Advertisement

European Radiology

, Volume 29, Issue 3, pp 1435–1443 | Cite as

Feasibility of mapping breast cancer with supine breast MRI in patients scheduled for oncoplastic surgery

  • S. JoukainenEmail author
  • A. Masarwah
  • M. Könönen
  • M. Husso
  • A. Sutela
  • V. Kärjä
  • R. Vanninen
  • M. Sudah
Magnetic Resonance
  • 148 Downloads

Abstract

Objectives

To prospectively determine the feasibility of preoperative supine breast MRI in breast cancer patients scheduled for oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery.

Methods

In addition to a diagnostic prone breast MRI, a supplementary supine MRI was performed with the patient in the surgical position including skin markers. Tumours’ locations were ink-marked on the skin according to findings obtained from supine MRI. Changes in tumours’ largest diameter and locations between prone and supine MRI were measured and compared to histology. Nipple-to-tumour and tumour-to-chest wall distances were also measured. Tumours and suspicious areas were surgically removed according to skin ink-markings. The differences between MRI measurements with reference to histopathology were evaluated with the paired-sample t test.

Results

Fourteen consecutive patients, 15 breasts and 27 lesions were analysed. Compared to histology, prone MRI overestimated tumour size by 47.1% (p = 0.01) and supine MRI by 14.5% (p = 0.259). In supine MRI, lesions’ mean diameters and areas were smaller compared to prone MRI (– 20.9%, p = 0.009 and – 38.3%, p = 0.016, respectively). This difference in diameter was more pronounced in non-mass lesions (– 31.2%, p = 0.031) compared to mass lesions (– 9.2%, p = 0.009). Tumours’ mean distance from chest wall diminished by 69.4% (p < 0.001) and from nipple by 18.2% (p < 0.001). Free microscopic margins were achieved in first operation in all patients.

Conclusions

Supine MRI in the surgical position is feasible and useful in the precise localisation of prone MRI-detected lesions and provides a helpful tool to implement in surgery. Supine MRI more accurately determines tumours’ size and location and might have an important role to diminish overestimations.

Key Points

Breath-hold supine breast MRI is feasible using commercially available coils and sequences.

Size and area of lesions on MRI were consistently smaller when measured from the supine position as compared to the prone position.

Supine breast MRI is useful in the precise preoperative localisation of prone MRI-detected lesions.

Keywords

Magnetic resonance imaging/methods Breast neoplasms/diagnosis Breast/neoplasms/surgery Humans 

Abbreviations

BCS

Breast-conserving surgery

DCIS

Ductal carcinoma in situ

IDC

Invasive ductal carcinoma

OBCS

Oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery

VIBE

Volumetric interpolated breath-hold examination

Notes

Funding

The authors state that this work has not received any funding.

Compliance with ethical standards

Guarantor

The scientific guarantor of this publication is Dr Mazen Sudah MD, PhD.

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.

No complex statistical methods were necessary for this paper.

Informed consent

Written informed consent was obtained from all patients in this study.

Ethical approval

Institutional review board approval was obtained.

Methodology

• prospective

• case-control, diagnostic study

• performed at one institution

References

  1. 1.
    Litière S, Werutsky G, Fentiman IS et al (2012) Breast conserving therapy versus mastectomy for stage I-II breast cancer: 20 year follow-up of the EORTC 10801 phase 3 randomised trial. Lancet Oncol 13:412–419CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Leithner D, Wengert GJ, Helbich TH et al (2017) Clinical role of breast MRI now and going forward. Clin Radiol.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crad.2017.10.021
  3. 3.
    Sardanelli F, Boetes C, Borisch B et al (2010) Magnetic resonance imaging of the breast: recommendations from the EUSOMA working group. Eur J Cancer 46:1296–1316CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Holland R, Veling SH, Mravunac M, Hendriks JH (1985) Histologic multifocality of Tis, T1-2 breast carcinomas. implications for clinical trials of breast-conserving surgery. Cancer 56:979–990CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Turnbull L, Brown S, Harvey I et al (2010) Comparative effectiveness of MRI in breast cancer (COMICE) trial: a randomised controlled trial. Lancet 375:563–571CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Houssami N, Turner RM, Morrow M (2017) Meta-analysis of pre-operative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and surgical treatment for breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat 165:273–283CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Tozaki M, Fukuda K (2006) Supine MR mammography using VIBE with parallel acquisition technique for the planning of breast-conserving surgery: clinical feasibility. Breast 15:137–140CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Carbonaro LA, Tannaphai P, Trimboli RM, Verardi N, Fedeli MP, Sardanelli F (2012) Contrast enhanced breast MRI: spatial displacement from prone to supine patient's position. Preliminary results. Eur J Radiol 81:e771–e774CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Siegler P, Holloway CM, Causer P, Thevathasan G, Plewes DB (2011) Supine breast MRI. J Magn Reson Imaging 34:1212–1217CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Gombos EC, Jayender J, Richman DM et al (2016) Intraoperative supine breast MR imaging to quantify tumor deformation and detection of residual breast cancer: preliminary results. Radiology 281:720–729CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Pallone MJ, Poplack SP, Avutu HB, Paulsen KD, Barth RJ Jr (2014) Supine breast MRI and 3D optical scanning: a novel approach to improve tumor localization for breast con-serving surgery. Ann Surg Oncol 21:2203–2208CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kuhl CK, Strobel K, Bieling H et al (2017) 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 284:645–655CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Hayes MK (2017) Update on preoperative breast localization. Radiol Clin North Am 55:591–603CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Macmillan RD, James R, Gale KL, McCulley SJ (2014) Therapeutic mammaplasty. J Surg Oncol 110:90–95CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Schouten van der Velden AP, Schlooz-Vries MS, Boetes C, Wobbes T (2009) Magnetic resonance imaging of ductal carcinoma in situ: what is its clinical application? A review. Am J Surg 198:262–269CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Lai HW, Chen DR, Wu YC et al (2015) Comparison of the diagnostic accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging with sonography in the prediction of breast cancer tumor size: a concordance analysis with histopathologically determined tumor size. Ann Surg Oncol 22:3816–3823CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Leddy R, Irshad A, Metcalfe A et al (2016) Comparative accuracy of preoperative tumor size assessment on mammography, sonography, and MRI: is the accuracy affected by breast density or cancer subtype? J Clin Ultrasound 44:17–25CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Behjatnia B, Sim J, Bassett LW, Moatamed NA, Apple SK (2010) Does size matter? Comparison study between MRI, gross, and microscopic tumor sizes in breast cancer in lumpectomy specimens. Int J Clin Exp Pathol 3:303–309Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    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 102:883–893CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Esserman LJ, Kumar AS, Herrera AF et al (2006) Magnetic resonance imaging captures the biology of ductal carcinoma in situ. J Clin Oncol 24:4603–4610CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Carin AJ, Molière S, Gabriele V et al (2017) Relevance of breast MRI in determining the size and focality of invasive breast cancer treated by mastectomy: a prospective study. World J Surg Oncol 15:128-017-1197-1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Ramião NG, Martins PS, Rynkevic R, Fernandes AA, Barroso M, Santos DC (2016) Biomechanical properties of breast tissue, a state-of-the-art review. Biomech Model Mechanobiol 15:1307–1323CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Satake H, Ishigaki S, Kitano M, Naganawa S (2016) Prediction of prone-to-supine tumor displacement in the breast using patient position change: investigation with prone MRI and supine CT. Breast Cancer 23:149–158CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Ebrahimi M, Siegler P, Modhafar A, Holloway CM, Plewes DB, Martel AL (2014) Using surface markers for MRI guided breast conserving surgery: a feasibility survey. Phys Med Biol 7:1589–1605CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Conley RH, Meszoely IM, Weis JA et al (2015) Realization of a biomechanical model-assisted image guidance system for breast cancer surgery using supine MRI. Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg 10:1985–1996CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© European Society of Radiology 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Surgery, Division of Plastic SurgeryKuopio University HospitalKuopioFinland
  2. 2.Department of Clinical RadiologyKuopio University HospitalKuopioFinland
  3. 3.Department of Pathology, Diagnostic Imaging CentreKuopio University HospitalKuopioFinland
  4. 4.Institute of Clinical Medicine, School of Medicine, Clinical RadiologyUniversity of Eastern FinlandKuopioFinland
  5. 5.Cancer Center of Eastern FinlandUniversity of Eastern FinlandKuopioFinland

Personalised recommendations