Journals / Haydarpaşa Numune Medical Journal / 2019 / Cilt: 59 - Sayı: 2

The Value of Magnetic Resonance Imaging For Staging and Planning Breast-Conserving Surgery

Pages
116–122
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The overall tumor size, the relationship between tumor size and breast size, tumor localization, tumor stage, and histopathological findings help to shape surgical management.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Introduction: This study aimed to evaluate the effect of breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) on staging and surgical planning.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Results: Contribution of breast MRI to the workup and management of breast cancer in our institute was meaningful by upstaging the cases in 23/92 (25%) of the patients and suggesting a change in surgical plan in 21/92 (23%) of the patients.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The overall tumor size, the relationship between tumor size and breast size, tumor localization, tumor stage, and histopathological findings help to shape surgical management.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Özet

Introduction: This study aimed to evaluate the effect of breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) on staging and surgical planning. Methods: Ninety-two females with breast cancer were enrolled in the study. We prospectively evaluated the contribution of MRI compared to mammography (MMG) and ultrasonography (USG) and impact of MRI on surgical treatment and histopathological concordance. Results: Contribution of breast MRI to the workup and management of breast cancer in our institute was meaningful by upstaging the cases in 23/92 (25%) of the patients and suggesting a change in surgical plan in 21/92 (23%) of the patients. Surgical staging with breast MRI results correlated with the final pathological staging in 18/21 (85%) patients who had a change in surgical plan. Discussion and Conclusion: The primary therapy modality of early breast cancer is surgery. The overall tumor size, the relationship between tumor size and breast size, tumor localization, tumor stage, and histopathological findings help to shape surgical management. MRI was better than conventional diagnostic techniques in determining correct tumor diameter and in detecting non-invasive cancer areas. Consequently preoperative breast MRI is an important adjunct to conventional imaging (USG and MMG) in the staging of breast cancer and a useful tool in treatment planning.

🔖

Cite This Article

KÖSE, E. E., ÖZEL, L., REYHAN, G., ATA, P., KARAGÜLLÜ, H., KILIÇOĞLU, G. (2019). The Value of Magnetic Resonance Imaging For Staging and Planning Breast-Conserving Surgery. Haydarpaşa Numune Medical Journal, Cilt: 59 - Sayı: 2, 116–122. https://ajindex.com/articles/167199

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (14)

  1. Kulkarni S, Singh N, Crystal P. Preoperative breast magnetic resonance imaging: applications in clinical practice. Can Assoc Radiol J 2012
  2. 207–14. [CrossRef ] 2. Schelfout K, Van Goethem M, Kersschot E, Colpaert C, Schelfhout AM, Leyman P, et al. Contrast-enhanced MR imaging of breast lesions and effect on treatment. Eur J Surg Oncol 2004
  3. 501–7. [CrossRef ] 3. Heywang-Köbrunner SH. Contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging of the breast. Invest Radiol 1994
  4. 94–104. 4. Gilles R, Guinebretière JM, Lucidarme O, Cluzel P, Janaud G, Finet JF, et al. Nonpalpable breast tumors: diagnosis with contrast- enhanced subtraction dynamic MR imaging. Radiology 1994
  5. 625–31. [CrossRef ] 5. Kaiser WA. MR mammography. Der Radiologe 1993
  6. 292–8. 6. Gilles R, Zafrani B, Guinebretière JM, Meunier M, Lucidarme O, Tardivon AA, et al. Ductal carcinoma in situ: MR imaginghistopathologic correlation. Radiology 1995
  7. 415–9. 7. Fischer U, Westerhof JP, Brinck U, Korabiowska M, Schauer A, Grabbe E. Ductal carcinoma in situ in dynamic MR-mammography at 1.5 T. [Article in German]. Rofo 1996
  8. 290–4. 8. Rieber A, Merkle E, Böhm W, Brambs HJ, Tomczak R. MRI of histologically confirmed mammary carcinoma: clinical relevance of diagnostic procedures for detection of multifocal or contralateral secondary carcinoma. J Comput Assist Tomogr 1997
  9. 773–9. [CrossRef ] 9. Fischer U, Vosshenrich R, Probst A, Burchhardt H, Grabbe E. Preoperative MR-mammography in diagnosed breast carcinoma. Useful information or useless extravagance?. [Article in German]. Rofo 1994
  10. 300–6. [CrossRef ] 10. Fischer U, Kopka L, Grabbe E. Breast carcinoma: effect of preoperative contrast-enhanced MR imaging on the therapeutic approach. Radiology 1999
  11. 881–8. [CrossRef ] 11. Lee SG, Orel SG, Woo IJ, Cruz-Jove E, Putt ME, Solin LJ, et al. MR imaging screening of the contralateral breast in patients with newly diagnosed breast cancer: preliminary results. Radiology 2003
  12. 773–8. [CrossRef ] 12. Liberman L, Morris EA, Kim CM, Kaplan JB, Abramson AF, Menell JH, et al. MR imaging findings in the contralateral breast of women with recently diagnosed breast cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2003
  13. 333–41. [CrossRef ] 13. Viehweg P, Rotter K, Laniado M, Lampe D, Buchmann J, Kölbl H, et al. MR imaging of the contralateral breast in patients after breast-conserving therapy. Eur Radiol 2004
  14. 402–8. 14. Pediconi F, Catalano C, Padula S, Roselli A, Moriconi E, Dominelli V, et al. Contrast-enhanced magnet