Comparative analysis of MRI vs mammography in evaluation of size, number of lesions and nodal status of breast cancer
600 Background: Breast MRI is thought to be better in evaluating patients (pts) with BrCa. Our study was to compare MRI vs mam to predict leisons and LNS in BrCa. Methods: A retrospective study of 100 consecutive pts with pathologically proven BrCa was done. All had preoperative MRI and mam. Findings were compared to the final pathologic size, used as gold standard. MRI and was done at same center and single surgeon did all surgeries. Results: Of 100 pts,MRI reported 124 lesions. MRI reported size in 107 and mam reported size in 63 lesions. In MRI detected sizes 8% had same size as pathological size, 66% were overestimated by a mean of 0.64cm and 26% were underestimated by a mean of 0.48cm. For mam lesions, 10% had same size, 34% were overestimated by a mean of 1.10cm, 57% were underestimated by a mean of 0.78 cm. Total of 25 additional lesions were found in 23 pts in same and 6 leisons in 6 pts in contralateral breast by MRI. MRI also detected enlarged axillary and intramammary LN in 15% pts, 40% were true positives(+ve) and 60% were false +ve. One pt had metastatic LN in the contralateral axilla detected by MRI and confirmed by lymphoscintogram and pathology. 3% pts had neo-adjuvant chemotherapy Conclusion: In our study mam underestimated the breast lesion size in pts significantly more than MRI, but MRI overestimated BrCa lesion size in more number of pts. The mean difference in size on MRI when compared to the pathological size is less than 1 cm, while mam overestimated by a mean of greater than 1cm. This might be particularly important for T1 and T2 lesions, where size is the most important criterion for the T-stage classification. The identification of additional lesions and enlarged LN on MRI further validates the utility of MRI. [Table: see text] No significant financial relationships to disclose.