancy. MRI recommendations varied: resume routine imaging (26/100, 26%), clinical management (18/100, 18%), follow-up MRI (17/100, 17%), MRI-directed US (17/100, 17%), aspiration/biopsy (11/100, 11%), and surgical consultation (10/100, 10%).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Peri-implant enhancement is a nonspecific imaging finding with a low malignant association, especially when seen in isolation (no associated effusion, mass, or adenopathy). Implant surface texture should be considered in management recommendations; diagnostic capsulectomy is not recommended in patients with smooth implants. Additional studies are encouraged to validate nonoperative management recommendations.</p>","PeriodicalId":43134,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Breast Imaging","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Peri-Implant Enhancement of the Breast: Imaging Features, Significance, and Management Strategies.\",\"authors\":\"Santo Maimone, Shweta Srivastava, Olivia S Ho, Kristin A Robinson, Andrey P Morozov, Haley P Letter, Amie Leon, Brian D Rinker\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/jbi/wbae084\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Peri-implant enhancement can be seen on contrast-enhanced breast MRI, but its association with malignancy has not been described, leading to considerable variability in assessment and recommendations by radiologists. This study evaluated imaging features, management, and outcomes of implant-related enhancement.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This multisite IRB-approved retrospective review queried all breast MRI reports for keywords describing peri-implant enhancement, fluid, and/or masses (plus synonymous descriptions) and implant-associated malignancies, with subsequent imaging and chart review. Peri-implant enhancement and implant features were characterized. Assessments and outcomes were evaluated via clinical and imaging follow-up, aspiration/biopsy, and/or capsulectomy to evaluate for association of peri-implant enhancement with implant-related malignancy.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 100 patients had peri-implant enhancement. Uniform thin peripheral enhancement was most common (79/100, 79%). Capsulectomy was performed in 31/100 (31%), with benign capsular fibrosis/inflammation discovered in 26/31 (83.9%). Breast implant-associated anaplastic large cell lymphoma was present in 2/100 (2%), both with textured implants, while 98/100 (98%) had no implant-related malignancy. MRI recommendations varied: resume routine imaging (26/100, 26%), clinical management (18/100, 18%), follow-up MRI (17/100, 17%), MRI-directed US (17/100, 17%), aspiration/biopsy (11/100, 11%), and surgical consultation (10/100, 10%).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Peri-implant enhancement is a nonspecific imaging finding with a low malignant association, especially when seen in isolation (no associated effusion, mass, or adenopathy). Implant surface texture should be considered in management recommendations; diagnostic capsulectomy is not recommended in patients with smooth implants. Additional studies are encouraged to validate nonoperative management recommendations.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":43134,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Breast Imaging\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Breast Imaging\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/jbi/wbae084\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ONCOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Breast Imaging","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jbi/wbae084","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:乳房MRI造影剂增强可以看到植入物周围增强,但其与恶性肿瘤的关联尚未被描述,导致放射科医生在评估和建议方面存在相当大的差异。本研究评估了植入物相关增强的影像学特征、处理和结果。方法:这项多位点irb批准的回顾性研究查询了所有描述植入物周围增强、液体和/或肿块(加上同义描述)和植入物相关恶性肿瘤的乳房MRI报告,并进行了随后的成像和图表回顾。描述了种植体周围增强和种植体特征。评估和结果通过临床和影像学随访、抽吸/活检和/或荚膜切除术来评估种植体周围增强与种植体相关恶性肿瘤的关系。结果:100例患者均有种植体周围增强。均匀薄周增强最为常见(79/100,79%)。31/100(31%)患者行囊切除术,26/31(83.9%)患者发现良性囊纤维化/炎症。乳房植入物相关间变性大细胞淋巴瘤2/100(2%)存在,都是有纹理的植入物,而98/100(98%)没有植入物相关的恶性肿瘤。MRI的建议各不相同:恢复常规影像学(26/ 100,26%),临床管理(18/ 100,18%),随访MRI (17/ 100,17%), MRI指导下的US(17/ 100,17%),抽吸/活检(11/ 100,11%)和手术咨询(10/ 100,10%)。结论:种植体周围增强是一种低恶性关联的非特异性影像学发现,尤其是在单独观察时(无相关积液、肿块或腺病)。在管理建议中应考虑种植体表面纹理;诊断性荚膜切除术不推荐用于光滑种植体的患者。鼓励更多的研究来验证非手术治疗建议。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Peri-Implant Enhancement of the Breast: Imaging Features, Significance, and Management Strategies.

Objective: Peri-implant enhancement can be seen on contrast-enhanced breast MRI, but its association with malignancy has not been described, leading to considerable variability in assessment and recommendations by radiologists. This study evaluated imaging features, management, and outcomes of implant-related enhancement.

Methods: This multisite IRB-approved retrospective review queried all breast MRI reports for keywords describing peri-implant enhancement, fluid, and/or masses (plus synonymous descriptions) and implant-associated malignancies, with subsequent imaging and chart review. Peri-implant enhancement and implant features were characterized. Assessments and outcomes were evaluated via clinical and imaging follow-up, aspiration/biopsy, and/or capsulectomy to evaluate for association of peri-implant enhancement with implant-related malignancy.

Results: A total of 100 patients had peri-implant enhancement. Uniform thin peripheral enhancement was most common (79/100, 79%). Capsulectomy was performed in 31/100 (31%), with benign capsular fibrosis/inflammation discovered in 26/31 (83.9%). Breast implant-associated anaplastic large cell lymphoma was present in 2/100 (2%), both with textured implants, while 98/100 (98%) had no implant-related malignancy. MRI recommendations varied: resume routine imaging (26/100, 26%), clinical management (18/100, 18%), follow-up MRI (17/100, 17%), MRI-directed US (17/100, 17%), aspiration/biopsy (11/100, 11%), and surgical consultation (10/100, 10%).

Conclusion: Peri-implant enhancement is a nonspecific imaging finding with a low malignant association, especially when seen in isolation (no associated effusion, mass, or adenopathy). Implant surface texture should be considered in management recommendations; diagnostic capsulectomy is not recommended in patients with smooth implants. Additional studies are encouraged to validate nonoperative management recommendations.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
20.00%
发文量
81
×
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