Back to the list
Congress: ECR24
Poster Number: C-14580
Type: EPOS Radiologist (educational)
DOI: 10.26044/ecr2024/C-14580
Authorblock: L. Montesinos Aguayo, S. Abiad Sosa, D. Medina Morales, B. Martos Rodriguez, C. Gómez De Las Heras, D. Calvo Gijón, B. Fernandez Gordillo, A. FERNANDEZ ARGUELLES, S. Rico Gala; Sevilla/ES
Disclosures:
Lucia Montesinos Aguayo: Nothing to disclose
Samer Abiad Sosa: Nothing to disclose
Daniela Medina Morales: Nothing to disclose
Beatriz Martos Rodriguez: Nothing to disclose
Cristina Gómez De Las Heras: Nothing to disclose
Daniel Calvo Gijón: Nothing to disclose
Borja Fernandez Gordillo: Nothing to disclose
AMAYA FERNANDEZ ARGUELLES: Nothing to disclose
Susana Rico Gala: Nothing to disclose
Keywords: Breast, Mammography, Contrast agent-intravenous, Diagnostic procedure, Cancer
Learning objectives - To review the main technical aspects of CEM procedure.- To expose raw data on the CEM results practiced in our institution.-To evince the correlation between unenhanced lesions in recombined imaging with positive histopathological results for breast cancer.
Read more Background Mammography is the primary method for breast cancer imaging. Its introduction in the 1960s and 1970s revolutionized breast cancer screening, leading to reduced mortality from breast cancer with use of relatively inexpensive imaging tool. However, breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), introduced in the 1990s, has been shown to be highly sensitive (nearly 100%) and accurate due to its ability to determine the contrast enhancement properties of tumors, nevertheless it has lower specificity than standard mammography owing to the false-positive results...
Read more Findings and procedure details Over a period of three years, our hospital performed 1,414 CEM procedures on patients from 30 to 89 years old who presented with symptoms or suspicious findings on any breast imaging study, such as heterogeneously dense parenchyma, microcalcifications, nodules, distorsion, etcetera. It is important to remember that all diagnostic tests including breast imaging have a false-negative rate. For digital mammography, this varies from 20% to 30%, and is higher for women with dense breasts. Techniques that are able to show...
Read more Conclusion In conclusion, this study emphasizes the importance of the “triple test” (physical examination, imaging and pathology) and the use of more than one imaging modality in the assessment of patients with breast symptoms, particularly in the presence of dense fibroglandular tissue. The results demonstrate that the most common type of breast cancer with negative CEM results is infiltrating breast cancer. Therefore, it may be worth considering performing a biopsy for every microcalcification or suspicious manifestation, with or without contrast enhancement.
Read more References Sensakovic, W. F., Carnahan, M. B., Czaplicki, C. D., Fahrenholtz, S., Panda, A., Zhou, Y., Pavlicek, W., & Patel, B. (2021). Contrast-enhanced Mammography: How Does It Work? RadioGraphics, 41(3), 829–839. https://doi.org/10.1148/rg.2021200167 Carnahan MB, Harper L, Brown PJ, Bhatt AA, Eversman S, Sharpe RE Jr, Patel BK. False-Positive and False-Negative Contrast-enhanced Mammograms: Pitfalls and Strategies to Improve Cancer Detection. Radiographics. 2023 Dec;43(12):e230100. doi: 10.1148/rg.230100. PMID: 38032823. Taylor D, O'Hanlon S, Latham B. False-negative contrast-enhanced spectral mammography: use of more than one imaging modality...
Read more
GALLERY