Israel Medical Association Journal

Objectives: To measure the tumor-to-breast volume ratio using MRI in order to assess whether there is a correlation between this ratio and the type of surgery selected (breast-conserving or mastectomy).

Methods: The volumes of the tumor and the breast and the tumor-to-breast volume ratio were retrospectively calculated using preoperative breast MRI in 76 patients who underwent breast-conserving surgery or mastectomy.

Results: Breast-conserving surgery (lumpectomy) was performed in 64 patients and mastectomy in 12. The average tumor-to-breast volume ratio was 0.06 (6%) in the lumpectomy group and 0.30 (30%) in the mastectomy group (P < 0.0001).

Conclusion: The tumor-to-breast volume ratio correlated with the type of surgery. As measured on MRI, this ratio is an accurate means of determining the type of surgery best suited for a given patient. It is recommended that MRI-determined tumor-to-breast volume ratio become part of the surgical planning protocol for patients diagnosed with breast cancer.

Background: The imaging parameters that mandate further diagnostic workup in focal asymmetric breast densities are not clearly defined.

Objectives: To identify indications for further workup in FABD[1] by comparing mammographic and ultrasonographic findings with the pathology results of women with FABD.

Methods: Ninety-four women (97 FABD) were referred for core needle biopsy after incidental discovery of FABD on routine mammograms (n=83) or on diagnostic mammograms performed for palpable masses (n=11). Clinical data included patient’s age, use of hormone replacement therapy, family history of breast cancer, and the presence of a palpable mass. Mammograms and sonograms were evaluated for lesion size and location, associated calcifications, architectural distortion, and change from previous examinations when available. Two patient groups emerged according to the pathological findings and the data were compared.

Results: The average age, size and location of the lesions in the malignant (n=5) and benign (n=92) groups were similar. There was a significant difference (P < 0.05) for the presence of a clinically palpable mass (60% vs. 9%, respectively), a cluster of calcifications (60% vs. 12%), associated architectural distortion (exclusively in the malignant group) and a solid mass on sonography (50% vs. 9%). The malignant group had a higher rate of family history of breast cancer and HRT[2] use.

Conclusions: FABD usually present a benign etiology and can safely be managed by follow‑up. The presence of an architectural distortion, a cluster of malignant‑appearing or indeterminate calcifications, a sonographic mass with features of possible malignancy, or a clinically palpable mass mandates tissue diagnosis.

Background: The current methods for pre‑ and post‑chemotherapy examination of the extent of disease in the breast and lymph nodes do not provide sufficiently accurate information and, not infrequently, the surgeon has to re‑operate.

Objectives: To correlate the findings between three methods of examination (physical examination, ultrasonography, mammography), all performed by the same oncologic and radiologic team, in patients with locally advanced breast cancer or a tumor/breast tissue ratio that precludes breast-conserving surgery.

Methods: Forty patients (median age 48 years, range 24–73) with locally advanced breast cancer or with a tumor/breast ratio that precluded breast‑conserving surgery were evaluated by the same medical team and received neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Surgery was performed in all, and the pathologic specimen was correlated with the results of the other examinations.

Results: In the pre‑chemotherapy evaluation, the imaging findings of the breast correlated with the physical findings in 78% of the patients and with the axilla examination in 66.7%. In the post‑chemotherapy analysis, imaging agreed with the physical findings of the breast in 62.2% and in 76.3% of the axilla. Sonography best detected occult breast disease and axillary lymph nodes but correlated with pathology in only 58% of the patients in diagnosing breast tumor and in 65.8% in diagnosing axillary lymph nodes. Mammography correlated with breast and lymph node pathology in half the patients.

Conclusions: None of the classical methods of post‑neoadjuvant chemotherapy evaluations could adequately delineate the actual extent of the disease in the breast and axillary lymph nodes. More exacting techniques of imaging combined with the classical methods are required.