Search

Background Adductor canal blocks (ACBs) are an alternative to femoral nerve blocks that minimize lower extremity weakness. However, it is unclear whether this block will provide analgesia that is equivalent to techniques, such as epidural analgesia. The purpose of this randomized controlled trial was to compare continuous ACBs with epidural analgesia for primary total knee arthroplasty. Methods Following institutional review board approval, 145 patients were randomized to 1 of 3 groups: combined spinal-epidural (CSE), spinal + continuous ACB (CACB), or general + CACB. Epidural analgesia was used postoperatively in the CSE group, and an adductor canal catheter was used in the CACB groups. Power analysis determined that 84 patients per group were needed to demonstrate a 35% increase in ambulation with an alpha of 0.05 at a power of 90%. Results At interim analysis, 13 patients were removed for protocol deviations, leaving 45 in CSE, 41 in spinal + CACB and 46 in general + CACB groups. Patient demographics were similar in all comparisons suggesting appropriate randomization. Patients in the CACB groups walked further on postoperative day 1, 2, and 3 ( P = .02). Mean daily pain scores were lower in the CACB groups (4.1 CSE, 3.0 spinal + CACB, 3.4 general + CACB, P = .009). There was no significant difference in total opioid consumption between groups (158 morphine equivalents CSE, 149 spinal + CACB, and 172 general + CACB). More patients reported being “very satisfied” in CACB groups (68% general + CACB, 63% spinal + CACB, and 36% CSE; P = .001). Conclusion Continuous adductor analgesia provides superior ambulation, lower pain scores, faster discharge, and greater patient satisfaction when compared to epidural analgesia for primary total knee arthroplasty.

Objective: The purpose of this study was to determine the accuracy of the pathologic diagnosis of papillary breast lesions when evaluated by percutaneous biopsy. Materials and Methods: A total of 2307 consecutive breast lesions, diagnosed by percutaneous biopsy, were retrospectively reviewed. Of these, 45 lesions were papillary lesions; 15 of the 45 cases were lost to follow-up or had not had imaging follow-up and were excluded. The remaining 30 papillary lesions constituted the study population. Subsequent surgical excision or imaging follow-up (a minimum of 6 months) was performed and correlated with the initial diagnoses. Results: Of the 30 lesions, 11 intraductal papillomas were diagnosed with stereotactic vacuum assisted biopsy (SVAB). Surgical excision was performed on four lesions (36.4%). Pathologic findings in all four lesions (100%) were benign. Of the 13 papillary lesions diagnosed with ultrasound-guided core needle biopsy, three (23.1%) demonstrated papillomatosis. Subsequent surgical excision was performed on 11 (84.6%) of the 13 papillary lesions, including two of the three papillomatosis. Pathology was benign in all. The two (18.2%) other lesions, initially diagnosed as papillomatosis and benign papilloma, were a fibroadenoma and organizing papillomatosis, respectively, at surgery. The six lesions that were sampled with fine needle aspiration (FNA) demonstrated intraductal papillary lesions, two (33.3%) of which had cytologic atypia. Surgical excision was performed on all six (100%) with benign breast tissue in four (66.7%) including one of the lesions demonstrating atypia. The two (33.3%) other lesions demonstrated high-grade invasive papillary carcinoma with in-situ components. Conclusion: Surgical excision is warranted when a percutaneous breast biopsy demonstrates a papillary lesion with atypia or when there is radiologic-pathologic discordance. Otherwise, these lesions can be followed conservatively. Furthermore, for improved diagnostic accuracy, indeterminate intraductal lesions should undergo biopsy with CNB or stereotactic vacuum assisted biopsy and not fine needle aspiration. The cytologic diagnosis of papillary lesions is considered only preliminary by fine needle aspiration, and should await surgical resection and histologic examination to further classify these lesions.

OBJECTIVE. The purpose of our study was to evaluate the performance of a computeraided detection (CAD) system in the detection of breast cancer based on mammographic appearance and lesion size. CONCLUSION. The CAD system correctly marked most biopsy-proven breast cancers, with a greater sensitivity for microcalcification than for mass lesions but with no significant difference in performance based on cancer size. CAD was highly effective in detecting even the smallest lesions, with a sensitivity of 92% for lesions of 5 mm or less. CAD is a useful tool for the detection of breast cancer.

Our aim was to determine whether breast density affects the performance of a computer-aided detection (CAD) system for the detection of breast cancer.Nine hundred six sequential mammographically detected breast cancers and 147 normal screening mammograms from 18 facilities were classified by mammographic density. BI-RADS 1 and 2 density cases were classified as nondense breasts; BI-RADS 3 and 4 density cases were classified as dense breasts. Cancers were classified as either masses or microcalcifications. All mammograms from the cancer and normal cases were evaluated by the CAD system. The sensitivity and false-positive rates from CAD in dense and nondense breasts were evaluated and compared.Overall, 809 (89%) of 906 cancer cases were detected by CAD; 455/505 (90%) cancers in nondense breasts and 354/401 (88%) cancers in dense breasts were detected. CAD sensitivity was not affected by breast density (p=0.38). Across both breast density categories, 280/296 (95%) microcalcification cases and 529/610 (87%) mass cases were detected. One hundred fourteen (93%) of the 122 microcalcifications in nondense breasts and 166 (95%) of 174 microcalcifications in dense breasts were detected, showing that CAD sensitivity to microcalcifications is not dependent on breast density (p=0.46). Three hundred forty-one (89%) of 383 masses in nondense breasts, and 188 (83%) of 227 masses in dense breasts were detected-that is, CAD sensitivity to masses is affected by breast density (p=0.03). There were more false-positive marks on dense versus nondense mammograms (p=0.04).Breast density does not impact overall CAD detection of breast cancer. There is no statistically significant difference in breast cancer detection in dense and nondense breasts. However, the detection of breast cancer manifesting as masses is impacted by breast density. The false-positive rate is lower in nondense versus dense breasts. CAD may be particularly advantageous in patients with dense breasts, in which mammography is most challenging.

Osseous metaplasia in the breast is rare. A clinical and pathological overview of a case of pure osseous metaplasia that was mammographically detected and was not associated with any neoplasm is presented here.

Stein LF, Zisman G, Rapelyea JA, Schwartz AM, Abell B, Brem RF oote and Stewart [1] described lobular carcinoma in situ (LCIS) as a distinct pathologic entity in 1941. Historically, it has been considered an incidental finding in breast tissue, often adjacent to the area of abnormality that prompts biopsy. It was previously thought to lack any corollary signs of mass or calcification on mammogram [2, 3]. Recent studies indicate that LCIS foci may contain specific microcalcifications [3, 4], but to our knowledge, there is no report of LCIS forming a solid mass. We report a case of LCIS that presented as a focal mass.

To prospectively evaluate a high-resolution breast-specific gamma camera for depicting occult breast cancer in women at high risk for breast cancer but with normal mammographic and physical examination findings.Institutional Review Board approval and informed consent were obtained. The study was HIPAA compliant. Ninety-four high-risk women (age range, 36-78 years; mean, 55 years) with normal mammographic (Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System [BI-RADS] 1 or 2) and physical examination findings were evaluated with scintimammography. After injection with 25-30 mCi (925-1110 MBq) of technetium 99m sestamibi, patients were imaged with a high-resolution small-field-of-view breast-specific gamma camera in craniocaudal and mediolateral oblique projections. Scintimammograms were prospectively classified according to focal radiotracer uptake as normal (score of 1), with no focal or diffuse uptake; benign (score of 2), with minimal patchy uptake; probably benign (score of 3), with scattered patchy uptake; probably abnormal (score of 4), with mild focal radiotracer uptake; and abnormal (score of 5), with marked focal radiotracer uptake. Mammographic breast density was categorized according to BI-RADS criteria. Patients with normal scintimammograms (scores of 1, 2, or 3) were followed up for 1 year with an annual mammogram, physical examination, and repeat scintimammography. Patients with abnormal scintimammograms (scores of 4 or 5) underwent ultrasonography (US), and those with focal hypoechoic lesions underwent biopsy. If no lesion was found during US, patients were followed up with scintimammography. Specific pathologic findings were compared with scintimammographic findings.Of 94 women, 78 (83%) had normal scintimammograms (score of 1, 2, or 3) at initial examination and 16 (17%) had abnormal scintimammograms (score of 4 or 5). Fourteen (88%) of the 16 patients had either benign findings at biopsy or no focal abnormality at US; in two (12%) patients, invasive carcinoma was diagnosed at US-guided biopsy (9 mm each at pathologic examination).High-resolution breast-specific scintimammography can depict small (1-cm), mammographically occult, nonpalpable lesions in women at increased risk for breast cancer not otherwise identified at mammography or physical examination.

BACKGROUND The objective of this study was to evaluate the performance of a computer-aided detection (CAD) system for the detection of breast cancer, based on mammographic appearance and histopathology. METHODS From 1000 consecutive screening mammograms from women with biopsy-proven breast carcinoma, 273 mammograms were selected randomly for retrospective evaluation by CAD. The sensitivity of the CAD system for breast cancer was assessed from the proportion of masses and microcalcifications detected. The corresponding tumor histopathologies also were evaluated. Normal mammograms (n = 155 patients) were used to determine the false-positive rate of the system. RESULTS Of the 273 breast carcinomas, 149 appeared mammographically as masses, and 88 appeared as microcalcifications, including 36 carcinomas that presented as mixed lesions. The CAD system marked 125 of 149 masses correctly (84%), marked 86 of 88 microcalcifications correctly (98%), and marked 32 of 36 of mixed lesions correctly (89%.). The system showed a high sensitivity for the detection of ductal carcinoma in situ (95%; 73 of 77 lesions), invasive lobular carcinoma (95%; 18 of 19 lesions), invasive ductal carcinoma (85%; 125 of 147 lesions), and invasive mammary carcinoma (90%; 27 of 30 lesions). The highest CAD system sensitivity was for all invasive carcinomas that presented as microcalcifications (100%). On normal mammograms, there was an average of 1.3 false-positive CAD marks per image. CONCLUSIONS The CAD system correctly marked a large majority of biopsy-proven breast cancers, with a greater sensitivity for lesions with microcalcifications and without significant impact of performance based on tumor histopathology. CAD was highly effective in detecting invasive lobular carcinoma (sensitivity, 95%) and ductal carcinoma in situ (sensitivity, 95%). CAD represents a useful tool for the detection of breast cancer. Cancer 2005. © 2005 American Cancer Society.