Archives of Plastic Surgery

  • 제40권3호
  • /
  • Pages.203-208
  • /
  • 2013
  • /
  • 2234-6163(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2234-6171(eISSN)
대한성형외과학회 (Korean Society of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgeons)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Based Volumetric Analysis and Its Relationship to Actual Breast Weight

  • Yoo, Anna (Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Seoul National University College of Medicine) ;
  • Minn, Kyung Won (Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Seoul National University College of Medicine) ;
  • Jin, Ung Sik (Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Seoul National University College of Medicine)
  • 투고 : 2013.02.14
  • 심사 : 2013.04.16
  • 발행 : 2013.05.15
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

Background Preoperative volume assessment is useful in breast reconstruction. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and mammography are commonly available to reconstructive surgeons in the care of a patient with breast cancer. This study aimed to verify the accuracy of breast volume measured by MRI, and to identify any factor affecting the relationship between measured breast volume and actual breast weight to derive a new model for accurate breast volume estimation. Methods From January 2012 to January 2013, a retrospective review was performed on a total of 101 breasts from 99 patients who had undergone total mastectomy. The mastectomy specimen weight was obtained for each breast. Mammographic and MRI data were used to estimate the volume and density. A standard statistical analysis was performed. Results The mean mastectomy specimen weight was 340.8 g (range, 95 to 795 g). The mean MRI-estimated volume was $322.2mL^3$. When divided into three groups by the "difference percentage value", the underestimated group showed a significantly higher fibroglandular volume, higher percent density, and included significantly more Breast Imaging, Reporting and Data System mammographic density grade 4 breasts than the other groups. We derived a new model considering both fibroglandular tissue volume and fat tissue volume for accurate breast volume estimation. Conclusions MRI-based breast volume assessment showed a significant correlation with actual breast weight; however, in the case of dense breasts, the reconstructive surgeon should note that the mastectomy specimen weight tends to overestimate the volume. We suggested a new model for accurate breast volume assessment considering fibroglandular and fat tissue volume.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. Katariya RN, Forrest AP, Gravelle IH. Breast volumes in cancer of the breast. Br J Cancer 1974;29:270-3. https://doi.org/10.1038/bjc.1974.66
  2. Malini S, Smith EO, Goldzieher JW. Measurement of breast volume by ultrasound during normal menstrual cycles and with oral contraceptive use. Obstet Gynecol 1985;66:538-41.
  3. Fowler PA, Casey CE, Cameron GG, et al. Cyclic changes in composition and volume of the breast during the menstrual cycle, measured by magnetic resonance imaging. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1990;97:595-602. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-0528.1990.tb02546.x
  4. Daly SE, Kent JC, Huynh DQ, et al. The determination of short-term breast volume changes and the rate of synthesis of human milk using computerized breast measurement. Exp Physiol 1992;77:79-87. https://doi.org/10.1113/expphysiol.1992.sp003584
  5. Ward C, Harrison B. The search for volumetric symmetry in reconstruction of the breast after mastectomy. Br J Plast Surg 1986;39:379-85. https://doi.org/10.1016/0007-1226(86)90052-4
  6. Bulstrode N, Bellamy E, Shrotria S. Breast volume assessment: comparing five different techniques. Breast 2001;10: 117-23. https://doi.org/10.1054/brst.2000.0196
  7. Yip JM, Mouratova N, Jeffery RM, et al. Accurate assessment of breast volume: a study comparing the volumetric gold standard (direct water displacement measurement of mastectomy specimen) with a 3D laser scanning technique. Ann Plast Surg 2012;68:135-41. https://doi.org/10.1097/SAP.0b013e31820ebdd0
  8. Klifa C, Carballido-Gamio J, Wilmes L, et al. Quantification of breast tissue index from MR data using fuzzy clustering. Conf Proc IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc 2004;3:1667-70.
  9. Chang DH, Chen JH, Lin M, et al. Comparison of breast density measured on MR images acquired using fat-suppressed versus nonfat-suppressed sequences. Med Phys 2011; 38:5961-8. https://doi.org/10.1118/1.3646756
  10. Nie K, Chen JH, Chan S, et al. Development of a quantitative method for analysis of breast density based on threedimensional breast MRI. Med Phys 2008;35:5253-62. https://doi.org/10.1118/1.3002306
  11. Parmar C, West M, Pathak S, et al. Weight versus volume in breast surgery: an observational study. JRSM Short Rep 2011;2:87. https://doi.org/10.1258/shorts.2011.011070
  12. Aslan G, Terzioglu A, Tuncali D, et al. Breast reduction: weight versus volume. Plast Reconstr Surg 2003;112:339-40.
  13. Yang JH, Lee TJ. Correlation of breast tissue density and body mass index. J Korean Soc Plast Reconstr Surg 2010; 37:732-5.
  14. Hou N, Huo D. A trend analysis of breast cancer incidence rates in the United States from 2000 to 2009 shows a recent increase. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2013;138:633-41. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-013-2434-0
  15. Kovacs L, Eder M, Hollweck R, et al. Comparison between breast volume measurement using 3D surface imaging and classical techniques. Breast 2007;16:137-45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.breast.2006.08.001

피인용 문헌

  1. Invited Commentary for “Preoperative Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Based Breast Volumetry for Immediate Breast Reconstruction” vol.39, pp.3, 2013, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00266-015-0492-x
  2. Preoperative Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Based Breast Volumetry for Immediate Breast Reconstruction vol.39, pp.3, 2013, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00266-015-0493-9
  3. Breast Reconstruction Using a TRAM Free Flap with a Mini-Abdominoplasty Design and Flap Beveling vol.21, pp.3, 2013, https://doi.org/10.14730/aaps.2015.21.3.109
  4. Imaging of common breast implants and implant-related complications: A pictorial essay vol.26, pp.2, 2016, https://doi.org/10.4103/0971-3026.184409
  5. Avoiding a Systematic Error in Assessing Fat Graft Survival in the Breast with Repeated Magnetic Resonance Imaging vol.4, pp.9, 2013, https://doi.org/10.1097/gox.0000000000001023
  6. Patient Satisfaction with Implant Based Breast Reconstruction Associated with Implant Volume and Mastectomy Specimen Weight Ratio vol.20, pp.1, 2013, https://doi.org/10.4048/jbc.2017.20.1.98
  7. Stem cell divisions, somatic mutations, cancer etiology, and cancer prevention vol.355, pp.6331, 2013, https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aaf9011
  8. Digital breast volume estimation (DBVE)-A new technique vol.91, pp.1091, 2013, https://doi.org/10.1259/bjr.20180406
  9. Engineered Fat Graft Enhanced with Adipose-Derived Stromal Vascular Fraction Cells for Regenerative Medicine: Clinical, Histological and Instrumental Evaluation in Breast Reconstruction vol.8, pp.4, 2019, https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm8040504
  10. Segmentation of breast MR images using a generalised 2D mathematical model with inflation and deflation forces of active contours vol.97, pp.None, 2013, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.artmed.2018.10.007
  11. Use of Mammographic Measurements to Predict Complications After Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy in BRCA Mutation Carriers vol.27, pp.2, 2013, https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-019-07704-1
  12. Breast Biomechanics: What Do We Really Know? vol.35, pp.2, 2020, https://doi.org/10.1152/physiol.00024.2019
  13. Prediction of the Ideal Implant Size Using 3-Dimensional Healthy Breast Volume in Unilateral Direct-to-Implant Breast Reconstruction vol.56, pp.10, 2013, https://doi.org/10.3390/medicina56100498
  14. A Prospective Investigation of Predictive Parameters for Preoperative Volume Assessment in Breast Reconstruction vol.10, pp.22, 2021, https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm10225216
  15. Evaluation of the reliability of a new simple device for standardized breast volume measurements vol.44, pp.6, 2013, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00238-021-01805-5