Neurofibroma (NF) of the breast is an uncommon benign entity that occurs sporadically or in association with neurofibromatosis type 1 (NF1). Sporadic NF of the breast is very rare and can present at any age. Neurofibroma of the breast associated with NF1 is more common. Neurofibroma commonly presents as oval, circumscribed masses that overlap with many benign entities. The histopathologic diagnosis of NF of the breast can present a management dilemma for the breast radiologist. An NF that is not associated with NF1 has good post-resection prognosis if superficial, sporadic, and solitary. However, NF of the breast diagnosed in an otherwise healthy patient should prompt evaluation for NF1 and formal genetic risk assessment. Patients diagnosed with NF1 have a higher lifetime risk for developing breast cancer and therefore may benefit from both initiating screening mammography at a younger age and supplemental screening MRI.
Axillary lymphadenopathy caused by the high immunogenicity of messenger RNA (mRNA) COVID-19 vaccines presents radiologists with new diagnostic dilemmas in differentiating vaccine-related benign reactive lymphadenopathy from that due to malignant causes. Understanding axillary anatomy and lymphatic drainage is key to radiologic evaluation of the axilla. US plays a critical role in evaluation and classification of axillary lymph nodes on the basis of their cortical and hilar morphology, which allows prediction of metastatic disease. Guidelines for evaluation and management of axillary lymphadenopathy continue to evolve as radiologists gain more experience with axillary lymphadenopathy related to COVID-19 vaccines. General guidelines recommend documenting vaccination dates and laterality and administering all vaccine doses contralateral to the site of primary malignancy whenever applicable. Guidelines also recommend against postponing imaging for urgent clinical indications or for treatment planning in patients with newly diagnosed breast cancer. Although conservative management approaches to axillary lymphadenopathy initially recommended universal short-interval imaging follow-up, updates to those approaches as well as risk-stratified approaches recommend interpreting lymphadenopathy in the context of both vaccination timing and the patient’s overall risk of metastatic disease. Patients with active breast cancer in the pretreatment or peritreatment phase should be evaluated with standard imaging protocols regardless of vaccination status. Tissue sampling and multidisciplinary discussion remain useful in management of complex cases, including increasing lymphadenopathy at follow-up imaging, MRI evaluation of extent of disease, response to neoadjuvant treatment, and potentially confounding cases. An invited commentary by Weinstein is available online. © RSNA, 2022
Multiple localizers placed in a bracketed fashion facilitates excision of radiographically extensive breast lesions. In this study, bracketed radioactive seed localization (bRSL) was compared to bracketed wire localization (bWL). We hypothesized that bRSL would achieve adequate margins and decrease re-operation rates with similar or less specimen volumes (SV) than bWL. Retrospective review identified patients who underwent bracketed breast procedures at an academic medical center. Data collected included patient demographics, tumor features, treatment variables, and surgical outcomes. Wilcoxon rank-sum test and chi-square test were used to compare continuous and categorical data, respectively. A multivariable logistic regression model was used to evaluate the association between re-excision and localization technique after adjusting for clinically relevant variables. Patients who underwent bWL were 3.9 times more likely to undergo re-excision compared to patients in bRSL group (OR=3.9, 95% CI: 2.0-7.4). Initial and total SV did not significantly differ between the two groups (P=.4). Patients were significantly more likely to undergo a mastectomy in the bWL group than in the bRSL group (24% vs 7%; P<.01). For patients undergoing excision of radiologically extensive breast lesions, bRSL serves as an alternative to bWL. In this retrospective study, bRSL was associated with a decreased re-excision rate with similar SV and a lower rate of mastectomy when compared to bWL.
BackgroundObesity and high radiologic breast density independently increase breast cancer risk. We evaluated the effect of surgical weight loss on mammographic density (MD).MethodsPatients undergoing bariatric surgery and screening mammography (MG) were identified, data regarding demographics, comorbidities, calculated and genetic breast cancer risk was collected. Patients had a MG before and after surgery. Fellowship-trained breast radiologists assigned Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System density categories.ResultsPatients underwent sleeve gastrectomy (n = 56) or gastric bypass (n = 7), 78% had hypertension, 48% had diabetes. Four had deleterious BRCA mutations, four were calculated high risk. Mean weight loss = 28.7 kg. Mean initial BMI = 44.3 kg/m2 (range:33–77), final BMI = 33.6 kg/m2 (range:20–62;p < 0.01). Density was unchanged in 53, decreased in 1, increased in 9. Of these 9(14%), 5 changed from almost entirely fatty to scattered MD, and 4 changed from scattered MD to heterogeneously dense. Mean weight loss of the 9 with increased MD was greater than the cohort (37.7vs.28.7 kg;p < 0.01).ConclusionsSurgical weight loss increased MD in 14%. Increased MD masks malignancies, patients may benefit from additional screening based on calculated risk assessments that include MD.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.