metricas
covid
Buscar en
Clinics
Toda la web
Inicio Clinics Comments on “Evaluation of the Accuracy of Mammography, Ultrasound and Magneti...
Journal Information
Vol. 75.
(January 2020)
Share
Share
Download PDF
More article options
Vol. 75.
(January 2020)
COMMENTS
Open Access
Comments on “Evaluation of the Accuracy of Mammography, Ultrasound and Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Suspect Breast Lesions”
Visits
549
Yongyu An
Corresponding author
an1518068842@163.com

Corresponding author.
Department of Radiology, Tongde Hospital of Zhejiang Province, Zhejiang Province, China
Related content
Renato de Oliveira Pereira, Larissa Almondes da Luz, Diego Cipriano Chagas, Jefferson Rodrigues Amorim, Elmo de Jesus Nery-Júnior, Araci Castelo Branco Rodrigues Alves, Flávio Teixeira de Abreu-Neto, Maria da Conceição Barros Oliveira, Danylo Rafhael Costa Silva, José Maria Soares-Júnior, Benedito Borges da Silva
This item has received

Under a Creative Commons license
Article information
Full Text
Bibliography
Download PDF
Statistics
Full Text

Dear Editor:

I read the article (1) “Evaluation of the accuracy of mammography, ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging in suspect breast lesions” (Pereira et al.) with great interest; however, I am left confused by the study and believe some issues must be discussed.

The aim of this study was to compare the diagnostic performance of three imaging methods for breast cancer (1). However, all patients showed a suspect breast lesion on evaluation by at least one of the methods. Based on the Breast Imaging-Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS), biopsy or surgical resection was recommended; however, the positive predictive value for BI-RADS categories 4 and 5 varies depending on the imaging modality. For instance, almost 90% of the suspect lesions detected by ultrasound eventually show negative results, leading to unnecessary biopsies (2). In this setting, the role of other imaging modalities is to evaluate whether a suspected lesion is truly malignant. Hence, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is the superior modality as it shows high sensitivity for breast cancer detection and has a high negative predictive value for the exclusion of malignancy (3–5), as shown in the study by Pereira at al. (1). Furthermore, several studies have suggested that MRI could be used as a problem-solving tool in cases of suspicious clinical and radiological findings (6–8).

Finally, I do not agree with the statement that MRI has low specificity owing to high breast density. Breast density has a vital impact on the interpretation of mammography findings, but not on that of MRI findings. On dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI, both morphology and kinetics are key for the diagnosis of breast lesions, although there is considerable overlap between signs of benign and malignant lesions, resulting in false-positive findings. Several studies have revealed that diffusion-weighted imaging can improve the specificity of breast MRI and help avoid unnecessary biopsies (9,10). The specificity shown in this study was low (1); hence, I wonder whether diffusion-weighted imaging was integrated into breast MRI. I would be interested in receiving responses to my comments.

REFERENCES
[1]
RO Pereira , LAD Luz , DC Chagas , JR Amorim , EJ Nery-Júnior , ACBR Alves , et al.
Valuation of the accuracy of mammography, ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging in suspect breast lesions.
[2]
WA Berg , Z Zhang , D Lehrer , RA Jong , ED Pisano , RG Barr , et al.
Detection of breast cancer with addition of annual screening ultrasound or a single screening MRI to mammography in women with elevated breast cancer risk.
[3]
RM Mann , C Balleyguier , PA Baltzer , U Bick , C Colin , E Cornford , et al.
Breast MRI: EUSOBI recommendations for women's information.
[4]
B Bennani-Baiti , N Bennani-Baiti , PA Baltzer .
Diagnostic Performance of Breast Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Non-Calcified Equivocal Breast Findings: Results from a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
[5]
C Spick , DHM Szolar , KW Preidler , M Tillich , P Reittner , PA Baltzer .
Breast MRI used as a problem-solving tool reliably excludes malignancy.
[6]
K Strobel , S Schrading , NL Hansen , A Barabasch , CK Kuhl .
Assessment of BI-RADS category 4 lesions detected with screening mammography and screening US: utility of MR imaging.
[7]
CS Giess , SA Chikarmane , DA Sippo , RL Birdwell .
Clinical Utility of Breast MRI in the Diagnosis of Malignancy After Inconclusive or Equivocal Mammographic Diagnostic Evaluation.
[8]
C Spick , DHM Szolar , KW Preidler , P Reittner , K Rauch , P Brader , et al.
3 Tesla breast MR imaging as a problem-solving tool: Diagnostic performance and incidental lesions.
[9]
H Dijkstra , MD Dorrius , M Wielema , RM Pijnappel , M Oudkerk , PE Sijens .
Quantitative DWI implemented after DCE-MRI yields increased specificity for BI-RADS 3 and 4 breast lesions.
[10]
H Rahbar , Z Zhang , TL Chenevert , J Romanoff , AE Kitsch , LG Hanna , et al.
Utility of Diffusion-weighted Imaging to Decrease Unnecessary Biopsies Prompted by Breast MRI: A Trial of the ECOG-ACRIN Cancer Research Group (A6702).

No potential conflict of interest was reported.

Copyright © 2020. CLINICS
Article options
es en pt

¿Es usted profesional sanitario apto para prescribir o dispensar medicamentos?

Are you a health professional able to prescribe or dispense drugs?

Você é um profissional de saúde habilitado a prescrever ou dispensar medicamentos