Scintimammographic Analysis of Nonpalpable Breast Lesions Previously Identified by Conventional Mammography

Tolmos, Jorge; Cutrone, John A.; Wang, Benjamin; Vargas, Hernan I.; Stuntz, Michael; Mishkin, Fred S.; Diggles, L.; Venegas, Rose; Klein, Stanley R.; Khalkhali, Iraj

doi:10.1093/jnci/90.11.846

Cited by 46 publications

(24 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Other imaging techniques, such as 99Tc-methoxyisobutyl isonitrile (MIBI) [22] and sestamibi [23] scintimammography or FDG-PET [11,24,25], were evaluated with the intention of reducing the number of biopsies required in patients with suspicious breast tumours. The results of the scintimammography differ with a sensitivity of 56-85% [22,23] and specificity of 79-87% depending on imaging technique and patient population.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Clinical and diagnostic value of preoperative MR mammography and FDG-PET in suspicious breast lesions

et al. 2003

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Dynamic enhanced magnetic resonance (MR) mammography and fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) of the breast were directly compared preoperatively in suspicious breast lesions. Forty-two breast lesions in 40 patients were examined with a three-dimensional dynamic MR imaging series and FDG-PET. The MR and PET examinations were evaluated separately and the results were compared with the histological findings. The sensitivity and specificity of each method were calculated. The diagnostic value of both modalities as single diagnostic tool and in combination was investigated. Nineteen malignant and 23 benign breast lesions were proven histologically. Magnetic resonance mammography and FDG-PET showed a sensitivity of 89 and 63%, respectively. The specificity was 74 and 91%, respectively. The combination of both imaging methods decreased the not-required biopsies from 55 to 17%. Only one false-negative finding-a patient pre-treated with chemotherapy-was observed in both methods. The combination of MR mammography and FDG-PET can help to decrease biopsies of benign breast lesions. Because of their high cost, these modalities should only be used in problematic cases to either rule out or to demonstrate malignancy. The best diagnostic strategy is achieved using MR mammography first. If the diagnosis is still questionable, FDG-PET can be performed.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The results of the scintimammography differ with a sensitivity of 56-85% [22,23] and specificity of 79-87% depending on imaging technique and patient population. Consequently, this technique cannot be recommended exclusively in routine work-up of patients with breast abnormalities [23].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Clinical and diagnostic value of preoperative MR mammography and FDG-PET in suspicious breast lesions

et al. 2003

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In addition, scintimammography has not shown increased uptake in women with architectural distortion or scarring from a prior procedure [11]. 99mTc sestamibi scintimammography performed with a general-purpose gamma camera is limited by the inability to reliably image cancers smaller than 1 cm, owing to its intrinsic resolution with a sensitivity for these lesions of 35-65% [12][13][14][15][16][17]. Accounting for these limitations in resolution and the design of the traditional gamma camera for breast imaging, high-resolution breast-specific gamma cameras have been developed ( fig.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Molecular Imaging in Breast Cancer – Potential Future Aspects

Pinker¹,

Bogner²,

Gruber³

et al. 2011

Breast Care

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Molecular imaging aims to visualize and quantify biological, physiological, and pathological processes at cellular and molecular levels. Recently, molecular imaging has been introduced into breast cancer imaging. In this review, we will present a survey of the molecular imaging techniques that are either clinically available or are being introduced into clinical imaging. We will discuss nuclear imaging and multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging as well as the combined application of molecular imaging in the assessment of breast lesions. In addition, we will briefly discuss other evolving molecular imaging techniques, such as phosphorus magnetic resonance spectroscopic imaging and sodium imaging.

show abstract

“…Scintigraphy with Tc-99m sestamibi has also been proposed to visualize malignant breast tumors [17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,29]. In a meta-analysis, Taillefer [30] reported an overall sensitivity of 85 % and a specificity of 89 % in detecting breast cancer, with a wide range, depending on inclusion and evaluation criteria; however, the value of this method in a multimodal context is not well established.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of dynamic MR imaging of the breast and sestamibi scintimammography for evaluation of indeterminate mammographic lesions

et al. 2001

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this study was to compare Tc-99m sestamibi scintimammography and dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging for the evaluation of indeterminate mammographic lesions. Forty patients with questionable mammographic findings were included in a prospective study. Thirty lesions were non-palpable. Mean lesion size was 1.6+/-0.7 cm (range 0.5-3.5 cm). Scintigraphy was considered as malignant when focal tracer accumulation was present. In MR imaging, lesions were classified according to their signal intensity time course: no enhancement or steady enhancement with low signal intensity (M0); steady enhancement with high signal intensity (M1); or rapid enhancement with plateau (M2) or washout (M3). Lesions classified as M2 or M3 were considered as suspicious for malignancy. Histopathologic evaluation was performed in 24 lesions. In 16 cases lesions were classified as benign from follow-up examinations (mean 24 months). Malignancies were proven in 14 patients (9 invasive carcinomas, 5 ductal carcinoma in situ). Sensitivity of MR imaging was 12 of 14 (86%) and sensitivity of scintimammography was 8 of 14 (57%). One of 26 benign lesions was false positive at MR imaging. Scintigraphy showed no false-positive results. In conclusion, magnetic resonance imaging provided high accuracy in evaluation of indeterminate mammographic lesions. Sensitivity of scintimammography was too low in detecting small carcinomas.

show abstract

Scintimammographic Analysis of Nonpalpable Breast Lesions Previously Identified by Conventional Mammography

Cited by 46 publications

References 20 publications

Clinical and diagnostic value of preoperative MR mammography and FDG-PET in suspicious breast lesions

Clinical and diagnostic value of preoperative MR mammography and FDG-PET in suspicious breast lesions

Molecular Imaging in Breast Cancer – Potential Future Aspects

Comparison of dynamic MR imaging of the breast and sestamibi scintimammography for evaluation of indeterminate mammographic lesions

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About