简化MRI用于乳腺癌术前评估:第一次造影后减(快速)序列的最大强度投影(MIP)是否足以用于疾病评估?

Rami Hajri, Alexandre Ponti, Jean-Yves Meuwly, Sylvain Eminian, Jean-Baptiste Ledoux, Estelle Tenisch, Leonor Alamo-Maestre, Clarisse Dromain, Naïk Vietti Violi
{"title":"简化MRI用于乳腺癌术前评估:第一次造影后减(快速)序列的最大强度投影(MIP)是否足以用于疾病评估?","authors":"Rami Hajri,&nbsp;Alexandre Ponti,&nbsp;Jean-Yves Meuwly,&nbsp;Sylvain Eminian,&nbsp;Jean-Baptiste Ledoux,&nbsp;Estelle Tenisch,&nbsp;Leonor Alamo-Maestre,&nbsp;Clarisse Dromain,&nbsp;Naïk Vietti Violi","doi":"10.26502/jcsct.5079184","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The aim of this study was to assess the diagnostic performance of abbreviated MRI (AMRI) using the maximal intensity projection (MIP) reconstruction of the first post-contrast acquisition subtracted (FAST) compared with MIP+FAST and full-protocol MRI (fpMRI) for the preoperative assessment of breast cancer (BC) in a biopsy-proven cancer population.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this monocentric retrospective study, two readers consensually assessed two AMRI protocols consisting of MIP reconstruction of the FAST (MIP) and MIP+FAST. 228 patients were included with a breast MRI performed between 2013 and 2014, 207 of them (90.8%) had biopsy-proven cancer with 256 lesions. Data of MIP and MIP+FAST were compared to full-protocol MRI (fpMRI) reading and to the reference standard including 6-month follow-up imaging and pathology as the reference.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>MIP, MIP+FAST and fpMRI demonstrated a per-lesion sensitivity for BC detection of 87.5% (224/256, 95%CI: 82.9-91.3%) and 97.7% (250/256, 95-99.1%) and 98.4% (252/256, 96.1-99.6%), respectively with a statistical difference between MIP compared to MIP+FAST and fpMRI when considering confidence intervals. Per-lesion specificity was not different [MIP: 47.6% (10/21, 25.7-70.2%), MIP+FAST: 52.4% (11/21,29.8-74.3%, fpMRI: 66.7% (14/21, 43-85.4%)].</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>AMRI using only MIP is not accurate for the pre-operative assessment of BC due to lower sensitivity when compared to MIP+FAST and fpMRI. AMRI using the MIP+FAST acquisition in the preoperative setting seems promising as it could be used as the same protocol for both screening and staging in case of positive cases, without need for a recall fpMRI. This needs confirmation with cohort including higher rate of negative cases in order to evaluate the specificity.</p>","PeriodicalId":73634,"journal":{"name":"Journal of cancer science and clinical therapeutics","volume":"6 4","pages":"452-459"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10022524/pdf/nihms-1877666.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Abbreviated MRI for Preoperative Assessment of Breast Cancer: is Maximal Intensity Projection (MIP) of the First Post Contrast Acquisition Subtracted (Fast) Sequence Sufficient for Disease Evaluation?\",\"authors\":\"Rami Hajri,&nbsp;Alexandre Ponti,&nbsp;Jean-Yves Meuwly,&nbsp;Sylvain Eminian,&nbsp;Jean-Baptiste Ledoux,&nbsp;Estelle Tenisch,&nbsp;Leonor Alamo-Maestre,&nbsp;Clarisse Dromain,&nbsp;Naïk Vietti Violi\",\"doi\":\"10.26502/jcsct.5079184\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The aim of this study was to assess the diagnostic performance of abbreviated MRI (AMRI) using the maximal intensity projection (MIP) reconstruction of the first post-contrast acquisition subtracted (FAST) compared with MIP+FAST and full-protocol MRI (fpMRI) for the preoperative assessment of breast cancer (BC) in a biopsy-proven cancer population.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this monocentric retrospective study, two readers consensually assessed two AMRI protocols consisting of MIP reconstruction of the FAST (MIP) and MIP+FAST. 228 patients were included with a breast MRI performed between 2013 and 2014, 207 of them (90.8%) had biopsy-proven cancer with 256 lesions. Data of MIP and MIP+FAST were compared to full-protocol MRI (fpMRI) reading and to the reference standard including 6-month follow-up imaging and pathology as the reference.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>MIP, MIP+FAST and fpMRI demonstrated a per-lesion sensitivity for BC detection of 87.5% (224/256, 95%CI: 82.9-91.3%) and 97.7% (250/256, 95-99.1%) and 98.4% (252/256, 96.1-99.6%), respectively with a statistical difference between MIP compared to MIP+FAST and fpMRI when considering confidence intervals. Per-lesion specificity was not different [MIP: 47.6% (10/21, 25.7-70.2%), MIP+FAST: 52.4% (11/21,29.8-74.3%, fpMRI: 66.7% (14/21, 43-85.4%)].</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>AMRI using only MIP is not accurate for the pre-operative assessment of BC due to lower sensitivity when compared to MIP+FAST and fpMRI. AMRI using the MIP+FAST acquisition in the preoperative setting seems promising as it could be used as the same protocol for both screening and staging in case of positive cases, without need for a recall fpMRI. This needs confirmation with cohort including higher rate of negative cases in order to evaluate the specificity.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":73634,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of cancer science and clinical therapeutics\",\"volume\":\"6 4\",\"pages\":\"452-459\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10022524/pdf/nihms-1877666.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of cancer science and clinical therapeutics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.26502/jcsct.5079184\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of cancer science and clinical therapeutics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.26502/jcsct.5079184","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:本研究的目的是评估缩短MRI (AMRI)的诊断性能,使用最大强度投影(MIP)重建第一次对比后获取减影(FAST)与MIP+FAST和全方案MRI (fpMRI)在活检证实的癌症人群中对乳腺癌(BC)的术前评估。方法:在这项单中心回顾性研究中,两位读者一致评估了两种AMRI方案,包括MIP重建FAST (MIP)和MIP+FAST。在2013年至2014年期间,228例患者接受了乳房MRI检查,其中207例(90.8%)患有活检证实的癌症,共256个病变。将MIP和MIP+FAST数据与全方案MRI (fpMRI)读数和以6个月随访影像和病理为参照的参考标准进行比较。结果:MIP、MIP+FAST和fpMRI对每个病灶的BC检测灵敏度分别为87.5% (224/256,95%CI: 82.9-91.3%)、97.7%(250/256,95-99.1%)和98.4%(252/256,96.1-99.6%),考虑置信区间,MIP与MIP+FAST和fpMRI之间存在统计学差异。各病灶特异性无差异[MIP: 47.6% (10/ 22,25.7 -70.2%), MIP+FAST: 52.4% (11/ 22,29.8 -74.3%, fpMRI: 66.7%(14/ 22,43 -85.4%)]。结论:与MIP+FAST和fpMRI相比,仅使用MIP的AMRI在术前评估BC时灵敏度较低,因此不准确。在术前使用MIP+FAST采集的AMRI似乎很有希望,因为它可以作为相同的方案用于阳性病例的筛查和分期,而无需召回fpMRI。这需要在包含较高阴性病例率的队列中进行确认,以评估特异性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Abbreviated MRI for Preoperative Assessment of Breast Cancer: is Maximal Intensity Projection (MIP) of the First Post Contrast Acquisition Subtracted (Fast) Sequence Sufficient for Disease Evaluation?

Abbreviated MRI for Preoperative Assessment of Breast Cancer: is Maximal Intensity Projection (MIP) of the First Post Contrast Acquisition Subtracted (Fast) Sequence Sufficient for Disease Evaluation?

Abbreviated MRI for Preoperative Assessment of Breast Cancer: is Maximal Intensity Projection (MIP) of the First Post Contrast Acquisition Subtracted (Fast) Sequence Sufficient for Disease Evaluation?

Objectives: The aim of this study was to assess the diagnostic performance of abbreviated MRI (AMRI) using the maximal intensity projection (MIP) reconstruction of the first post-contrast acquisition subtracted (FAST) compared with MIP+FAST and full-protocol MRI (fpMRI) for the preoperative assessment of breast cancer (BC) in a biopsy-proven cancer population.

Methods: In this monocentric retrospective study, two readers consensually assessed two AMRI protocols consisting of MIP reconstruction of the FAST (MIP) and MIP+FAST. 228 patients were included with a breast MRI performed between 2013 and 2014, 207 of them (90.8%) had biopsy-proven cancer with 256 lesions. Data of MIP and MIP+FAST were compared to full-protocol MRI (fpMRI) reading and to the reference standard including 6-month follow-up imaging and pathology as the reference.

Results: MIP, MIP+FAST and fpMRI demonstrated a per-lesion sensitivity for BC detection of 87.5% (224/256, 95%CI: 82.9-91.3%) and 97.7% (250/256, 95-99.1%) and 98.4% (252/256, 96.1-99.6%), respectively with a statistical difference between MIP compared to MIP+FAST and fpMRI when considering confidence intervals. Per-lesion specificity was not different [MIP: 47.6% (10/21, 25.7-70.2%), MIP+FAST: 52.4% (11/21,29.8-74.3%, fpMRI: 66.7% (14/21, 43-85.4%)].

Conclusion: AMRI using only MIP is not accurate for the pre-operative assessment of BC due to lower sensitivity when compared to MIP+FAST and fpMRI. AMRI using the MIP+FAST acquisition in the preoperative setting seems promising as it could be used as the same protocol for both screening and staging in case of positive cases, without need for a recall fpMRI. This needs confirmation with cohort including higher rate of negative cases in order to evaluate the specificity.

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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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