European Radiology

, Volume 24, Issue 6, pp 1176–1185 | Cite as

Short interval follow-up after a benign concordant MR-guided vacuum assisted breast biopsy – is it worthwhile?

  • Sara D. Shaylor
  • Samantha L. Heller
  • Amy N. Melsaether
  • Dipti Gupta
  • Avani Gupta
  • James Babb
  • Linda Moy



To determine the utility of short-interval follow-up after benign concordant MRI-guided breast biopsy.

Materials and methods

Institutional review board approved, retrospective review of consecutive biopsies performed over 3 years (2007–10) yielded 170 women with 188 lesions that were considered benign concordant. Indication for original study, biopsy results, follow-up recommendations, compliance and outcomes of subsequent MRI and mammography examinations were reviewed.


The most common indication for breast MRI was high-risk screening 119/170 (70 %). Overall, 59 % of lesions (113/188) had follow-up MRI. Of those lesions (n = 113), 43 % (49/113) presented within 7 months, 26 % (29/113) presented within 8–13 months, 11.5 % (13/113) presented within 14–22 months, and 19 % (22/113) presented after 23 months. At initial follow-up, 37 % of lesions were stable and 61 % were decreased in size. Three lesions were recommended for excision based on follow-up imaging with one malignancy diagnosed 2 years following biopsy. One additional patient had MRI-detected bilateral cancers remote from the biopsy site 3 years after biopsy.


Overall cancer yield of lesions with follow-up MRI was 0.9 % (1/113); no cancers were detected at 6 months. Our data suggests that 6-month follow-up may not be required and that annual screening MRI would be acceptable to maintain a reasonable cancer detection rate.

Key Points

Follow-up recommendations after benign concordant MRI-guided breast biopsy remain controversial.

Cancer detection rate was 0.9 % overall with no cancers detected at 6 months.

Short-interval follow-up after benign concordant MRI-guided breast biopsy may not be necessary.


Benign Concordant MRI biopsy Breast Follow-up 



The scientific guarantor of this publication is Linda Moy, MD. The authors of this manuscript declare no relationships with any companies whose products or services may be related to the subject matter of the article. The authors state that this work has not received any funding. One of the authors has significant statistical expertise. Institutional review board approval was obtained. Written informed consent was waived by the institutional review board. Methodology: retrospective, observational, performed at one institution.


  1. 1.
    Perlet C, Heinig A, Prat X et al (2002) Multicenter study of the evaluation of a dedicated biopsy device for MR-guided vacuum biopsy of the breast. Eur Radiol 12:1463–1470PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Liberman L, Morris EA, Dershaw DD, Thornton CM, Van Zee KJ, Tan LK (2003) Fast MRI-guided vacuum-assisted breast biopsy: initial experience. AJR Am J Roentgenol 181:1283–1293PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Lehman CD, DePeri ER, Peacock S et al (2005) Clinical experience with MRI-guided vacuum assisted breast biopsy. AJR Am J Roentgenol 184:1782–1787PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Liberman L, Bracero N, Morris E, Thornton C, Dershaw DD (2005) MRI-guided 9-gauge vacuum-assisted breast biopsy: initial clinical experience. AJR Am J Roentgenol 185:183–193PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Orel SG, Rosen M, Mies C, Schnall MD (2006) MR imaging-guided 9-gauge vacuum-assisted core-needle breast biopsy: initial experience. Radiology 238:54–61PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Perlet C, Heywang-Kobrunner SH, Heinig A et al (2006) Magnetic resonance-guided, vacuum-assisted breast biopsy: results from a European multicenter study of 538 lesions. Cancer 106:982–990PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ghate SV, Rosen EL, Soo MSC, Baker JA (2006) MRI-guided vacuum assisted breast biopsy with a handheld portable biopsy system. AJR Am J Roentgenol 186:1733–1736PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Mahoney MC (2008) Initial clinical experience with a new MRI vacuum-assisted breast biopsy device. J Magn Reson Imaging 28:900–905PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Perretta T, Pistolese CA, Bolacchi F, Cossu E, Fiaschetti V, Simonetti G (2008) MR imaging-guided 10-gauge vacuum-assisted breast biopsy: histological characterisation. Radiol Med 113:830–840PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Malhaire C, El Khoury C, Thibault F et al (2010) Vacuum-assisted biopsies under MR guidance: results of 72 procedures. Eur Radiol 20:1554–1562PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Heywang-Köbrunner SH, Sinnatamby R, Lebeau A et al (2009) Consensus Group. Eur J Radiol 72:289–294PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Sung JS, Lee CH, Morris EA, Comstock CE et al (2012) Patient follow-up after concordant histologically benign imaging-guided biopsy of MRI detected breast lesions. AJR Am J Roentgenol 198:1464–1469PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Makoske T, Preletz R, Riley L, Fogarty K, Swank M, Cochrane P, Blisard D (2000) Long-term outcomes of stereotactic core biopsies. Am Surg 66:1104–1108, discussion 1108–1109PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Youk JH, Jung I, Kim EK, Kim MJ, Son EJ, Moon HJ, Kwak JY (2012) US follow-up protocol in concordant benign result after US-guided 14-gauge core needle breast biopsy. Breast Cancer Res Treat 132:1089–1097PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Shin S, Schneider HB, Cole FJ Jr, Laronga C (2006) Follow-up recommendations for benign breast biopsies. Breast J 12:413–417PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    American College of Radiology (ACR) (2003) ACR breast imaging reporting and data system, BI-RADS imaging atlas. Reston, VAGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Lee CH, Philpotts LE, Horvath LJ, Tocino I (1999) Follow-up of breast lesions diagnosed as benign with stereotactic core-needle biopsy: frequency of mammographic change and false-negative rate. Radiology 212:189–194PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kriege M, Brekelmans CTM, Boetes C et al (2004) Efficacy of MRI and mammography for breast cancer screening in women with a familial or genetic predisposition. N Engl J Med 351:427–437PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Liberman L (2004) Breast cancer screening with MRI: what are the data for patients at high risk? N Engl J Med 351:497–500PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Morris EA, Liberman L, Ballon DJ et al (2003) MRI of occult breast carcinoma in a high risk population. AJR Am J Roentgenol 181:619–626PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Lee JM, Kaplan JB, Murray MP et al (2007) Imaging–histologic discordance at MRI-guided 9-gauge vacuum-assisted breast biopsy. AJR Am J Roentgenol 189:852–859PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Jackman RJ, Marzoni FA Jr, Rosenberg J (2009) False-negative diagnoses at stereotactic vacuum-assisted needle breast biopsy: long-term follow-up of 1,280 lesions and review of the literature. AJR Am J Roentgenol 192:341–351PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Johnson J, Johnson A, O’Meara E et al (2011) Breast cancer yield after short interval follow-up compared to return to routine annual screen in patients with benign stereotactic or ultrasound guided biopsy results. Abstract in proceedings of Radiological Society of North America 2011 Scientific Assembly and Annual Meeting; November 27–December 2, 2011 Chicago IL. Accessed 22 May 2012
  24. 24.
    Salkowski LR, Fowler AM, Burnside ES et al (2011) Utility of 6 month follow-up imaging after a concordant benign breast biopsy result. Radiology 258:380–387PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Li J, Dershaw D, Lee C et al (2009) MRI follow-up after a concordant, histologically benign diagnosis of breast lesions sampled by MRI guided biopsy. AJR Am J Roentgenol 193:850–855PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Wang S, Geisel J, Hooley R et al (2012) Utility of short term follow-up after benign concordant MR-guided breast biopsy. Abstract in proceedings American Roentgen Ray Society. Accessed 22 May 2012
  27. 27.
    Raher LB, Wisner DJ, Chang B et al (2011) false negatives found on follow-up MRI after benign concordant MRI-guided breast biopsies. Abstract in proceedings of Radiological Society of North America 2011 Scientific Assembly and Annual Meeting; November 27–December 2, 2011 Chicago IL. Accessed 22 May 2012
  28. 28.
    Friedlander LC, Lee CH, Comstock CE et al (2011) Frequency of unsuspected missed lesions and false-negative rate at MRI-guided core biopsy. Abstract in proceedings of Radiological Society of North America 2011 Scientific Assembly and Annual Meeting; November 27–December 2, 2011 Chicago IL. Accessed 22 May 2012
  29. 29.
    Goodman KA, Birdwell RL, Ikeda DM (1998) Compliance with recommended follow-up after percutaneous breast core biopsy. AJR Am J Roentgenol 170:89–92PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Thompson MO, Lipson J, Daniel B et al (2013) Why are patients non-compliant with follow-up recommendations after MRI-guided core needle biopsy of suspicious breast lesions? AJR Am J Roentgenol 201:1391–1400PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© European Society of Radiology 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sara D. Shaylor
    • 1
  • Samantha L. Heller
    • 2
  • Amy N. Melsaether
    • 1
  • Dipti Gupta
    • 3
  • Avani Gupta
    • 1
  • James Babb
    • 1
  • Linda Moy
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of RadiologyNYU School of MedicineNew YorkUSA
  2. 2.Department of RadiologySt. George’s Healthcare TrustLondonUK
  3. 3.Breast and Women’s Imaging CenterNorthwestern Memorial HospitalChicagoUSA

Personalised recommendations