scholarly journals The effectiveness of contrast-enhanced spectral mammography and magnetic resonance imaging in dense breasts

2021 ◽  
Vol 86 (1) ◽  
pp. 159-164
Author(s):  
Wojciech Rudnicki ◽  
Tomasz Piegza ◽  
Natalia Rozum-Liszewska ◽  
Mateusz Górski ◽  
Tadeusz J. Popiela ◽  
...  
2020 ◽  
Vol 184 (3) ◽  
pp. 723-731
Author(s):  
Anna Bozzini ◽  
Luca Nicosia ◽  
Giancarlo Pruneri ◽  
Patrick Maisonneuve ◽  
Lorenza Meneghetti ◽  
...  

Abstract Purpose To compare the efficacy of contrast-enhanced spectral mammography, with ultrasound, full field digital mammography and magnetic resonance imaging in detection and size estimation of histologically proven breast tumors. Methods This open-label, single center, prospective study, included 160 dense breast women with at least one suspicious mammary lesion evaluated by ultrasound, full field digital mammography and magnetic resonance imaging in whom a mammary tumor was histologically proven after surgery performed at the European Institute of Oncology between January 2013 and December 2015. Following the complete diagnostic procedure, the patients were further investigated by contrast-enhanced spectral mammography prior to surgery. Results Overall, the detection rate of malignant breast lesions (in situ and invasive) was 93.8% (165/176) for contrast-enhanced spectral mammography, 94.4% (168/178) for ultrasound, 85.5 (147/172) for full field digital mammography and 97.7% (173/177) for magnetic resonance imaging. Radiological measurements were concordant with the post-surgical pathological measurements of the invasive tumor (i.e., within 5 mm) in: 64.6% for contrast-enhanced spectral mammography, 62.0% for ultrasound, 45.2% for full field digital mammography (p < 0.0001) and 69.9% for magnetic resonance imaging (p = 0.28); underestimated in: 17.4% for contrast-enhanced spectral mammography, 19.6% for ultrasound, 24.2% for full field digital mammography (p = 0.03) and 6.7% for magnetic resonance imaging (p = 0.0005); and overestimated in: 16.2% for contrast-enhanced spectral mammography, 16.6% for ultrasound, 16.6% for full field digital mammography and 22.7% for magnetic resonance imaging (p = 0.02). Conclusions Our data suggest that contrast-enhanced spectral mammography improves on full field digital mammography and is comparable to ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging in terms of detection sensitivity and size estimation of malignant lesions in dense breasts.


2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (7) ◽  
pp. 1781-1786
Author(s):  
Ze’ai Wang ◽  
Yanfeng Wang ◽  
Yuan Wang ◽  
Chaogang Wei ◽  
Yibin Deng ◽  
...  

Biomineralized iron oxide–polydopamine hybrid nanodots are constructed using albumin nanoreactors to facilitate contrast-enhanced T1-weighted magnetic resonance imaging as well as photothermal therapeutic efficacy.


2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (9) ◽  
pp. 4586
Author(s):  
Marta Orts-Arroyo ◽  
Amadeo Ten-Esteve ◽  
Sonia Ginés-Cárdenas ◽  
Isabel Castro ◽  
Luis Martí-Bonmatí ◽  
...  

The paramagnetic gadolinium(III) ion is used as contrast agent in magnetic resonance (MR) imaging to improve the lesion detection and characterization. It generates a signal by changing the relaxivity of protons from associated water molecules and creates a clearer physical distinction between the molecule and the surrounding tissues. New gadolinium-based contrast agents displaying larger relaxivity values and specifically targeted might provide higher resolution and better functional images. We have synthesized the gadolinium(III) complex of formula [Gd(thy)2(H2O)6](ClO4)3·2H2O (1) [thy = 5-methyl-1H-pyrimidine-2,4-dione or thymine], which is the first reported compound based on gadolinium and thymine nucleobase. 1 has been characterized through UV-vis, IR, SEM-EDAX, and single-crystal X-ray diffraction techniques, and its magnetic and relaxometric properties have been investigated by means of SQUID magnetometer and MR imaging phantom studies, respectively. On the basis of its high relaxivity values, this gadolinium(III) complex can be considered a suitable candidate for contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging.


Head & Neck ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Soumya Ranjan Malla ◽  
Ashu Seith Bhalla ◽  
Smita Manchanda ◽  
Devasenathipathy Kandasamy ◽  
Rakesh Kumar ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document