scholarly journals Role of MRI in Breast Cancer Staging: A Case-Based Review

Cureus ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Swati Sharma ◽  
Fiorella G Vicenty-Latorre ◽  
Sherif Elsherif ◽  
Smita Sharma
2012 ◽  
Vol 56 (2) ◽  
pp. 139-145 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sara E. Monaco ◽  
Amy Colaizzi ◽  
Anisa Kanbour ◽  
Ahmed S. Ibrahim ◽  
Amal Kanbour-Shakir

2015 ◽  
Vol 96 (1) ◽  
pp. 27-35 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. Mercier ◽  
F. Kwiatkowski ◽  
C. Abrial ◽  
V. Boussion ◽  
V. Dieu-de Fraissinette ◽  
...  

2017 ◽  
Vol 69 (7) ◽  
pp. 2798-2803
Author(s):  
Salha Mofareh Ghazwani ◽  
Maram Adnan Rawah ◽  
Jaber Mohammed Zarbah

Author(s):  
Katie N Hunt

Abstract Molecular breast imaging (MBI) is a nuclear medicine technique that has evolved considerably over the past two decades. Technical advances have allowed reductions in administered doses to the point that they are now acceptable for screening. The most common radiotracer used in MBI, 99mTc-sestamibi, has a long history of safe use. Biopsy capability has become available in recent years, with early clinical experience demonstrating technically successful biopsies of MBI-detected lesions. MBI has been shown to be an effective supplemental screening tool in women with dense breasts and is also utilized for breast cancer staging, assessment of response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy, problem solving, and as an alternative to breast MRI in women who have a contraindication to MRI. The degree of background parenchymal uptake on MBI shows promise as a tool for breast cancer risk stratification. Radiologist interpretation is guided by a validated MBI lexicon that mirrors the BI-RADS lexicon. With short interpretation times, a fast learning curve for radiologists, and a substantially lower cost than breast MRI, MBI provides many benefits in the practices in which it is utilized. This review will discuss the current state of MBI technology, clinical applications of MBI, MBI interpretation, radiation dose associated with MBI, and the future of MBI.


2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (A) ◽  
pp. 970-975
Author(s):  
Ahmed Tawakol ◽  
Maha Khalil ◽  
Yasser G. Abdelhafez ◽  
Mai Hussein ◽  
Mohamed Fouad Osman

BACKGROUND: Accurate staging is important for management decisions in patients with newly diagnosed breast cancer. AIM: This study was conducted to evaluate the value of 18 fluorine-fluorodeoxyglucose (18F-FDG) positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) imaging in breast cancer staging.. METHODS: A prospective study of 80 patients (1 male and 79 female) mean age 51.13 years with histologically confirmed breast cancer. The staging procedures included history, physical examination, mammography, and CT of neck, chest, abdomen, and pelvis; then, PET/CT was performed in a time interval <30 days. The findings of PET/CT were compared with those of the other conventional methods. RESULTS: The agreement between conventional methods (mammography, breast ultrasound, contrast-enhanced CT of the neck, chest, abdomen, and pelvis) and 18F FDG-PET/CT was 0.6 for assessing the T stage, 0.39 for N stage, and 0.75 for M stage. There was moderate agreement between CT and 18F FDG-PET/CT in the detection of nodal lesions (K=0.6) and pulmonary lesions (K=0.51), while a perfect agreement was noted for detecting osseous (K=0.82) and liver lesions (K=0.81). In total, 50 patients (62.5%) were concordantly staged between the conventional imaging and 18F-FDG PET/CT, while 30 patients (37.5%) showed a different tumor, node, and metastasis stage. The changes were driven by the detection of additional findings (n=26) or exclusion of findings (n=4), mainly at the lymph nodes (LNs) and/or distant sites. Regarding N status, 18F FDG-PET/CT revealed previously unknown regional lymphatic spread in supraclavicular (n=4; 5%), infraclavicular (n=11; 13.7%), and internal mammary (n=12; 15%) lymph node groups. 18F-FDG PET/CT changed M status in a total of four patients (5%); three of them were upstaged by detecting distant metastases, while osseous deposits were excluded in one patient leading to downstaging. CONCLUSION: 18F-FDG-PET/CT is considered a valuable imaging tool in the initial staging of breast cancer, which significantly impacts the overall American Joint Committee on Cancer staging in 37.5% of our study population.


2020 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 521-528
Author(s):  
Christiane J. El Khoury ◽  
Salim M. Adib ◽  
Monique Chaaya ◽  
Khalil El Asmar ◽  
Maya Charafeddine ◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (6) ◽  
pp. 407-414 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ashley Biswal ◽  
Jacqueline Erler ◽  
Omar Qari ◽  
Arthur A. Topilow ◽  
Varsha Gupta ◽  
...  

2012 ◽  
pp. 11 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anne Ording ◽  
Malene Schou Nielsson ◽  
Trine Frøslev ◽  
Søren Friis ◽  
Garne ◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
Vol 25 (5) ◽  
pp. 829-837 ◽  
Author(s):  
Esther C. Yoon ◽  
Christopher Schwartz ◽  
Edi Brogi ◽  
Katia Ventura ◽  
Hannah Wen ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document