Image-Guided Breast Biopsy

Radiologic-pathologic Correlation at Breast MR Imaging: What is the Appropriate Management for High-risk Lesions?

Image-guided breast biopsy programs are a clinical reality at breast care centers throughout the world. Because image-guided biopsy is a departure from traditional surgical breast biopsy, the quality of each new image-guided breast biopsy program should be measured. A generalized scheme for quality evaluation will be presented. The most complex part of this scheme is the comparison of tissue samples obtained by image-guided biopsy with tissue samples subsequently obtained during surgery. Because image-guided biopsy programs retrieve histology specimens that are microscopically as valid as histology obtained from open surgery, comparing the histology from an image-guided breast biopsy with the histology from an open surgical biopsy is complex. One cannot use the well-known method of determining false-negative and false-positive rates. In addition, breast histology, itself, is quite complex. Some benign breast disease is quite focal and specific, such as fibroadenomas. Other benign breast disease is diffuse and not very specific, such as fibrocystic abnormalities. Furthermore, malignant breast disease is part of a histology spectrum starting with normal-looking breast tissue with atypical features, progressing to carcinoma in situ, and ending, finally, with infiltrating breast cancer. To illustrate how histological comparisons should be made for breast tissue, published results from a large, nationally funded study will be re-examined using the proposed scheme. Although the breast biopsy, itself, may seem like the hard work of a new breast biopsy program, it is not. After the first year of the program, follow-up of women who have been biopsied is the true, back-breaking, hard work. How a breast center should perform air-tight follow-up will be described.

We aimed to investigate the value of breast magnetic resonance (MR) imaging and positron emission tomography-computed tomography (PET/CT) in predicting advanced axillary lymph node (ALN) metastases (ypN2-3) after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) in invasive ductal carcinoma patients. A total of 108 patients with invasive ductal carcinoma underwent breast MR imaging and PET/CT both before and after NAC (termed initial staging and restaging, respectively). The number of positive ALNs and the short diameter (SD) of the largest ALN on breast MR imaging and maximal standardized uptake value (SUVmax) in the ALNs on PET/CT were evaluated. Odds ratio (OR) for prediction of advanced ALN metastases was calculated. The negative predictive value (NPV) of restaging imaging for exclusion of advanced ALN metastases was also calculated. Patients with advanced ALN metastases were more likely to have a higher number (≥2) of positive LNs (OR, 8.06; P = 0.015) on restaging MR imaging. No clinico-pathological factors were significantly associated with advanced ALN metastases. With restaging MR imaging, PET/CT, and MR imaging plus PET/CT, the NPV for excluding advanced ALN metastases was 97.3%, 94.4%, and 100.0%. A higher number of positive ALNs on restaging MR imaging was an independent predictor for advanced ALN metastases after NAC.

We summarise here the information to be provided to women and referring physicians about percutaneous breast biopsy and lesion localisation under imaging guidance. After explaining why a preoperative diagnosis with a percutaneous biopsy is preferred to surgical biopsy, we illustrate the criteria used by radiologists for choosing the most appropriate combination of device type for sampling and imaging technique for guidance. Then, we describe the commonly used devices, from fine-needle sampling to tissue biopsy with larger needles, namely core needle biopsy and vacuum-assisted biopsy, and how mammography, digital breast tomosynthesis, ultrasound, or magnetic resonance imaging work for targeting the lesion for sampling or localisation. The differences among the techniques available for localisation (carbon marking, metallic wire, radiotracer injection, radioactive seed, and magnetic seed localisation) are illustrated. Type and rate of possible complications are described and the issue of concomitant antiplatelet or anticoagulant therapy is also addressed. The importance of pathological-radiological correlation is highlighted: when evaluating the results of any needle sampling, the radiologist must check the concordance between the cytology/pathology report of the sample and the radiological appearance of the biopsied lesion. We recommend that special attention is paid to a proper and tactful approach when communicating to the woman the need for tissue sampling as well as the possibility of cancer diagnosis, repeat tissue sampling, and or even surgery when tissue sampling shows a lesion with uncertain malignant potential (also referred to as “high-risk” or B3 lesions). Finally, seven frequently asked questions are answered.

To evaluate the usefulness of preoperative magnetic resonance (MR) imaging-guided stereotactic localization and core biopsy of suspicious breast lesions that are visible at breast MR imaging alone (ie, that are clinically, mammographically, and ultrasonographically occult), with the goal of integrating this technique into the diagnostic and therapeutic work-up of MR-suspicious lesions in a clinical setting. A stereotactic breast biopsy device was used for needle placement in and guide wire localization of 97 lesions in 66 patients or core biopsy of five lesions in five patients; all lesions were visible at MR imaging. Interventions were performed with MR guidance on a 0.5- or 1.5-T system. Lesion localization and resection were successful in 95 of the 97 lesions; two of the lesions were not resected in spite of correct guide wire localization. In this series, 53 (55%) of 97 lesions proved malignant (11 [21%] in situ; 42 [79%] invasive). Lesions were 4-19 mm (mean, 8.7 mm); all invasive cancers corresponded to a pT1 tumor stage. Location of the lesion in the parenchyma (retroareolar or prepectoral) did not interfere with accessibility. MR imaging-guided stereotactic hook-wire placement and excisional biopsy are accurate and effective in managing lesions identified at only breast MR imaging. MR imaging-guided core biopsy holds promise for allowing a definite work-up of these lesions.

Percutaneous image-guided biopsy of the pancreas is a safe, effective, efficient, and minimally invasive way to obtain samples for pathological diagnosis of pancreatic mass lesions. The myriad of diseases that can involve the pancreas require different therapies. Therefore, pathological diagnosis is key. With proper imaging resources and techniques, most mass lesions of the pancreas that are visible on cross-sectional imaging can be approached safely and accurately percutaneously under either computed tomography (CT) or ultrasound guidance. These lesions may be accessed through anterior, posterior, and/or lateral approaches depending upon their proximity to the anticipated skin puncture site, and the presence or absence of intervening structures. While the ideal percutaneous route to any pancreatic target lesion is the one that has no vital structures in its path, methods and tools exist to make even the most seemingly obstructed paths to pancreatic targets navigable. Once accessed, the targets may be sampled by either fine-needle aspiration or core needle biopsy. The alternatives to percutaneous image-guided biopsy of the pancreas include open (surgical) biopsy and endoscopic ultrasound-guided (EUS) biopsy. Percutaneous image-guided biopsy poses less risk to the patient than open biopsy and has been shown to be as accurate as EUS biopsy with an even lower complication rate.

The purpose of this study was to evaluate percutaneous imaging-guided core biopsy in the assessment of selected palpable breast masses. Of 1388 consecutive breast lesions that had percutaneous imaging-guided core biopsy, 155 (11%) were palpable. Palpable masses referred for percutaneous imaging-guided core biopsy included lesions that were small, deep, mobile, vaguely palpable, or multiple. Biopsy guidance was sonography in 140 lesions (90%) and stereotaxis in 15 (10%). Surgical correlation or minimum of 2 years follow-up is available in 115 palpable masses in 107 women. Medical records, imaging studies, and histologic findings were reviewed. Of 115 palpable breast masses, 98 (85%) were referred by surgeons to the radiology department for percutaneous imaging-guided core biopsy and 88 (77%) had percutaneous imaging-guided core biopsy on the day of initial evaluation at our institution. Percutaneous imaging-guided core biopsy spared additional diagnostic tissue sampling in 79 (74%) of 107 women, including 57 women with carcinoma and 22 women with benign findings. Percutaneous imaging-guided core biopsy did not spare additional tissue sampling in 28 women (26%), including 15 women in whom surgical biopsy was recommended on the basis of percutaneous biopsy findings and 13 women with benign (n = 7) or malignant (n = 6) percutaneous biopsy findings who chose to undergo diagnostic surgical biopsy. Percutaneous imaging-guided core biopsy is useful in the evaluation of palpable breast masses that are small, deep, mobile, vaguely palpable, or multiple. In this study, percutaneous imaging-guided core biopsy spared additional diagnostic tissue sampling in 74% women with palpable breast masses.

Purpose To investigate the utility and accuracy of breast magnetic resonance (MR) imaging as a supplemental screening tool in women at average risk for breast cancer and to investigate the types of cancer detected with MR imaging screening. Materials and Methods This prospective observational study was conducted at two academic breast centers in women aged 40-70 years without breast cancer-associated risk factors (lifetime risk <15%). Between January 2005 and December 2013, women with at least minimal residual breast tissue (American College of Radiology categories A-D) and normal conventional imaging findings (screening mammography with or without screening ultrasonography [US]) were invited to undergo supplemental MR imaging screening. Outcome measures were supplemental cancer detection rates, interval cancer rates, and biologic profiles of MR imaging-detected additional cancers, as well as specificity and positive predictive value (PPV) of MR imaging screening. Tissue diagnoses or 2 years of follow-up were used to establish the reference standard. Results A total of 2120 women were recruited and underwent 3861 screening MR imaging studies, covering an observation period of 7007 women-years. Breast MR imaging depicted 60 additional breast cancers (ductal carcinoma in situ, n = 20; invasive carcinoma, n = 40) for an overall supplemental cancer detection rate of 15.5 per 1000 cases (95% confidence interval [CI]: 11.9, 20.0). Forty-eight additional cancers were detected with MR imaging at initial screening (supplemental cancer detection rate, 22.6 per 1000 cases). During the 1741 subsequent screening rounds, 12 of 13 incident cancers were found with MR imaging alone (supplemental cancer detection rate, 6.9 per 1000 cases). One cancer was diagnosed with all three methods (mammography, US, and MR imaging), and none were diagnosed with mammography only or US only. Cancers diagnosed with MR imaging were small (median, 8 mm), node negative in 93.4% of cases, and dedifferentiated (high-grade cancer) in 41.7% of cases at prevalence screening and 46.0% of cases at incidence screening. No interval cancers were observed. MR imaging screening offered high specificity (97.1%; 95% CI: 96.5, 97.6) and high PPV (35.7%; 95% CI: 28.9, 43.1). Conclusion In women at average risk for breast cancer, MR imaging screening improves early diagnosis of prognostically relevant breast cancer. © RSNA, 2017 Online supplemental material is available for this article.

Breast magnetic resonance (MR) imaging, because of its extremely high sensitivity in detecting invasive breast cancers, is sometimes used as a diagnostic tool to evaluate equivocal mammographic findings. However, breast MR imaging should never substitute for a complete diagnostic evaluation or for biopsy of suspected, localizable suspicious mammographic lesions, whenever possible. The modality's high cost, in addition to only moderate specificity, mandate that radiologists use it sparingly and with discrimination for problematic mammographic findings. It is rare that the reality or significance of a noncalcified mammographic finding remains equivocal or problematic at diagnostic mammography evaluation, which usually includes targeted ultrasonography (US). There are several reasons for this infrequent occurrence: (a) an asymmetry may persist on diagnostic views but be visible only on craniocaudal or mediolateral oblique projections, precluding three-dimensional localization for US or biopsy, or a lesion may persist on some diagnostic spot views but dissipate or efface on others; (b) uncertainty may exist as to whether apparent change is clinically important or owing to technical factors such as compression or positioning differences; or (c) a lesion may be suspected but biopsy options are limited owing to lack of a US correlate and lesion inaccessibility for stereotactic biopsy, or biopsy of a vague or questionably real lesion has been attempted unsuccessfully. This article will discuss the indications for problem-solving MR imaging for equivocal mammographic findings, present cases illustrating appropriate and inappropriate uses of problem-solving MR imaging, and present false-positive and false-negative cases affecting the specificity of breast MR imaging. (©)RSNA, 2016.

6060 Background: Breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is a sensitive method of breast imaging virtually uninfluenced by breast density. Because of the improved sensitivity, breast MRI is increasingly being used for detection of breast cancer among high risk young women. However, the specificity of breast MRI is variable and costs are high. The purpose of this study was to determine if breast MRI is a cost-effective approach for the detection of breast cancer among young women at high risk. Methods: A Markov model was created to compare annual breast cancer screening over 25 years with either breast MRI or mammography among young women at high risk. Data from published studies provided probabilities for the model including sensitivity and specificity of each screening strategy. Costs were based on Medicare reimbursement rates for hospital and physician services while medication costs were obtained from the Federal Supply Scale. Utilities from the literature were applied to each health outcome in the model including a disutility for the temporary health state following breast biopsy for a false positive test result. The analysis was performed from the payer perspective with results reported in 2005 U.S. dollars. Univariate and probabilistic sensitivity analyses addressed uncertainty in all model parameters. Results: Breast MRI provided 23.287 quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) at a cost of $30,317 while mammography provided 23.141 QALYs at a cost of $7,895 over 25 years of screening. The cost-effectiveness ratios for the two strategies were $1302 and $341, respectively. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of breast MRI compared to mammography was $131,376/QALY. In univariate analysis, breast MRI screening became &lt;$50,000/QALY when the cost of the MRI was &lt;$405. In the probabilistic sensitivity analysis, MRI screening produced a net benefit of +0.146 QALYs (95% central range: -0.825 QALYs to +1.378 QALYs). However, breast MRI screening was superior in &lt;1%, &lt;$50,000/QALY in 27%, &gt;$50,000/QALY in 32%, and inferior in 41% of 10,000 probabilistic Monte Carlo simulations. Conclusions: Breast MRI provides a net benefit when compared to mammographic screening for high risk women, however, this approach does not appear to be cost-effective at this time. No significant financial relationships to disclose.

The purpose of this study is to review the literature and present our experience in imaging-guided musculoskeletal biopsies. We will describe percutaneous needle biopsies of bone and soft tissue lesions guided by ultrasonography (US) and computed tomography (CT), including indications, procedure planning, techniques, and complications. The major indications for percutaneous musculoskeletal biopsies are the diagnosis of primary and secondary neoplasms and infectious processes. Complications of percutaneous needle biopsies are rare, whereas open biopsy has a complication rate of up to 16%. Possible related complications are hematomas, neural, and vascular injuries, osteitis, and reflex sympathetic dystrophy. Before the procedure, possible blood coagulation disorders, anticoagulant treatments or other possible contraindications should be evaluated. The main disadvantage of percutaneous biopsy is the accuracies large range of this procedure. Histopathological and bacteriological studies are often required for definitive diagnosis of musculoskeletal lesions. In these cases, percutaneous biopsy guided by US or CT has been shown to be effective, accurate and safe method.

e14084 Background: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) have been shown to be helpful in the treatment of a several cancers. Response to ICI therapy is varied. The goal of this study was to examine the role of pan-endoscopy guided biopsies as well as image-guided and percutaneous biopsies as a means to tailor treatment regimens for patients receiving ICI therapy. Methods: A retrospective chart review was performed on oncology patients at a single institution from 2010 from 2018 undergoing treatment with ICI (n = 1044). Patients undergoing biopsies within the treatment period and up to one month following conclusion of treatment were analyzed and separated into a pan-endoscopy guided biopsy cohort or image-guided/percutaneous biopsy cohort. Data regarding biopsy results and subsequent treatment plans was then gathered and compared. Results: 5.3% of patients underwent pan-endoscopy guided biopsy (n = 55). 6.0% of patients underwent image-guided/percutaneous biopsy (n = 63). The most common endoscopic procedures included EGD 42.6%, bronchoscopy 38.9%, and flexible sigmoidoscopy/colonoscopy 20.4%. The most common image/percutaneously sampled tissues included skin/soft tissue 24.6%, lymph nodes 19.7%, and liver 16.4%. Breakdown of treatment complications in the pan-endoscopy group included pneumonitis 3.2%, inflammatory or infectious esophagitis 6.4%, or colitis 4.3%. Treatment complications in the image guided/percutaneous group included skin reactions 2.2% and inflammatory mediastinal changes 1.1%. Conclusions: In our cohort, Pan endoscopy and image guided/percutaneous biopsies were successfully performed along multiple cancer cell lines and helped in the decision making process.[Table: see text]

Image-guided biopsy is well-established in the diagnosis of musculoskeletal lesions. While several studies have demonstrated a high diagnostic yield in image-guided biopsy, there are no current guidelines around procedural factors such as number of cores. Furthermore, there have been mixed results regarding which lesions are more favourable to a diagnostic biopsy. We wanted to evaluate diagnostic yield and concordance for image-guided biopsies for musculoskeletal lesions. The null hypothesis was that there are no controllable factors that contribute to positive yield. Retrospective review of consecutive patients who underwent image-guided biopsy at a large teaching hospital for musculoskeletal lesions discussed at the sarcoma multi-disciplinary meeting. The formal biopsy histology report was evaluated, and biopsies were considered diagnostic or non-diagnostic. In those that had subsequent surgery (by wide excision or open biopsy), final and initial histology was compared and biopsies were considered concordant or not. Overall diagnostic yield and concordance were calculated. Statistical analysis was performed with Stata 13.0 (StataCorp). Over the 14-year period, 429 biopsies were included. Diagnostic yield was 85% and concordance was 100%. No cases of malignant lesions were initially called benign on biopsy. One biopsy had a complication (0.2%). Factors associated with higher diagnostic yield included soft tissue versus bone lesions, three or more cores and longer total specimen length. Factors that were not associated included core size, use of FNA cytology, gender, age, benign versus malignant, anatomic location and lesion appearance. The null hypothesis is rejected. The main predictor of diagnostic biopsy was total specimen length, independent of number of cores taken. Three or more cores and longer cores are optimal, though these factors are influenced by lesion biology and not always able to be controlled.

This project aims to model an optimal scanning environment for breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) screening based on real-life data to identify to what extent the logistics of breast MRI can be optimized. A novel concept for a breast MRI screening facility was developed considering layout of the building, workflow steps, used resources, and MRI protocols. The envisioned screening facility is person centered and aims for an efficient workflow-oriented design. Real-life data, collected from existing breast MRI screening workflows, during 62 scans in 3 different hospitals, were imported into a 3D simulation software for designing and testing new concepts. The model provided several realistic, virtual, logistical pathways for MRI screening and their outcome measures: throughput, waiting times, and other relevant variables. The total average appointment time in the baseline scenario was 25:54 minutes, with 19:06 minutes of MRI room occupation. Simulated improvements consisted of optimizing processes and resources, facility layout, and scanning protocol. In the simulation, time spent in the MRI room was reduced by introducing an optimized facility layout, dockable tables, and adoption of an abbreviated MRI scanning protocol. The total average appointment time was reduced to 19:36 minutes, and in this scenario, the MRI room was occupied for 06:21 minutes. In the most promising scenario, screening of about 68 people per day (10 hours) on a single MRI scanner could be feasible, compared with 36 people per day in the baseline scenario. This study suggests that by optimizing workflow MRI for breast screening total appointment duration and MRI occupation can be reduced. A throughput of up to 6 people per hour may be achieved, compared with 3 people per hour in the current setup.

Role of breast magnetic resonance imaging in predicting residual lobular carcinoma in situ after initial excision