A survey by the European Society of Breast Imaging on the utilisation of breast MRI in clinical practice

Paola Clauser, Ritse Mann, Alexandra Athanasiou, Helmut Prosch, Katja Pinker, Matthias Dietzel, Thomas H Helbich, Michael Fuchsjäger, Julia Camps-Herrero, Francesco Sardanelli, Gabor Forrai, Pascal A T Baltzer, Paola Clauser, Ritse Mann, Alexandra Athanasiou, Helmut Prosch, Katja Pinker, Matthias Dietzel, Thomas H Helbich, Michael Fuchsjäger, Julia Camps-Herrero, Francesco Sardanelli, Gabor Forrai, Pascal A T Baltzer

Abstract

Objectives: While magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is considered a helpful diagnostic tool in breast imaging, discussions are ongoing about appropriate protocols and indications. The European Society of Breast Imaging (EUSOBI) launched a survey to evaluate the utilisation of breast MRI in clinical practice.

Methods: An online survey reviewed by the EUSOBI board and committees was distributed amongst members. The questions encompassed: training and experience; annual breast MRI and MRI-guided-intervention workload; examination protocols; indications; reporting habits and preferences. Data were summarised and subgroups compared using χ2 test.

Results: Of 647 EUSOBI members, 177 (27.4%) answered the survey. The majority were radiologists (90.5%), half of them based in academic centres (51.9%). Common indications for MRI included cancer staging, treatment monitoring, high-risk screening and problem-solving, and differed significantly between countries (p≤0.03). Structured reporting and BI-RADS were mostly used. Breast radiologists with ≤10 years of experience preferred inclusion of additional techniques, such as T2/STIR (p=0.03) and DWI (p=0.08) in the scan protocol. MRI-guided interventions were performed by a minority of participants (35.4%).

Conclusions: The utilisation of breast MRI in clinical practice is generally in line with international recommendations. There are substantial differences between countries. MRI-guided interventions and functional MRI parameters are not widely available.

Key points: • MRI is commonly used for the detection and characterisation of breast lesions. • Clinical practice standards are generally in line with current recommendations. • Standardised criteria and diagnostic categories (mainly BI-RADS) are widely adopted. • Younger radiologists value additional techniques, such as T2/STIR and DWI. • MRI-guided breast biopsy is not widely available.

Keywords: Breast; Magnetic resonance imaging; Practice Guideline; Radiologists; Survey and Questionnaires.

Conflict of interest statement

Guarantor

The scientific guarantor of this publication is Pascal A.T. Baltzer.

Conflict of interest

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.

Statistics and biometry

One of the authors has significant statistical expertise (Pascal A.T. Baltzer).

Methodology

• retrospective

• observational

• multicentre study

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Countries where the participants were working at the time of the survey (3/189 did not answer, 1.6%). Four different geographical areas were distinguished: southern; northern and eastern European countries; and non-European countries. Southern and northern countries were considered together as western European countries. Other: countries of various geographical areas in which only one person answered the survey. Footnotes: The number of responders is indicated in the horizontal -axis
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Clinical setting (a) and current position (b) of the people who participated in the survey
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Indications for pre-operative breast MRI in different clinical settings (a) and geographical areas (b). Footnotes: Pre-OP: pre-operative MRI; ILC: invasive lobular carcinoma; APBI: accelerated partial breast irradiation; DCIS: ductal carcinoma in situ; B3: high-risk lesions/lesions with uncertain malignant potential
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
Common indications for breast MRI in the different clinical settings. Footnotes: CUP: carcinoma of unknown primary; NAC: neoadjuvant chemotherapy; BCS: breast-conserving surgery

References

    1. Mann RM, Balleyguier C, Baltzer PA, et al. Breast MRI: EUSOBI recommendations for women’s information. Eur Radiol. 2015;25:3669–3678. doi: 10.1007/s00330-015-3807-z.
    1. Sardanelli F, Boetes C, Borisch B, et al. (2010) Magnetic resonance imaging of the breast: recommendations from the EUSOMA working group. Eur J Cancer Oxf Engl. 1990;46:1296–1316. doi: 10.1016/j.ejca.2010.02.015.
    1. (2013) ACR Practice Parameter for the Performance of Contrast-Enhanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) of the Breast.
    1. Hylton NM, Blume JD, Bernreuter WK, et al. Locally advanced breast cancer: MR imaging for prediction of response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy--results from ACRIN 6657/I-SPY TRIAL. Radiology. 2012;263:663–672. doi: 10.1148/radiol.12110748.
    1. Riedl CC, Luft N, Bernhart C, et al. Triple-modality screening trial for familial breast cancer underlines the importance of magnetic resonance imaging and questions the role of mammography and ultrasound regardless of patient mutation status, age, and breast density. J Clin Oncol Off J Am Soc Clin Oncol. 2015;33:1128–1135. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2014.56.8626.
    1. Debald M, Abramian A, Nemes L, et al. Who may benefit from preoperative breast MRI? A single-center analysis of 1102 consecutive patients with primary breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2015;153:531–537. doi: 10.1007/s10549-015-3556-3.
    1. Mann RM, Kuhl CK, Kinkel K, Boetes C. Breast MRI: guidelines from the European Society of Breast Imaging. Eur Radiol. 2008;18:1307–1318. doi: 10.1007/s00330-008-0863-7.
    1. Saslow D, Boetes C, Burke W, et al. American Cancer Society guidelines for breast screening with MRI as an adjunct to mammography. CA Cancer J Clin. 2007;57:75–89. doi: 10.3322/canjclin.57.2.75.
    1. Houssami N, Ciatto S, Macaskill P, et al. Accuracy and Surgical Impact of Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Breast Cancer Staging: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis in Detection of Multifocal and Multicentric Cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26:3248–3258. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2007.15.2108.
    1. Bennani-Baiti B, Bennani-Baiti N, Baltzer PA. Diagnostic Performance of Breast Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Non-Calcified Equivocal Breast Findings: Results from a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. PloS One. 2016;11:e0160346. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0160346.
    1. Sardanelli F. Overview of the role of pre-operative breast MRI in the absence of evidence on patient outcomes. Breast Edinb Scotl. 2010;19:3–6. doi: 10.1016/j.breast.2009.11.003.
    1. Houssami N, Turner R, Morrow M. Preoperative magnetic resonance imaging in breast cancer: meta-analysis of surgical outcomes. Ann Surg. 2013;257:249–255. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0b013e31827a8d17.
    1. D’Orsi Carl J, Sickles EA, Mendelson EB, Morris EA. ACR BI-RADS® Atlas, Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System. 5. Reston: American College of Radiology; 2013.
    1. Saini KS, Taylor C, Ramirez A-J, et al. Role of the multidisciplinary team in breast cancer management: results from a large international survey involving 39 countries. Ann Oncol Off J Eur Soc Med Oncol ESMO. 2012;23:853–859. doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdr352.
    1. McCutcheon S, Cardoso F. Challenges in optimizing care in advanced breast cancer patients: Results of an international survey linked to the ABC1 consensus conference. Breast Edinb Scotl. 2015;24:623–629. doi: 10.1016/j.breast.2015.06.008.
    1. Giess CS, Chikarmane SA, Sippo DA, Birdwell RL. Breast MR Imaging for Equivocal Mammographic Findings: Help or Hindrance? RadioGraphics. 2016;36:943–956. doi: 10.1148/rg.2016150205.
    1. Lorenzon M, Zuiani C, Linda A, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging in patients with nipple discharge: should we recommend it? Eur Radiol. 2011;21:899–907. doi: 10.1007/s00330-010-2009-y.
    1. Belli P, Costantini M, Romani M, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging in breast cancer recurrence. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2002;73:223–235. doi: 10.1023/A:1015868406986.
    1. Morakkabati N, Leutner CC, Schmiedel A, et al. Breast MR imaging during or soon after radiation therapy. Radiology. 2003;229:893–901. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2293020167.
    1. Renz DM, Baltzer PAT, Böttcher J, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging of inflammatory breast carcinoma and acute mastitis. A comparative study. Eur Radiol. 2008;18:2370–2380. doi: 10.1007/s00330-008-1029-3.
    1. Londero V, Zuiani C, Linda A, et al. High-Risk Breast Lesions at Imaging-Guided Needle Biopsy: Usefulness of MRI for Treatment Decision. Am J Roentgenol. 2012;199:W240–W250. doi: 10.2214/AJR.11.7869.
    1. Berger N, Luparia A, Di Leo G, et al (2017) Diagnostic Performance of MRI Versus Galactography in Women With Pathologic Nipple Discharge: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1–7. doi: 10.2214/AJR.16.16682
    1. Center for Devices and Radiological Health, U.S. Food and Drug Administration (2011) FDA Update on the Safety of Silicone Gel-Filled Breast Implants. . Accessed 23 Aug 2016
    1. Pinker K, Bickel H, Helbich TH, et al. Combined contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance and diffusion-weighted imaging reading adapted to the “Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System” for multiparametric 3-T imaging of breast lesions. Eur Radiol. 2013;23:1791–1802. doi: 10.1007/s00330-013-2771-8.
    1. Baltzer A, Dietzel M, Kaiser CG, Baltzer PA (2015) Combined reading of Contrast Enhanced and Diffusion Weighted Magnetic Resonance Imaging by using a simple sum score. Eur Radiol. 10.1007/s00330-015-3886-x
    1. Begley JKP, Redpath TW, Bolan PJ, Gilbert FJ. In vivo proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy of breast cancer: a review of the literature. Breast Cancer Res BCR. 2012;14:207. doi: 10.1186/bcr3132.
    1. Baltzer PAT, Dietzel M. Breast lesions: diagnosis by using proton MR spectroscopy at 1.5 and 3.0 T--systematic review and meta-analysis. Radiology. 2013;267:735–746. doi: 10.1148/radiol.13121856.
    1. Woodhams R, Matsunaga K, Iwabuchi K, et al. Diffusion-weighted imaging of malignant breast tumors: the usefulness of apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) value and ADC map for the detection of malignant breast tumors and evaluation of cancer extension. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 2005;29:644–649. doi: 10.1097/01.rct.0000171913.74086.1b.
    1. Pinker K, Bogner W, Baltzer P et al (2014) Improved Diagnostic Accuracy With Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging of the Breast Using Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Diffusion-Weighted Imaging, and 3-dimensional Proton Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopic Imaging. Invest Radiol. 10.1097/RLI.0000000000000029
    1. Pinker K, Bogner W, Baltzer P, et al. Improved differentiation of benign and malignant breast tumors with multiparametric 18fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography magnetic resonance imaging: a feasibility study. Clin Cancer Res Off J Am Assoc Cancer Res. 2014;20:3540–3549. doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-13-2810.
    1. Mann RM, Mus RD, van Zelst J, et al. A novel approach to contrast-enhanced breast magnetic resonance imaging for screening: high-resolution ultrafast dynamic imaging. Invest Radiol. 2014;49:579–585. doi: 10.1097/RLI.0000000000000057.
    1. Kuhl CK, Schrading S, Strobel K, et al. Abbreviated breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI): first postcontrast subtracted images and maximum-intensity projection-a novel approach to breast cancer screening with MRI. J Clin Oncol Off J Am Soc Clin Oncol. 2014;32:2304–2310. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2013.52.5386.
    1. Spick C, Szolar DHM, Preidler KW, et al. Breast MRI used as a problem-solving tool reliably excludes malignancy. Eur J Radiol. 2015;84:61–64. doi: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2014.10.005.
    1. Kuhl C. The current status of breast MR imaging. Part I. Choice of technique, image interpretation, diagnostic accuracy, and transfer to clinical practice. Radiology. 2007;244:356–378. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2442051620.
    1. Wallis M, Tardivon A, Tarvidon A, et al. Guidelines from the European Society of Breast Imaging for diagnostic interventional breast procedures. Eur Radiol. 2007;17:581–588. doi: 10.1007/s00330-006-0408-x.
    1. Perlet C, Heywang-Kobrunner SH, Heinig A, et al. Magnetic resonance-guided, vacuum-assisted breast biopsy: results from a European multicenter study of 538 lesions. Cancer. 2006;106:982–990. doi: 10.1002/cncr.21720.
    1. Abe H, Schmidt RA, Shah RN, et al. MR-directed (“Second-Look”) ultrasound examination for breast lesions detected initially on MRI: MR and sonographic findings. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2010;194:370–377. doi: 10.2214/AJR.09.2707.
    1. Spick C, Baltzer PAT (2014) Diagnostic Utility of Second-Look US for Breast Lesions Identified at MR Imaging: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Radiology 140474. doi: 10.1148/radiol.14140474
    1. Spick C, Schernthaner M, Pinker K et al (2016) MR-guided vacuum-assisted breast biopsy of MRI-only lesions: a single center experience. Eur Radiol. 10.1007/s00330-016-4267-9
    1. Ferré R, Ianculescu V, Ciolovan L, et al. Diagnostic Performance of MR-guided Vacuum-Assisted Breast Biopsy: 8 Years of Experience. Breast J. 2016;22:83–89. doi: 10.1111/tbj.12519.
    1. Kuhl CK, Strobel K, Bieling H, et al. Impact of Preoperative Breast MR Imaging and MR-guided Surgery on Diagnosis and Surgical Outcome of Women with Invasive Breast Cancer with and without DCIS Component. Radiology. 2017;284:645–655. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2017161449.

Source: PubMed

3
S'abonner