Comparison of Sonography Versus Digital Breast Tomosynthesis to Locate Intramammary Marker Clips

Overview

Journal Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd

Specialty Gynecology & Obstetrics

Date 2015 Feb 17

PMID 25684789

Citations 2

Authors

R Schulz-Wendtland

P Dankerl

G Dilbat

M Bani

P A Fasching

K Heusinger

M P Lux

C R Loehberg

S M Jud

C Rauh

C M Bayer

M W Beckmann

D L Wachter

M Uder

M Meier-Meitinger

B Brehm

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

This study aimed to compare the accuracy of sonography versus digital breast tomosynthesis to locate intramammary marker clips placed under ultrasound guidance. Fifty patients with suspicion of breast cancer (lesion diameter less than 2 cm [cT1]) had ultrasound-guided core needle biopsy with placement of a marker clip in the center of the tumor. Intramammary marker clips were subsequently located with both sonography and digital breast tomosynthesis. Sonography detected no dislocation of intrammammary marker clips in 42 of 50 patients (84 %); dislocation was reported in 8 patients (16 %) with a maximum dislocation of 7 mm along the x-, y- or z-axis. Digital breast tomosynthesis showed accurate placement without dislocation of the intramammary marker clip in 48 patients (96 %); 2 patients (4 %) had a maximum clip dislocation of 3 mm along the x-, y- or z-axis (p < 0.05). The use of digital breast tomosynthesis could improve the accuracy when locating intramammary marker clips compared to sonography and could, in future, be used to complement or even completely replace sonography.

Citing Articles

Evaluation of a Wireless Localization System for Nonpalpable Breast Lesions - Feasibility and Cost-effectiveness in Everyday Clinical Routine.

Heindl F, Schulz-Wendtland R, Jud S, Erber R, Hack C, Preuss C In Vivo. 2022; 36(5):2342-2349.

PMID: 36099117 PMC: 9463936. DOI: 10.21873/invivo.12965.

Evaluation of a Marker Clip System in Sonographically Guided Core Needle Biopsy for Breast Cancer Localization Before and After Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy.

Schulz-Wendtland R, Dankerl P, Bani M, Fasching P, Heusinger K, Lux M Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd. 2017; 77(2):169-175.

PMID: 28331239 PMC: 5357217. DOI: 10.1055/s-0042-124191.

References

Gruber R, Bernt R, Helbich T . [Cost-effectiveness of percutaneous core needle breast biopsy (CNBB) versus open surgical biopsy (OSB) of nonpalpable breast lesions: metaanalysis and cost evaluation for German-speaking countries]. Rofo. 2007; 180(2):134-42. DOI: 10.1055/s-2007-963621. View

Fasching P, Ekici A, Wachter D, Hein A, Bayer C, Haberle L . Breast Cancer Risk - From Genetics to Molecular Understanding of Pathogenesis. Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd. 2014; 73(12):1228-1235. PMC: 3964347. DOI: 10.1055/s-0033-1360178. View

Eisemann N, Waldmann A, Katalinic A . Epidemiology of Breast Cancer - Current Figures and Trends. Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd. 2014; 73(2):130-135. PMC: 3858992. DOI: 10.1055/s-0032-1328075. View

Liberman L, Feng T, Dershaw D, Morris E, Abramson A . US-guided core breast biopsy: use and cost-effectiveness. Radiology. 1998; 208(3):717-23. DOI: 10.1148/radiology.208.3.9722851. View

Zannis V, Aliano K . The evolving practice pattern of the breast surgeon with disappearance of open biopsy for nonpalpable lesions. Am J Surg. 1999; 176(6):525-8. DOI: 10.1016/s0002-9610(98)00265-7. View

Pijnappel R, van den Donk M, Holland R, Mali W, Peterse J, Hendriks J . Diagnostic accuracy for different strategies of image-guided breast intervention in cases of nonpalpable breast lesions. Br J Cancer. 2004; 90(3):595-600. PMC: 2409591. DOI: 10.1038/sj.bjc.6601559. View

Kreienberg R, Albert U, Follmann M, Kopp I, Kuhn T, Wockel A . Interdisciplinary GoR level III Guidelines for the Diagnosis, Therapy and Follow-up Care of Breast Cancer: Short version - AWMF Registry No.: 032-045OL AWMF-Register-Nummer: 032-045OL - Kurzversion 3.0, Juli 2012. Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd. 2014; 73(6):556-583. PMC: 3963234. DOI: 10.1055/s-0032-1328689. View

Wallis M, Tardivon A, Tarvidon A, Helbich T, Schreer I . Guidelines from the European Society of Breast Imaging for diagnostic interventional breast procedures. Eur Radiol. 2006; 17(2):581-8. DOI: 10.1007/s00330-006-0408-x. View

Schulz-Wendtland R, Wenkel E, Lell M, Bohner C, Bautz W, Mertelmeier T . Experimental phantom lesion detectability study using a digital breast tomosynthesis prototype system. Rofo. 2006; 178(12):1219-23. DOI: 10.1055/s-2006-926933. View

10.

Golatta M, Franz D, Harcos A, Junkermann H, Rauch G, Scharf A . Interobserver reliability of automated breast volume scanner (ABVS) interpretation and agreement of ABVS findings with hand held breast ultrasound (HHUS), mammography and pathology results. Eur J Radiol. 2013; 82(8):e332-6. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2013.03.005. View

11.

Weismann C, Forstner R, Prokop E, Rettenbacher T . Three-dimensional targeting: a new three-dimensional ultrasound technique to evaluate needle position during breast biopsy. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2001; 16(4):359-64. DOI: 10.1046/j.1469-0705.2000.00182.x. View

12.

Skaane P, Bandos A, Gullien R, Eben E, Ekseth U, Haakenaasen U . Prospective trial comparing full-field digital mammography (FFDM) versus combined FFDM and tomosynthesis in a population-based screening programme using independent double reading with arbitration. Eur Radiol. 2013; 23(8):2061-71. PMC: 3701792. DOI: 10.1007/s00330-013-2820-3. View

13.

Sittek H, Heske N, Kessler M, Britsch S, Vick C, Untch M . [O-twist marker for post-interventional marking in imaging of suspected breast lesions]. Radiologe. 2005; 45(3):223-9. DOI: 10.1007/s00117-005-1177-2. View

14.

Schulz-Wendtland R, Dilbat G, Bani M, Fasching P, Heusinger K, Lux M . Full Field Digital Mammography (FFDM) versus CMOS Technology, Specimen Radiography System (SRS) and Tomosynthesis (DBT) - Which System Can Optimise Surgical Therapy?. Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd. 2014; 73(5):422-427. PMC: 3864442. DOI: 10.1055/s-0032-1328600. View

15.

Liberman L, Dershaw D, Morris E, Abramson A, Thornton C, Rosen P . Clip placement after stereotactic vacuum-assisted breast biopsy. Radiology. 1997; 205(2):417-22. DOI: 10.1148/radiology.205.2.9356622. View

16.

Schulz-Wendtland R, Heywang-Kobrunner S, Aichinger U, Kramer S, Wenkel E, Bautz W . [Do tissue marker clips after sonographically or stereotactically guided breast biopsy improve follow-up of small breast lesions and localisation of breast cancer after chemotherapy?]. Rofo. 2002; 174(5):620-4. DOI: 10.1055/s-2002-28278. View

17.

Schulz-Wendtland R . Neoadjuvant chemotherapy--monitoring: clinical examination, ultrasound, mammography, MRI, elastography: only one, only few or all?. Eur J Radiol. 2012; 81 Suppl 1:S147-8. DOI: 10.1016/S0720-048X(12)70061-X. View

18.

Hoorntje L, Schipper M, Kaya A, Verkooijen H, Klinkenbijl J, Rinkes I . Tumour cell displacement after 14G breast biopsy. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2004; 30(5):520-5. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejso.2004.03.001. View

19.

Schulz-Wendtland R, Hermann K, Wacker T, Bautz W . [Current situation and future perspectives of digital mammography]. Radiologe. 2008; 48(4):324-34. DOI: 10.1007/s00117-008-1639-4. View

20.

Ciatto S, Houssami N, Bernardi D, Caumo F, Pellegrini M, Brunelli S . Integration of 3D digital mammography with tomosynthesis for population breast-cancer screening (STORM): a prospective comparison study. Lancet Oncol. 2013; 14(7):583-9. DOI: 10.1016/S1470-2045(13)70134-7. View