Search

Objectives: To investigate the influence of preoperative breast MRI on mastectomy and reoperation rates in patients with pure ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS)., Methods: The MIPA observational study database (7245 patients) was searched for patients aged 18-80 years with pure unilateral DCIS diagnosed at core needle or vacuum-assisted biopsy (CNB/VAB) and planned for primary surgery. Patients who underwent preoperative MRI (MRI group) were matched (1:1) to those who did not receive MRI (noMRI group) according to 8 confounding covariates that drive referral to MRI (age; hormonal status; familial risk; posterior-to-nipple diameter; BI-RADS category; lesion diameter; lesion presentation; surgical planning at conventional imaging). Surgical outcomes were compared between the matched groups with nonparametric statistics after calculating odds ratios (ORs)., Results: Of 1005 women with pure unilateral DCIS at CNB/VAB (507 MRI group, 498 noMRI group), 309 remained in each group after matching. First-line mastectomy rate in the MRI group was 20.1% (62/309 patients, OR 2.03) compared to 11.0% in the noMRI group (34/309 patients, p = 0.003). The reoperation rate was 10.0% in the MRI group (31/309, OR for reoperation 0.40) and 22.0% in the noMRI group (68/309, p < 0.001), with a 2.53 OR of avoiding reoperation in the MRI group. The overall mastectomy rate was 23.3% in the MRI group (72/309, OR 1.40) and 17.8% in the noMRI group (55/309, p = 0.111)., Conclusions: Compared to those going directly to surgery, patients with pure DCIS at CNB/VAB who underwent preoperative MRI had a higher OR for first-line mastectomy but a substantially lower OR for reoperation., Clinical Relevance Statement: When confounding factors behind MRI referral are accounted for in the comparison of patients with CNB/VAB-diagnosed pure unilateral DCIS, preoperative MRI yields a reduction of reoperations that is more than twice as high as the increase in overall mastectomies., Key Points: • Confounding factors cause imbalance when investigating the influence of preoperative MRI on surgical outcomes of pure DCIS. • When patient matching is applied to women with pure unilateral DCIS, reoperation rates are significantly reduced in women who underwent preoperative MRI. • The reduction of reoperations brought about by preoperative MRI is more than double the increase in overall mastectomies., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Objective: To assess the correlation between pancreatic quantitative edge analysis as a surrogate of parenchymal stiffness and the incidence of postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF), in patients undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD)., Methods: All consecutive patients who underwent PD at our Institution between March 2018 and November 2019 with an available preoperative CT were included. Pancreatic margin score (PMS) was calculated through computer-assisted quantitative edge analysis on the margins of the pancreatic body and tail (the expected pancreatic remnant) on non-contrast scans with in-house software. Intraoperative assessment of pancreatic stiffness by manual palpation was also performed, classifying pancreatic texture into soft and non-soft. PMS values were compared between groups using an unpaired T-test and correlated with the intraoperative evaluation of stiffness and with the grading of postoperative pancreatic fistula according to the International Study Group on Pancreatic Surgery (ISGPS)., Results: Patient population included 200 patients (mean age 64.6 years), 146 without onset of POPF (73%, non-POPF group), and 54 with POPF (27%, POPF group). A significant difference in PMS values was observed between POPF and non-POPF (respectively 1.88 ± 0.05 vs 0.69 ± 0.01; p < 0.0001). PMS values of pancreatic parenchymas intraoperatively considered "soft" were significantly higher than those evaluated as "non-soft" (1.21 ± 0.04 vs 0.73 ± 0.02; p < 0.0001). A significant correlation between PMS values and POPF grade was observed (r = 0.8316), even in subgroups of patients with soft (r = 0.8016) and non-soft (r = 0.7602) pancreas (all p < 0.0001)., Conclusions: Quantitative edge analysis with dedicated software may stratify patients with different pancreatic stiffness, thus potentially improving preoperative risk assessment and strategies for POPF mitigation., Clinical Relevance Statement: This study proposes quantitative pancreas edge analysis as a predictor for postoperative pancreatic fistula. The test has high accuracy and correlation with fistula grade according to the International Study Group on Pancreatic Surgery., Key Points: • Prediction of postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) onset risk after pancreaticoduodenectomy is based only on intraoperative evaluation. • Quantitative edge analysis may preoperatively identify patients with higher risk of POPF. • Quantification of pancreatic stiffness through the analysis of pancreatic margins could be done on preoperative CT., (© 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to European Society of Radiology.)

Objectives: To report mastectomy and reoperation rates in women who had breast MRI for screening (S-MRI subgroup) or diagnostic (D-MRI subgroup) purposes, using multivariable analysis for investigating the role of MRI referral/nonreferral and other covariates in driving surgical outcomes., Methods: The MIPA observational study enrolled women aged 18-80 years with newly diagnosed breast cancer destined to have surgery as the primary treatment, in 27 centres worldwide. Mastectomy and reoperation rates were compared using non-parametric tests and multivariable analysis., Results: A total of 5828 patients entered analysis, 2763 (47.4%) did not undergo MRI (noMRI subgroup) and 3065 underwent MRI (52.6%); of the latter, 2441/3065 (79.7%) underwent MRI with preoperative intent (P-MRI subgroup), 510/3065 (16.6%) D-MRI, and 114/3065 S-MRI (3.7%). The reoperation rate was 10.5% for S-MRI, 8.2% for D-MRI, and 8.5% for P-MRI, while it was 11.7% for noMRI (p ≤ 0.023 for comparisons with D-MRI and P-MRI). The overall mastectomy rate (first-line mastectomy plus conversions from conserving surgery to mastectomy) was 39.5% for S-MRI, 36.2% for P-MRI, 24.1% for D-MRI, and 18.0% for noMRI. At multivariable analysis, using noMRI as reference, the odds ratios for overall mastectomy were 2.4 (p < 0.001) for S-MRI, 1.0 (p = 0.957) for D-MRI, and 1.9 (p < 0.001) for P-MRI., Conclusions: Patients from the D-MRI subgroup had the lowest overall mastectomy rate (24.1%) among MRI subgroups and the lowest reoperation rate (8.2%) together with P-MRI (8.5%). This analysis offers an insight into how the initial indication for MRI affects the subsequent surgical treatment of breast cancer., Key Points: • Of 3065 breast MRI examinations, 79.7% were performed with preoperative intent (P-MRI), 16.6% were diagnostic (D-MRI), and 3.7% were screening (S-MRI) examinations. • The D-MRI subgroup had the lowest mastectomy rate (24.1%) among MRI subgroups and the lowest reoperation rate (8.2%) together with P-MRI (8.5%). • The S-MRI subgroup had the highest mastectomy rate (39.5%) which aligns with higher-than-average risk in this subgroup, with a reoperation rate (10.5%) not significantly different to that of all other subgroups., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Objectives: To report and analyse the characteristics and performance of the first cohort of Italian radiologists completing the national mammography self-evaluation online test established by the Italian Society of Medical Radiology (SIRM)., Methods: A specifically-built dataset of 132 mammograms (24 with screen-detected cancers and 108 negative cases) was preliminarily tested on 48 radiologists to define pass thresholds (62% sensitivity and 86% specificity) and subsequently made available online to SIRM members during a 13-month timeframe between 2018 and 2019. Associations between participants' characteristics, pass rates, and diagnostic accuracy were then investigated with descriptive statistics and univariate and multivariable regression analyses., Results: A total of 342 radiologists completed the test, 151/342 (44.2%) with success. All individual variables, except gender, showed a significant correlation with pass rates and diagnostic sensitivity, confirmed by univariate logistic regression, while only involvement in organised screening programs and number of mammograms read per year showed a positive association with specificity at univariate logistic regression. In the multivariable regression analysis, fewer variables remained significant: > 3000 mammograms read per year for success rate; female gender, public practice setting, and higher experience self-judgement for sensitivity; no variables were significantly associated with specificity., Conclusions: This national self-evaluation test effectively differentiated multiple aspects of mammographic reading experience, but specific breast imaging experience was shown not to strictly guarantee good diagnostic accuracy. Due to its easy use and the validity of obtained results, this test could be extended to all Italian breast radiologists, regardless of their experience, also as a Breast Unit accreditation criterion., Key Points: • This self-evaluation test was found to be able to differentiate various degrees of mammographic interpretation experience. • Breast cancer screening readers should undergo a self-assessment test, since experience parameters alone do not guarantee diagnostic ability., (© 2021. European Society of Radiology.)

Objectives: Preoperative breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) can inform surgical planning but might cause overtreatment by increasing the mastectomy rate. The Multicenter International Prospective Analysis (MIPA) study investigated this controversial issue., Methods: This observational study enrolled women aged 18-80 years with biopsy-proven breast cancer, who underwent MRI in addition to conventional imaging (mammography and/or breast ultrasonography) or conventional imaging alone before surgery as routine practice at 27 centers. Exclusion criteria included planned neoadjuvant therapy, pregnancy, personal history of any cancer, and distant metastases., Results: Of 5896 analyzed patients, 2763 (46.9%) had conventional imaging only (noMRI group), and 3133 (53.1%) underwent MRI that was performed for diagnosis, screening, or unknown purposes in 692/3133 women (22.1%), with preoperative intent in 2441/3133 women (77.9%, MRI group). Patients in the MRI group were younger, had denser breasts, more cancers ≥ 20 mm, and a higher rate of invasive lobular histology than patients who underwent conventional imaging alone (p < 0.001 for all comparisons). Mastectomy was planned based on conventional imaging in 22.4% (MRI group) versus 14.4% (noMRI group) (p < 0.001). The additional planned mastectomy rate in the MRI group was 11.3%. The overall performed first- plus second-line mastectomy rate was 36.3% (MRI group) versus 18.0% (noMRI group) (p < 0.001). In women receiving conserving surgery, MRI group had a significantly lower reoperation rate (8.5% versus 11.7%, p < 0.001)., Conclusions: Clinicians requested breast MRI for women with a higher a priori probability of receiving mastectomy. MRI was associated with 11.3% more mastectomies, and with 3.2% fewer reoperations in the breast conservation subgroup., Key Points: • In 19% of patients of the MIPA study, breast MRI was performed for screening or diagnostic purposes. • The current patient selection to preoperative breast MRI implies an 11% increase in mastectomies, counterbalanced by a 3% reduction of the reoperation rate. • Data from the MIPA study can support discussion in tumor boards when preoperative MRI is under consideration and should be shared with patients to achieve informed decision-making., (© 2021. The Author(s).)

Objectives: This study evaluated the feasibility of DWI for lesion targeting in MRI-guided breast biopsies. Furthermore, it assessed device positioning on DWI during biopsy procedures., Methods: A total of 87 biopsy procedures (5/87 bilateral) consecutively performed between March 2019 and June 2020 were retrospectively reviewed: in these procedures, a preliminary DWI sequence (b = 1300 s/mm 2 ) was acquired to assess lesion detectability. We included 64/87 procedures on lesions detectable at DWI; DWI sequences were added to the standard protocol to localize lesion and biopsy device and to assess the site marker correct positioning., Results: Mass lesions ranged from 5 to 48 mm, with a mean size of 10.7 mm and a median size of 8 mm. Non-mass lesions ranged from 7 to 90 mm, with a mean size of 33.9 mm and a median size of 31 mm. Positioning of the coaxial system was confirmed on both T1-weighted and DWI sequences. At DWI, the biopsy needle was detectable in 62/64 (96.9%) cases; it was not visible in 2/64 (3.1%) cases. The site marker was always identified using T1-weighted imaging; a final DWI sequence was acquired in 44/64 cases (68.8%). In 42/44 cases (95.5%), the marker was recognizable at DWI., Conclusions: DWI can be used as a cost-effective, highly reliable technique for targeting both mass and non-mass lesions, with a minimum size of 5 mm, detectable at pre-procedural DWI. DWI is also a feasible technique to localize the biopsy device and to confirm the deployment of the site marker., Key Points: • MRI-guided breast biopsy is performed in referral centers by an expert dedicated staff, based on prior MR imaging; contrast agent administration is usually needed for lesion targeting. • DWI represents a feasible, highly reliable technique for lesion targeting, avoiding contrast agent administration. • DWI allows a precise localization of both biopsy needle device and site marker.

Despite its high diagnostic performance, the use of breast MRI in the preoperative setting is controversial. It has the potential for personalized surgical management in breast cancer patients, but two of three randomized controlled trials did not show results in favor of its introduction for assessing the disease extent before surgery. Meta-analyses showed a higher mastectomy rate in women undergoing preoperative MRI compared to those who do not. Nevertheless, preoperative breast MRI is increasingly used and a survey from the American Society of Breast Surgeons showed that 41% of respondents ask for it in daily practice. In this context, a large-scale observational multicenter international prospective analysis (MIPA study) was proposed under the guidance of the European Network for the Assessment of Imaging in Medicine (EuroAIM). The aims were (1) to prospectively and systematically collect data on consecutive women with a newly diagnosed breast cancer, not candidates for neoadjuvant therapy, who are offered or not offered breast MRI before surgery according to local practice; (2) to compare these two groups in terms of surgical and clinical endpoints, adjusting for covariates. The underlying hypotheses are that MRI does not cause additional mastectomies compared to conventional imaging, while reducing the reoperation rate in all or in subgroups of patients. Ninety-six centers applied to a web-based call; 36 were initially selected based on volume and quality standards; 27 were active for enrollment. On November 2018, the target of 7000 enrolled patients was reached. The MIPA study is presently at the analytic phase. Key Points • Breast MRI has a high diagnostic performance but its utility in the preoperative setting is controversial. • A large-scale observational multicenter prospective study was launched to compare women receiving with those not receiving preoperative MRI. • Twenty-seven centers enrolled more than 7000 patients. The study is presently at the analytic phase.

Objectives: To provide multicentre external validation of the Bayesian Inference Malignancy Calculator (BIMC) model by assessing diagnostic accuracy in a cohort of solitary pulmonary nodules (SPNs) collected in a clinic-based setting. To assess model impact on SPN decision analysis and to compare findings with those obtained via the Mayo Clinic model., Methods: Clinical and imaging data were retrospectively collected from 200 patients from three centres. Accuracy was assessed by means of receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) areas under the curve (AUCs). Decision analysis was performed by adopting both the American College of Chest Physicians (ACCP) and the British Thoracic Society (BTS) risk thresholds., Results: ROC analysis showed an AUC of 0.880 (95 % CI, 0.832-0.928) for the BIMC model and of 0.604 (95 % CI, 0.524-0.683) for the Mayo Clinic model. Difference was 0.276 (95 % CI, 0.190-0.363, P < 0.0001). Decision analysis showed a slightly reduced number of false-negative and false-positive results when using ACCP risk thresholds., Conclusions: The BIMC model proved to be an accurate tool when characterising SPNs. In a clinical setting it can distinguish malignancies from benign nodules with minimal errors by adopting current ACCP or BTS risk thresholds and guiding lesion-tailored diagnostic and interventional procedures during the work-up., Key Points: • The BIMC model can accurately discriminate malignancies in the clinical setting • The BIMC model showed ROC AUC of 0.880 in this multicentre study • The BIMC model compares favourably with the Mayo Clinic model.

Objectives: The aim of this study was to compare classification results from four major risk prediction models in a wide population of incidentally detected solitary pulmonary nodules (SPNs) which were selected to crossmatch inclusion criteria for the selected models., Methods: A total of 285 solitary pulmonary nodules with a definitive diagnosis were evaluated by means of four major risk assessment models developed from non-screening populations, namely the Mayo, Gurney, PKUPH and BIMC models. Accuracy was evaluated by receiver operating characteristic (ROC) area under the curve (AUC) analysis. Each model's fitness to provide reliable help in decision analysis was primarily assessed by adopting a surgical threshold of 65 % and an observation threshold of 5 % as suggested by ACCP guidelines., Results: ROC AUC values, false positives, false negatives and indeterminate nodules were respectively 0.775, 3, 8, 227 (Mayo); 0.794, 41, 6, 125 (Gurney); 0.889, 42, 0, 144 (PKUPH); 0.898, 16, 0, 118 (BIMC)., Conclusions: Resultant data suggests that the BIMC model may be of greater help than Mayo, Gurney and PKUPH models in preoperative SPN characterization when using ACCP risk thresholds because of overall better accuracy and smaller numbers of indeterminate nodules and false positive results., Key Points: • The BIMC and PKUPH models offer better characterization than older prediction models • Both the PKUPH and BIMC models completely avoided false negative results • The Mayo model suffers from a large number of indeterminate results.