دورية أكاديمية
Preoperative breast MRI positively impacts surgical outcomes of needle biopsy-diagnosed pure DCIS: a patient-matched analysis from the MIPA study.
| العنوان: | Preoperative breast MRI positively impacts surgical outcomes of needle biopsy-diagnosed pure DCIS: a patient-matched analysis from the MIPA study. |
|---|---|
| المؤلفون: | Cozzi A; Unit of Radiology, IRCCS Policlinico San Donato, Via Rodolfo Morandi 30, 20097, San Donato Milanese, Italy.; Imaging Institute of Southern Switzerland, Ente Ospedaliero Cantonale, Lugano, Switzerland., Di Leo G; Unit of Radiology, IRCCS Policlinico San Donato, Via Rodolfo Morandi 30, 20097, San Donato Milanese, Italy., Houssami N; The Daffodil Centre, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney (Joint Venture with Cancer Council NSW), Sydney, Australia., Gilbert FJ; Department of Radiology, School of Clinical Medicine, Cambridge Biomedical Campus, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK., Helbich TH; Division of General and Paediatric Radiology, Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-Guided Therapy, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.; Division of Molecular and Structural Preclinical Imaging, Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-Guided Therapy, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria., Álvarez Benito M; Department of Radiology, Hospital Universitario Reina Sofía, Córdoba, Spain., Balleyguier C; Department of Radiology, Institut Gustave Roussy, Villejuif, France.; Biomaps, UMR1281 INSERM, CEA, CNRS, Université Paris-Saclay, Villejuif, France., Bazzocchi M; Institute of Radiology, Department of Medicine, Ospedale Universitario S. Maria della Misericordia, Università degli Studi di Udine, Udine, Italy., Bult P; Department of Pathology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands., Calabrese M; Unit of Oncological and Breast Radiology, IRCCS Ospedale Policlinico San Martino, Genoa, Italy., Camps Herrero J; Department of Radiology, Hospital Universitario de La Ribera, Alzira, Spain.; Ribera Salud Hospitals, Valencia, Spain., Cartia F; Unit of Breast Imaging, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy., Cassano E; Breast Imaging Division, IEO, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy., Clauser P; Division of General and Paediatric Radiology, Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-Guided Therapy, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria., de Lima Docema MF; Department of Radiology, Hospital Sírio Libanês, São Paulo, Brazil., Depretto C; Unit of Breast Imaging, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy., Dominelli V; Breast Imaging Division, IEO, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy., Forrai G; Department of Radiology, MHEK Teaching Hospital, Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary.; Department of Radiology, Duna Medical Center, GE-RAD Kft, Budapest, Hungary., Girometti R; Institute of Radiology, Department of Medicine, Ospedale Universitario S. Maria della Misericordia, Università degli Studi di Udine, Udine, Italy., Harms SE; Breast Center of Northwest Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR, USA., Hilborne S; Department of Radiology, School of Clinical Medicine, Cambridge Biomedical Campus, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK., Ienzi R; Department of Radiology, Di.Bi.MED, Policlinico Universitario Paolo Giaccone Università degli Studi di Palermo, Palermo, Italy., Lobbes MBI; Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, The Netherlands.; Department of Medical Imaging, Zuyderland Medical Center, Sittard-Geleen, The Netherlands., Losio C; Department of Breast Radiology, IRCCS Ospedale San Raffaele, Milan, Italy., Mann RM; Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.; Department of Radiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands., Montemezzi S; Department of Radiology, Azienda Ospedaliera Universitaria Integrata Verona, Verona, Italy., Obdeijn IM; Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands., Aksoy Ozcan U; Department of Radiology, Acıbadem Atasehir Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey., Pediconi F; Department of Radiological, Oncological and Pathological Sciences, Università degli Studi di Roma 'La Sapienza', Rome, Italy., Pinker K; Division of General and Paediatric Radiology, Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-Guided Therapy, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.; Department of Radiology, Breast Imaging Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA., Preibsch H; Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany., Raya Povedano JL; Department of Radiology, Hospital Universitario Reina Sofía, Córdoba, Spain., Rossi Saccarelli C; Department of Radiology, Hospital Sírio Libanês, São Paulo, Brazil., Sacchetto D; Kiwifarm S.R.L., La Morra, Italy.; Disaster Medicine Service 118, ASL CN1, Levaldigi, Italy., Scaperrotta GP; Unit of Breast Imaging, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy., Schlooz M; Department of Surgery, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands., Szabó BK; Department of Radiology, Barking Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust, London, UK., Taylor DB; Medical School, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, The University of Western Australia, Perth, Australia.; Department of Radiology, Royal Perth Hospital, Perth, Australia., Ulus SÖ; Department of Radiology, Acıbadem Atasehir Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey., Van Goethem M; Gynecological Oncology Unit, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Department of Radiology, Multidisciplinary Breast Clinic, Antwerp University Hospital, University of Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium., Veltman J; Maatschap Radiologie Oost-Nederland, Oldenzaal, The Netherlands., Weigel S; Clinic for Radiology and Reference Center for Mammography, University of Münster, Münster, Germany., Wenkel E; Department of Radiology, University Hospital of Erlangen, Erlangen, Germany., Zuiani C; Institute of Radiology, Department of Medicine, Ospedale Universitario S. Maria della Misericordia, Università degli Studi di Udine, Udine, Italy., Sardanelli F; Unit of Radiology, IRCCS Policlinico San Donato, Via Rodolfo Morandi 30, 20097, San Donato Milanese, Italy. francesco.sardanelli@unimi.it.; Department of Biomedical Sciences for Health, Università degli Studi di Milano, Milan, Italy. francesco.sardanelli@unimi.it. |
| المصدر: | European radiology [Eur Radiol] 2024 Jun; Vol. 34 (6), pp. 3970-3980. Date of Electronic Publication: 2023 Nov 24. |
| نوع المنشور: | Journal Article; Observational Study |
| اللغة: | English |
| بيانات الدورية: | Publisher: Springer International Country of Publication: Germany NLM ID: 9114774 Publication Model: Print-Electronic Cited Medium: Internet ISSN: 1432-1084 (Electronic) Linking ISSN: 09387994 NLM ISO Abbreviation: Eur Radiol Subsets: MEDLINE |
| أسماء مطبوعة: | Original Publication: Berlin : Springer International, c1991- |
| مواضيع طبية MeSH: | Magnetic Resonance Imaging*/methods , Breast Neoplasms*/surgery , Breast Neoplasms*/diagnostic imaging , Breast Neoplasms*/pathology , Carcinoma, Intraductal, Noninfiltrating*/surgery , Carcinoma, Intraductal, Noninfiltrating*/diagnostic imaging , Carcinoma, Intraductal, Noninfiltrating*/pathology , Mastectomy*/methods , Reoperation*/statistics & numerical data, Humans ; Female ; Middle Aged ; Aged ; Adult ; Aged, 80 and over ; Young Adult ; Adolescent ; Preoperative Care/methods ; Treatment Outcome ; Biopsy, Needle ; Breast/diagnostic imaging ; Breast/pathology ; Breast/surgery |
| مستخلص: | 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).) |
| التعليقات: | Comment in: Eur Radiol. 2024 Jun;34(6):3967-3969. doi: 10.1007/s00330-023-10460-2. (PMID: 37999731) |
| References: | Grimm LJ, Rahbar H, Abdelmalak M, Hall AH, Ryser MD (2022) Ductal carcinoma in situ: state-of-the-art review. Radiology 302:246–255. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.211839. (PMID: 10.1148/radiol.21183934931856) van Seijen M, Lips EH, Thompson AM et al (2019) Ductal carcinoma in situ: to treat or not to treat, that is the question. Br J Cancer 121:285–292. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41416-019-0478-6. (PMID: 10.1038/s41416-019-0478-6312855906697179) Solin LJ (2019) Management of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) of the breast: present approaches and future directions. Curr Oncol Rep 21:33. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11912-019-0777-3. (PMID: 10.1007/s11912-019-0777-330834994) Wright JL, Rahbar H, Obeng-Gyasi S, Carlos R, Tjoe J, Wolff AC (2022) Overcoming barriers in ductal carcinoma in situ management: from overtreatment to optimal treatment. J Clin Oncol 40:225–230. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.21.01674. (PMID: 10.1200/JCO.21.0167434813345) Allen LR, Lago-Toro CE, Hughes JH et al (2010) Is there a role for MRI in the preoperative assessment of patients with DCIS? Ann Surg Oncol 17:2395–2400. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-010-1000-9. (PMID: 10.1245/s10434-010-1000-920217259) Itakura K, Lessing J, Sakata T et al (2011) The impact of preoperative magnetic resonance imaging on surgical treatment and outcomes for ductal carcinoma in situ. Clin Breast Cancer 11:33–38. https://doi.org/10.3816/CBC.2011.n.006. (PMID: 10.3816/CBC.2011.n.006214215204508001) Davis KL, Barth RJ, Gui J, Dann E, Eisenberg B, Rosenkranz K (2012) Use of MRI in preoperative planning for women with newly diagnosed DCIS: risk or benefit? Ann Surg Oncol 19:3270–3274. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-012-2548-3. (PMID: 10.1245/s10434-012-2548-322911365) Kropcho LC, Steen ST, Chung AP, Sim M-S, Kirsch DL, Giuliano AE (2012) Preoperative breast MRI in the surgical treatment of ductal carcinoma in situ. Breast J 18:151–156. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1524-4741.2011.01204.x. (PMID: 10.1111/j.1524-4741.2011.01204.x22211816) Pilewskie M, Kennedy C, Shappell C et al (2013) Effect of MRI on the management of ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. Ann Surg Oncol 20:1522–1529. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-012-2771-y. (PMID: 10.1245/s10434-012-2771-y23224903) Hajaj M, Karim A, Pascaline S, Noor L, Patel S, Dakka M (2017) Impact of MRI on high grade ductal carcinoma in situ (HG DCIS) management, are we using the full scope of MRI? Eur J Radiol 95:271–277. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2017.08.027. (PMID: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2017.08.02728987679) Balleyguier C, Dunant A, Ceugnart L et al (2019) Preoperative breast magnetic resonance imaging in women with local ductal carcinoma in situ to optimize surgical outcomes: results from the randomized phase III trial IRCIS. J Clin Oncol 37:885–892. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.18.00595. (PMID: 10.1200/JCO.18.0059530811290) Lehman CD, Gatsonis C, Romanoff J et al (2019) Association of magnetic resonance imaging and a 12-gene expression assay with breast ductal carcinoma in situ treatment. JAMA Oncol 5:1036. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamaoncol.2018.6269. (PMID: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2018.6269306532096583020) Keymeulen KBIM, Geurts SME, Lobbes MBI et al (2019) Population-based study of the effect of preoperative breast MRI on the surgical management of ductal carcinoma in situ. Br J Surg 106:1488–1494. https://doi.org/10.1002/bjs.11299. (PMID: 10.1002/bjs.1129931386197) Lam DL, Smith J, Partridge SC et al (2019) The impact of preoperative breast MRI on surgical management of women with newly diagnosed ductal carcinoma in situ. Acad Radiol 27:478–486. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acra.2019.05.013. (PMID: 10.1016/j.acra.2019.05.013312810836942628) Yoon GY, Choi WJ, Kim HH, Cha JH, Shin HJ, Chae EY (2020) Surgical outcomes for ductal carcinoma in situ: impact of preoperative MRI. Radiology 295:296–303. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2020191535. (PMID: 10.1148/radiol.202019153532181727) Healy NA, Parag Y, Soppelsa G et al (2022) Does pre-operative breast MRI have an impact on surgical outcomes in high-grade DCIS? Br J Radiol 95:20220306. https://doi.org/10.1259/bjr.20220306. (PMID: 10.1259/bjr.20220306358199209815730) Hong M, Fan S, Yu Z et al (2022) Evaluating upstaging in ductal carcinoma in situ using preoperative MRI-based radiomics. J Magn Reson Imaging. https://doi.org/10.1002/jmri.28539. (PMID: 10.1002/jmri.28539364408119509497) Chou SHS, Romanoff J, Lehman CD et al (2021) Preoperative breast MRI for newly diagnosed ductal carcinoma in situ: imaging features and performance in a multicenter setting (ECOG-ACRIN E4112 Trial). Radiology 301:66–77. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2021204743. (PMID: 10.1148/radiol.202120474334342501) Keymeulen KBIM, Geurts SME, Kooreman LFS et al (2022) Clinical value of contralateral breast cancers detected by pre-operative MRI in patients diagnosed with DCIS: a population-based cohort study. Eur Radiol 33:2209–2217. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-022-09115-5. (PMID: 10.1007/s00330-022-09115-5361806459935702) Luo J, Johnston BS, Kitsch AE et al (2017) Ductal carcinoma in situ: quantitative preoperative breast MR imaging features associated with recurrence after treatment. Radiology 285:788–797. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2017170587. (PMID: 10.1148/radiol.201717058728914599) Fazeli S, Snyder BS, Gareen IF et al (2021) Patient-reported testing burden of breast magnetic resonance imaging among women with ductal carcinoma in situ. JAMA Netw Open 4:e2129697. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.29697. (PMID: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.29697347267488564581) Fazeli S, Snyder BS, Gareen IF et al (2022) Association between surgery preference and receipt in ductal carcinoma in situ after breast magnetic resonance imaging. JAMA Netw Open 5:e2210331. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2022.10331. (PMID: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2022.10331355365809092204) Cody HS, Van Zee KJ (2015) Reexcision — the other breast cancer epidemic. N Engl J Med 373:568–569. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMe1507190. (PMID: 10.1056/NEJMe150719026244311) Kaczmarski K, Wang P, Gilmore R et al (2019) Surgeon re-excision rates after breast-conserving surgery: a measure of low-value care. J Am Coll Surg 228:504-512e2. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2018.12.043. (PMID: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2018.12.04330703538) Shubeck SP, Morrow M, Dossett LA (2022) De-escalation in breast cancer surgery. npj Breast Cancer 8:25. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41523-022-00383-4. (PMID: 10.1038/s41523-022-00383-4351974788866473) Fancellu A, Turner RM, Dixon JM, Pinna A, Cottu P, Houssami N (2015) Meta-analysis of the effect of preoperative breast MRI on the surgical management of ductal carcinoma in situ. Br J Surg 102:883–893. https://doi.org/10.1002/bjs.9797. (PMID: 10.1002/bjs.979725919321) Canelo-Aybar C, Taype-Rondan A, Zafra-Tanaka JH et al (2021) Preoperative breast magnetic resonance imaging in patients with ductal carcinoma in situ: a systematic review for the European Commission Initiative on Breast Cancer (ECIBC). Eur Radiol 31:5880–5893. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-021-07873-2. (PMID: 10.1007/s00330-021-07873-2340528818270803) Bartram A, Gilbert F, Thompson A, Mann GB, Agrawal A (2021) Breast MRI in DCIS size estimation, breast-conserving surgery and oncoplastic breast surgery. Cancer Treat Rev 94:102158. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ctrv.2021.102158. (PMID: 10.1016/j.ctrv.2021.10215833610127) Pinder SE, Thompson AM, Wesserling J (2022) Low-risk DCIS. What is it? Observe or excise? Virchows Arch 480:21–32. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00428-021-03173-8. (PMID: 10.1007/s00428-021-03173-834448893) Pinker K (2020) Preoperative MRI improves surgical planning and outcomes for ductal carcinoma in situ. Radiology 295:304–306. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2020200076. (PMID: 10.1148/radiol.202020007632186457) Peters NHGM, van Esser S, van den Bosch MAAJ et al (2011) Preoperative MRI and surgical management in patients with nonpalpable breast cancer: the MONET – randomised controlled trial. Eur J Cancer 47:879–886. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejca.2010.11.035. (PMID: 10.1016/j.ejca.2010.11.03521195605) Sardanelli F, Trimboli RM, Houssami N et al (2020) Solving the preoperative breast MRI conundrum: design and protocol of the MIPA study. Eur Radiol 30:5427–5436. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-020-06824-7. (PMID: 10.1007/s00330-020-06824-732377813) Sardanelli F, Trimboli RM, Houssami N et al (2022) Magnetic resonance imaging before breast cancer surgery: results of an observational multicenter international prospective analysis (MIPA). Eur Radiol 32:1611–1623. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-021-08240-x. (PMID: 10.1007/s00330-021-08240-x34643778) Cozzi A, Di Leo G, Houssami N et al (2023) Screening and diagnostic breast MRI: how do they impact surgical treatment? Insights from the MIPA study. Eur Radiol. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-023-09600-5. Wadasadawala T, Lewis S, Parmar V et al (2018) Bilateral breast cancer after multimodality treatment: a report of clinical outcomes in an Asian population. Clin Breast Cancer 18:e727–e737. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clbc.2017.11.003. (PMID: 10.1016/j.clbc.2017.11.00329254601) Jiang H, Zhang R, Liu X et al (2021) Bilateral breast cancer in China: a 10-year single-center retrospective study (2006–2016). Cancer Med 10:6089–6098. https://doi.org/10.1002/cam4.4141. (PMID: 10.1002/cam4.4141343465608419776) King G, Nielsen R (2019) Why propensity scores should not be used for matching. Polit Anal 27:435–454. https://doi.org/10.1017/pan.2019.11. (PMID: 10.1017/pan.2019.11) Greifer N, Stuart EA (2021) Choosing the estimand when matching or weighting in observational studies. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2106.10577. Ho DE, Imai K, King G, Stuart EA (2011) MatchIt: nonparametric preprocessing for parametric causal inference. J Stat Softw 42:1–28. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v042.i08. (PMID: 10.18637/jss.v042.i08) Rubin DB (1980) Bias reduction using Mahalanobis-metric matching. Biometrics 36:293. https://doi.org/10.2307/2529981. (PMID: 10.2307/2529981) Greifer N, Stuart EA (2021) Matching methods for confounder adjustment: an addition to the epidemiologist’s toolbox. Epidemiol Rev 43:118–129. https://doi.org/10.1093/epirev/mxab003. (PMID: 10.1093/epirev/mxab0039005055) Austin PC (2009) Balance diagnostics for comparing the distribution of baseline covariates between treatment groups in propensity-score matched samples. Stat Med 28:3083–3107. https://doi.org/10.1002/sim.3697. (PMID: 10.1002/sim.3697197574443472075) Kandel M, Dunant A, Balleyguier C, Bonastre J (2020) Cost-effectiveness of preoperative magnetic resonance imaging to optimize surgery in ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. Eur J Radiol 129:109058. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2020.109058. (PMID: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2020.10905832563960) Rothwell PM (2005) External validity of randomised controlled trials: “to whom do the results of this trial apply?” Lancet 365:82–93. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(04)17670-8. (PMID: 10.1016/S0140-6736(04)17670-815639683) Djurisic S, Rath A, Gaber S et al (2017) Barriers to the conduct of randomised clinical trials within all disease areas. Trials 18:360. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13063-017-2099-9. (PMID: 10.1186/s13063-017-2099-9287648095539637) Hershman DL, Buono D, Jacobson JS et al (2009) Surgeon characteristics and use of breast conservation surgery in women with early stage breast cancer. Ann Surg 249:828–833. https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0b013e3181a38f6f. (PMID: 10.1097/SLA.0b013e3181a38f6f19387318) Lee J, Tanaka E, Eby PR et al (2017) Preoperative breast MRI: surgeons’ patient selection patterns and potential bias in outcomes analyses. Am J Roentgenol 208:923–932. https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.16.17038. (PMID: 10.2214/AJR.16.1703828026205) Valero MG, Mallory MA, Losk K et al (2018) Surgeon variability and factors predicting for reoperation following breast-conserving surgery. Ann Surg Oncol 25:2573–2578. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-018-6526-2. (PMID: 10.1245/s10434-018-6526-2297861296264913) Myers PL, Park RH, Mitchell DC, Nghiem BT, Amalfi AN (2019) Would plastic surgeons choose breast conservation therapy? Ann Plast Surg 82:S202–S207. https://doi.org/10.1097/SAP.0000000000001922. (PMID: 10.1097/SAP.000000000000192230855389) Ryan JF, Lesniak DM, Cordeiro E, Campbell SM, Rajaee AN (2023) Surgeon factors influencing breast surgery outcomes: a scoping review to define the modern breast surgical oncologist. Ann Surg Oncol. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-023-13472-w. (PMID: 10.1245/s10434-023-13472-w3726156310409677) Shaaban AM, Hilton B, Clements K et al (2021) Pathological features of 11,337 patients with primary ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) and subsequent events: results from the UK Sloane Project. Br J Cancer 124:1009–1017. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41416-020-01152-5. (PMID: 10.1038/s41416-020-01152-533199800) Kuhl CK, Schrading S, Bieling HB et al (2007) MRI for diagnosis of pure ductal carcinoma in situ: a prospective observational study. Lancet 370:485–492. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(07)61232-X. (PMID: 10.1016/S0140-6736(07)61232-X17693177) Rahbar H, DeMartini WB, Lee AY, Partridge SC, Peacock S, Lehman CD (2015) Accuracy of 3T versus 1.5T breast MRI for pre-operative assessment of extent of disease in newly diagnosed DCIS. Eur J Radiol 84:611–616. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2014.12.029. (PMID: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2014.12.029256049094348176) Greenwood HI, Wilmes LJ, Kelil T, Joe BN (2020) Role of breast MRI in the evaluation and detection of DCIS: opportunities and challenges. J Magn Reson Imaging 52:697–709. https://doi.org/10.1002/jmri.26985. (PMID: 10.1002/jmri.2698531746088) Roque R, Cordeiro MR, Armas M, Caramelo F, Caseiro-Alves F, Figueiredo-Dias M (2022) The accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging in predicting the size of pure ductal carcinoma in situ: a systematic review and meta-analysis. NPJ Breast Cancer 8:77. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41523-022-00441-x. (PMID: 10.1038/s41523-022-00441-x357684429243148) Cozzi A, Schiaffino S, Sardanelli F (2019) The emerging role of contrast-enhanced mammography. Quant Imaging Med Surg 9:2012–2018. https://doi.org/10.21037/qims.2019.11.09. (PMID: 10.21037/qims.2019.11.09319299766942965) Cozzi A, Magni V, Zanardo M, Schiaffino S, Sardanelli F (2022) Contrast-enhanced mammography: a systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic performance. Radiology 302:568–581. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.211412. (PMID: 10.1148/radiol.21141234904875) European Commission Initiative on Breast Cancer (2022) Planning surgical treatment: contrast-enhanced spectral mammography. https://healthcare-quality.jrc.ec.europa.eu/european-breast-cancer-guidelines/surgical-planning/CESM . Accessed 30 Jun 2023. |
| فهرسة مساهمة: | Keywords: Breast neoplasms (biopsy, needle); Carcinoma (intraductal, noninfiltrating); Magnetic resonance imaging; Mastectomy; Reoperation |
| تواريخ الأحداث: | Date Created: 20231124 Date Completed: 20240611 Latest Revision: 20240618 |
| رمز التحديث: | 20240618 |
| مُعرف محوري في PubMed: | PMC11166778 |
| DOI: | 10.1007/s00330-023-10409-5 |
| PMID: | 37999727 |
| قاعدة البيانات: | MEDLINE |
Find this article in full text from Springer Verlag. 
Full Text Finder | تدمد: | 1432-1084 |
|---|---|
| DOI: | 10.1007/s00330-023-10409-5 |