Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Dynamic breast MR imaging: is parametric mapping superior to image subtraction in lesion detection?

  • Breast
  • Published:
European Radiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

We compared the detection of malignant lesions in two different methods of parametric-guided analysis to the widely used early subtraction images. The parametric colour-coded overlays were defined by the increase of signal intensity after contrast injection and the course of the time signal intensity curve. Exams of 30 patients with histopathological evidence of 32 invasive breast carcinomas were evaluated. Five hundred five areas of additional enhancing tissue were found in the early subtraction images. The sensitivity was 100 in the subtraction images and 100 and 93.8 in the parametric images, respectively, the specificity 67.5, 84.2 and 88.7, respectively. On average 4.4 ROI-measurements were needed to find the highest increase of signal intensity in the subtraction series compared to 1.9 in the parametric images. Properly selected thresholds in parametric imaging may be helpful in the differentiation of enhancing tissue. Furthermore the parametric image-guided ROI selection significantly speeds up the analysis and makes it safer as a lower rate of ROI-measurements is needed to find the strongest enhancement.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Sardanelli F, Iozzelli A, Fausto A (2003) MR imaging of the breast: indications, established technique, and new directions. Eur Radiol 13(Suppl 3):N28–N36

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Kuhl CK, Mielcareck P, Klaschik S, Leutner C, Wardelmann E, Gieseke J, Schild HH (1999) Dynamic breast MR imaging: are signal intensity time course data useful for differential diagnosis of enhancing lesions? Radiology 211:101–110

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Helbich TH (2000) Contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging of the breast. Eur J Radiol 34:208–219

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Szabo BK, Aspelin P, Kristoffersen Wiberg M, Tot T, Bone B (2003) Invasive breast cancer: correlation of dynamic MR features with prognostic factors. Eur Radiol 13:2425–2435

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Schnall MD, Blume J, Bluemke DA, DeAngelis GA, DeBruhl N, Harms S, Heywang-Kobrunner SH, Hylton N, Kuhl CK, Pisano ED, Causer P, Schnitt SJ, Thickman D, Stelling CB, Weatherall PT, Lehman C, Gatsonis CA (2006) Diagnostic architectural and dynamic features at breast MR imaging: multicenter study. Radiology 238:42–53

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Agoston AT, Daniel BL, Herfkens RJ, Ikeda DM, Birdwell RL, Heiss SG, Sawyer-Glover AM (2001) Intensity-modulated parametric mapping for simultaneous display of rapid dynamic and high-spatial-resolution breast MR imaging data. Radiographics 21:217–226

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Kelcz F, Furman-Haran E, Grobgeld D, Degani H (2002) Clinical testing of high-spatial-resolution parametric contrast-enhanced MR imaging of the breast. AJR Am J Roentgenol 179:1485–1492

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Hauth EA, Jaeger H, Maderwald S, Stockamp C, Muhler A, Kimmig R, Forsting M (2006) Evaluation of quantitative parametric analysis for characterization of breast lesions in contrast-enhanced MR mammography. Eur Radiol 16(12):2834–2841

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Hoffmann U, Brix G, Knopp MV, Hess T, Lorenz WJ (1995) Pharmacokinetic mapping of the breast: a new method for dynamic MR mammography. Magn Reson Med 33:506–514

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Parker GJ, Suckling J, Tanner SF, Padhani AR, Revell PB, Husband JE, Leach MO (1997) Probing tumor microvascularity by measurement, analysis and display of contrast agent uptake kinetics. J Magn Reson Imaging 7:564–574

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Jacobs MA, Barker PB, Bluemke DA, Maranto C, Arnold C, Herskovits EH, Bhujwalla Z (2003) Benign and malignant breast lesions: diagnosis with multiparametric MR imaging. Radiology 229:225–232

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Degani H, Gusis V, Weinstein D, Fields S, Strano S (1997) Mapping pathophysiological features of breast tumors by MRI at high spatial resolution. Nat Med 3:780–782

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Furman-Haran E, Schechtman E, Kelcz F, Kirshenbaum K, Degani H (2005) Magnetic resonance imaging reveals functional diversity of the vasculature in benign and malignant breast lesions. Cancer 104:708–718

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Turkat TJ, Klein BD, Polan RL, Richman RH (1994) Dynamic MR mammography: a technique for potentially reducing the biopsy rate for benign breast disease. J Magn Reson Imaging 4:563–568

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Szabo BK, Aspelin P, Wiberg MK (2004) Neural network approach to the segmentation and classification of dynamic magnetic resonance images of the breast: comparison with empiric and quantitative kinetic parameters. Acad Radiol 11:1344–1354

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Baum F, Fischer U, Vosshenrich R, Grabbe E (2002) Classification of hypervascularized lesions in CE MR imaging of the breast. Eur Radiol 12:1087–1092

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Brinck U, Fischer U, Korabiowska M, Jutrowski M, Schauer A, Grabbe E (1997) The variability of fibroadenoma in contrast-enhanced dynamic MR mammography. AJR Am J Roentgenol 168:1331–1334

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Heywang SH, Hahn D, Schmidt H, Krischke I, Eiermann W, Bassermann R, Lissner J (1986) MR imaging of the breast using gadolinium-DTPA. J Comput Assist Tomogr 10:199–204

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Weinstein D, Strano S, Cohen P, Fields S, Gomori JM, Degani H (1999) Breast fibroadenoma: mapping of pathophysiologic features with three-time-point, contrast-enhanced MR imaging-pilot study. Radiology 210:233–240

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Boetes C, Barentsz JO, Mus RD, van der Sluis RF, van Erning LJ, Hendriks JH, Holland R, Ruys SH (1994) MR characterization of suspicious breast lesions with a gadolinium-enhanced TurboFLASH subtraction technique. Radiology 193:777–781

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Gilles R, Guinebretiere JM, Lucidarme O, Cluzel P, Janaud G, Finet JF, Tardivon A, Masselot J, Vanel D (1994) Nonpalpable breast tumors: diagnosis with contrast-enhanced subtraction dynamic MR imaging. Radiology 191:625–631

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Harms SE, Flamig DP, Hesley KL, Meiches MD, Jensen RA, Evans WP, Savino DA, Wells RV (1993) MR imaging of the breast with rotating delivery of excitation off resonance: clinical experience with pathologic correlation. Radiology 187:493–501

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Heiberg EV, Perman WH, Herrmann VM, Janney CG (1996) Dynamic sequential 3D gadolinium-enhanced MRI of the whole breast. Magn Reson Imaging 14:337–348

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Ercolani P, Valeri G, Amici F (1998) Dynamic MRI of the breast. Eur J Radiol 27(Suppl 2):S265–S271

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Hauth EA, Stockamp C, Maderwald S, Muhler A, Kimmig R, Jaeger H, Barkhausen J, Forsting M (2006) Evaluation of the three-time-point method for diagnosis of breast lesions in contrast-enhanced MR mammography. Clin Imaging 30:160–165

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Kuhl CK, Schild HH, Morakkabati N (2005) Dynamic bilateral contrast-enhanced MR imaging of the breast: trade-off between spatial and temporal resolution. Radiology 236:789–800

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Mussurakis S, Buckley DL, Horsman A (1997) Dynamic MRI of invasive breast cancer: assessment of three region-of-interest analysis methods. J Comput Assist Tomogr 21:431–438

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Mussurakis S, Gibbs P, Horsman A (1998) Primary breast abnormalities: selective pixel sampling on dynamic gadolinium-enhanced MR images. Radiology 206:465–473

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Lehman CD, Peacock S, DeMartini WB, Chen X (2006) A new automated software system to evaluate breast MR examinations: improved specificity without decreased sensitivity. AJR Am J Roentgenol 187:51–56

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Safir J (2005) 3TP and magnetic resonance breast imaging: interview with Dr. Julian Safir. Integr Cancer Ther 4:45–47

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Kuhl CK (2000) MRI of breast tumors. Eur Radiol 10:46–58

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Mariano MN, van den Bosch MA, Daniel BL, Nowels KW, Birdwell RL, Fong KJ, Desmond PS, Plevritis S, Stables LA, Zakhour M, Herfkens RJ, Ikeda DM (2005) Contrast-enhanced MRI of ductal carcinoma in situ: characteristics of a new intensity-modulated parametric mapping technique correlated with histopathologic findings. J Magn Reson Imaging 22:520–526

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Vomweg TW, Teifke A, Kunz RP, Hintze C, Hlawatsch A, Kern A, Kreitner KF, Thelen M (2004) Combination of low and high resolution sequences in two orientations for dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI of the breast: more than a compromise. Eur Radiol 14:1732–1742

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Wedegartner U, Bick U, Wortler K, Rummeny E, Bongartz G (2001) Differentiation between benign and malignant findings on MR-mammography: usefulness of morphological criteria. Eur Radiol 11:1645–1650

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Obenauer S, Schorn C, Stelter B, Fischer U, Grabbe E (2002) Contrast-enhanced high in-plane resolution dynamic MRI of the breast. Are there advantages in comparison to standard dynamic MRI? Clin Imaging 26:161–165

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Kriege M, Brekelmans CT, Boetes C, Muller SH, Zonderland HM, Obdeijn IM, Manoliu RA, Kok T, Rutgers EJ, de Koning HJ, Klijn JG (2006) Differences between first and subsequent rounds of the MRISC breast cancer screening program for women with a familial or genetic predisposition. Cancer 106:2318–2326

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Bazzocchi M, Zuiani C, Panizza P, Del Frate C, Soldano F, Isola M, Sardanelli F, Giuseppetti GM, Simonetti G, Lattanzio V, Del Maschio A (2006) Contrast-enhanced breast MRI in patients with suspicious microcalcifications on mammography: results of a multicenter trial. AJR Am J Roentgenol 186:1723–1732

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Radiology, Stavanger University Hospital, Arm. Hansensv.20, 4011, Stavanger, Norway

    Kathinka D. Kurz, Hans-Jörg Wittsack, Reinhart Willers, Dirk Blondin, Ulrich Mödder & Andreas Saleh

  2. Institute of Diagnostic Radiology, University of Düsseldorf, Moorenstr. 5, 40225, Düsseldorf, Germany

    Hans-Jörg Wittsack, Dirk Blondin, Ulrich Mödder & Andreas Saleh

  3. Multimediacenter, University of Düsseldorf, Moorenstr. 5, 40225, Düsseldorf, Germany

    Reinhart Willers

Authors
  1. Kathinka D. Kurz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Hans-Jörg Wittsack
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Reinhart Willers
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Dirk Blondin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Ulrich Mödder
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Andreas Saleh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kathinka D. Kurz.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Kurz, K.D., Wittsack, HJ., Willers, R. et al. Dynamic breast MR imaging: is parametric mapping superior to image subtraction in lesion detection?. Eur Radiol 17, 3093–3099 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-007-0652-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-007-0652-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation