Korean Journal of Radiology

  • 제16권5호
  • /
  • Pages.996-1005
  • /
  • 2015
  • /
  • 1229-6929(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2005-8330(eISSN)
대한영상의학회 (The Korean Society of Radiology)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Breast Microcalcifications: Diagnostic Outcomes According to Image-Guided Biopsy Method

  • Bae, Sohi (Department of Radiology, Research Institute of Radiological Science, Yonsei University College of Medicine) ;
  • Yoon, Jung Hyun (Department of Radiology, Research Institute of Radiological Science, Yonsei University College of Medicine) ;
  • Moon, Hee Jung (Department of Radiology, Research Institute of Radiological Science, Yonsei University College of Medicine) ;
  • Kim, Min Jung (Department of Radiology, Research Institute of Radiological Science, Yonsei University College of Medicine) ;
  • Kim, Eun-Kyung (Department of Radiology, Research Institute of Radiological Science, Yonsei University College of Medicine)
  • 투고 : 2015.03.13
  • 심사 : 2015.05.22
  • 발행 : 2015.09.01
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

Objective: To evaluate the diagnostic outcomes of ultrasonography-guided core needle biopsy (US-CNB), US-guided vacuum-assisted biopsy (US-VAB), and stereotactic-guided vacuum-assisted biopsy (S-VAB) for diagnosing suspicious breast microcalcification. Materials and Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 336 cases of suspicious breast microcalcification in patients who subsequently underwent image-guided biopsy. US-CNB was performed for US-visible microcalcifications associated with a mass (n = 28), US-VAB for US-visible microcalcifications without an associated mass (n = 59), and S-VAB for mammogram-only visible lesions (n = 249). Mammographic findings, biopsy failure rate, false-negative rate, and underestimation rate were analyzed. Histological diagnoses and the Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) categories were reported. Results: Biopsy failure rates for US-CNB, US-VAB, and S-VAB were 7.1% (2/28), 0% (0/59), and 2.8% (7/249), respectively. Three false-negative cases were detected for US-CNB and two for S-VAB. The rates of biopsy-diagnosed ductal carcinoma in situ that were upgraded to invasive cancer at surgery were 41.7% (5/12), 12.9% (4/31), and 8.6% (3/35) for US-CNB, US-VAB, and S-VAB, respectively. Sonographically visible lesions were more likely to be malignant (66.2% [51/77] vs. 23.2% [46/198]; p < 0.001) or of higher BI-RADS category (61.0% [47/77] vs. 22.2% [44/198]; p < 0.001) than sonographically invisible lesions. Conclusion: Ultrasonography-guided vacuum-assisted biopsy is more accurate than US-CNB when suspicious microcalcifications are detected on US. Calcifications with malignant pathology are significantly more visible on US than benign lesions.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. Anania G, Bazzocchi M, di Loreto C, Risaliti A, Terrosu G, Donini A, et al. Percutaneous large core needle biopsy versus surgical biopsy in the diagnosis of breast lesions. Int Surg 1997;82:52-55
  2. Elvecrog EL, Lechner MC, Nelson MT. Nonpalpable breast lesions: correlation of stereotaxic large-core needle biopsy and surgical biopsy results. Radiology 1993;188:453-455 https://doi.org/10.1148/radiology.188.2.8327696
  3. Gisvold JJ, Goellner JR, Grant CS, Donohue JH, Sykes MW, Karsell PR, et al. Breast biopsy: a comparative study of stereotaxically guided core and excisional techniques. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1994;162:815-820 https://doi.org/10.2214/ajr.162.4.8140997
  4. Park JS, Park YM, Kim EK, Kim SJ, Han SS, Lee SJ, et al. Sonographic findings of high-grade and non-high-grade ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. J Ultrasound Med 2010;29:1687-1697 https://doi.org/10.7863/jum.2010.29.12.1687
  5. Soo MS, Baker JA, Rosen EL. Sonographic detection and sonographically guided biopsy of breast microcalcifications. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2003;180:941-948 https://doi.org/10.2214/ajr.180.4.1800941
  6. Yu PC, Lee YW, Chou FF, Wu SC, Huang CC, Ng SH, et al. Clustered microcalcifications of intermediate concern detected on digital mammography: ultrasound assessment. Breast 2011;20:495-500 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.breast.2011.05.003
  7. Parker SH, Burbank F. A practical approach to minimally invasive breast biopsy. Radiology 1996;200:11-20 https://doi.org/10.1148/radiology.200.1.8657896
  8. Soo MS, Baker JA, Rosen EL, Vo TT. Sonographically guided biopsy of suspicious microcalcifications of the breast: a pilot study. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2002;178:1007-1015 https://doi.org/10.2214/ajr.178.4.1781007
  9. Cho N, Moon WK, Cha JH, Kim SM, Jang M, Chang JM, et al. Ultrasound-guided vacuum-assisted biopsy of microcalcifications detected at screening mammography. Acta Radiol 2009;50:602-609 https://doi.org/10.1080/02841850902933107
  10. Kim HS, Kim MJ, Kim EK, Kwak JY, Son EJ, Oh KK. US-guided vacuum-assisted biopsy of microcalcifications in breast lesions and long-term follow-up results. Korean J Radiol 2008;9:503-509 https://doi.org/10.3348/kjr.2008.9.6.503
  11. Yi J, Lee EH, Kwak JJ, Cha JG, Jung SH. Retrieval rate and accuracy of ultrasound-guided 14-G semi-automated core needle biopsy of breast microcalcifications. Korean J Radiol 2014;15:12-19 https://doi.org/10.3348/kjr.2014.15.1.12
  12. Kettritz U, Rotter K, Schreer I, Murauer M, Schulz-Wendtland R, Peter D, et al. Stereotactic vacuum-assisted breast biopsy in 2874 patients: a multicenter study. Cancer 2004;100:245-251 https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.11887
  13. Zuiani C, Mazzarella F, Londero V, Linda A, Puglisi F, Bazzocchi M. Stereotactic vacuum-assisted breast biopsy: results, follow-up and correlation with radiological suspicion. Radiol Med 2007;112:304-317 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11547-007-0143-7
  14. Golub RM, Bennett CL, Stinson T, Venta L, Morrow M. Cost minimization study of image-guided core biopsy versus surgical excisional biopsy for women with abnormal mammograms. J Clin Oncol 2004;22:2430-2437 https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2004.06.154
  15. Hahn SY, Shin JH, Han BK, Ko EY. Sonographically-guided vacuum-assisted biopsy with digital mammography-guided skin marking of suspicious breast microcalcifications: comparison of outcomes with stereotactic biopsy in Asian women. Acta Radiol 2011;52:29-34 https://doi.org/10.1258/ar.2010.100289
  16. Jung YJ, Bae YT, Lee JY, Seo HI, Kim JY, Choo KS. Lateral decubitus positioning stereotactic vacuum-assisted breast biopsy with true lateral mammography. J Breast Cancer 2011;14:64-68 https://doi.org/10.4048/jbc.2011.14.1.64
  17. Burbank F, Parker SH. Methods for Analysis of One-Step Breast Biopsy Programs. Breast J 1998;4:307-319 https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1524-4741.1998.450307.x
  18. Wunderbaldinger P, Wolf G, Turetschek K, Helbich TH. Comparison of sitting versus prone position for stereotactic large-core breast biopsy in surgically proven lesions. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2002;178:1221-1225 https://doi.org/10.2214/ajr.178.5.1781221
  19. Jackman RJ, Rodriguez-Soto J. Breast microcalcifications: retrieval failure at prone stereotactic core and vacuum breast biopsy--frequency, causes, and outcome. Radiology 2006;239:61-70 https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2383041953
  20. Schrading S, Distelmaier M, Dirrichs T, Detering S, Brolund L, Strobel K, et al. Digital breast tomosynthesis-guided vacuumassisted breast biopsy: initial experiences and comparison with prone stereotactic vacuum-assisted biopsy. Radiology 2015;274:654-662 https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.14141397
  21. Welle GJ, Clark M, Loos S, Pauls D, Warden D, Sheffield M, et al. Stereotactic breast biopsy: recumbent biopsy using add-on upright equipment. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2000;175:59-63 https://doi.org/10.2214/ajr.175.1.1750059
  22. Jackman RJ, Nowels KW, Rodriguez-Soto J, Marzoni FA Jr, Finkelstein SI, Shepard MJ. Stereotactic, automated, largecore needle biopsy of nonpalpable breast lesions: falsenegative and histologic underestimation rates after long-term follow-up. Radiology 1999;210:799-805 https://doi.org/10.1148/radiology.210.3.r99mr19799
  23. Lee CH, Philpotts LE, Horvath LJ, Tocino I. Follow-up of breast lesions diagnosed as benign with stereotactic coreneedle biopsy: frequency of mammographic change and falsenegative rate. Radiology 1999;212:189-194 https://doi.org/10.1148/radiology.212.1.r99jl42189
  24. Crystal P, Koretz M, Shcharynsky S, Makarov V, Strano S. Accuracy of sonographically guided 14-gauge core-needle biopsy: results of 715 consecutive breast biopsies with at least two-year follow-up of benign lesions. J Clin Ultrasound 2005;33:47-52 https://doi.org/10.1002/jcu.20089
  25. Cho N, Moon WK. Digital mammography-guided skin marking for sonographically guided biopsy of suspicious microcalcifications. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2009;192:W132-W136 https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.08.1444
  26. Jackman RJ, Burbank F, Parker SH, Evans WP 3rd, Lechner MC, Richardson TR, et al. Stereotactic breast biopsy of nonpalpable lesions: determinants of ductal carcinoma in situ underestimation rates. Radiology 2001;218:497-502 https://doi.org/10.1148/radiology.218.2.r01fe35497
  27. Moon WK, Im JG, Koh YH, Noh DY, Park IA. US of mammographically detected clustered microcalcifications. Radiology 2000;217:849-854 https://doi.org/10.1148/radiology.217.3.r00nv27849
  28. Wang LC, Sullivan M, Du H, Feldman MI, Mendelson EB. US appearance of ductal carcinoma in situ. Radiographics 2013;33:213-228 https://doi.org/10.1148/rg.331125092

피인용 문헌

  1. The Utility of MicroPure™ Ultrasound Technique in Assessing Grouped Microcalcifications without a Mass on Mammography vol.19, pp.1, 2016, https://doi.org/10.4048/jbc.2016.19.1.83
  2. Calcificaciones mamarias: descripción y clasificación según la 5.a edición BI-RADS vol.22, pp.2, 2015, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rchira.2016.06.004
  3. Analysis of mammary microcalcifications diagnosed using stereotactic vacuum-assisted breast biopsies vol.27, pp.1, 2015, https://doi.org/10.3804/jjabcs.27.62
  4. Evaluating imaging-pathology concordance and discordance after ultrasound-guided breast biopsy vol.37, pp.2, 2015, https://doi.org/10.14366/usg.17049
  5. A comparison of diagnostic performance of vacuum-assisted biopsy and core needle biopsy for breast microcalcification: a systematic review and meta-analysis vol.187, pp.4, 2015, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11845-018-1781-6
  6. Correlation analysis between ultrasonography and mammography with other risk factors related to breast cancer vol.17, pp.6, 2015, https://doi.org/10.3892/ol.2019.10246
  7. Clinical Implication of Intraoperative Sonography in Localized Excision Biopsy for Mammographic Microcalcifications vol.7, pp.1, 2015, https://doi.org/10.14449/jbd.2019.7.1.16
  8. Value of multimodality imaging in the diagnosis of breast lesions with calcification: A retrospective study vol.76, pp.1, 2020, https://doi.org/10.3233/ch-200877
  9. 3D microcalcification detection using a color Doppler twinkling artifact with optimized transmit conditions: Preliminary results vol.47, pp.12, 2020, https://doi.org/10.1002/mp.14342