Medical Physics Research Today is a free monthly online journal that collates and summarizes the latest research about Medical Physics, including details on medicine, radiotherapy, biomechanics, medical imaging. | ||||||||
|
MR imaging-guided breast localization system with medial or lateral access.Causer PA, Piron CA, Jong RA, Curpen BN, Luginbuhl CA, Glazier JE, Warner E, Hill K, Muldoon J, Taylor G, Wong JW, Plewes DB Department of Medical Imaging, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, ON, Canada. Petrina.causer@sw.ca PURPOSE: To evaluate the degree of error of the authors' magnetic resonance (MR) imaging-guided needle localization system for biopsy of suspicious lesions visualized only with MR imaging, by using both prospectively recorded and retrospectively reviewed data, including MR imaging lesion coordinates as the reference standard, and to determine whether any lesion or breast characteristics affect this error. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Institutional review board approval, along with informed consent, was obtained as directed by the board. In 31 patients (age range, 34-64 years; mean age, 54.5 years), 38 wires were placed for 35 lesions by means of an MR-guided needle localization system with medial or lateral access and computer software assistance for needle placement calculation. Needle and wire placement error measurements were calculated before and after necessary placement correction, accounting for tissue shift in the z plane. The error was statistically correlated with MR imaging lesion variables, breast density, and histopathologic findings by means of univariate and multivariate linear regression analyses or two-tailed paired t test. Procedure times and the frequency of medial or lateral approaches were recorded. RESULTS: Eleven of 35 localizations (31%) were medial, and 24 of 35 (69%) were lateral. The mean total magnet time was 61.6 minutes, and the mean needle deployment time was 9 minutes (range, 4-17 minutes). Sixteen of 35 lesions (46%) were malignant (seven ductal carcinoma in situ, six invasive ductal, two invasive lobular, and one lymphoma). The mean uncorrected needle placement error was 1.3 mm (range, 0-6 mm) for the x plane, 2.4 mm (range, 0-6.5 mm) for the y plane, and 5.6 mm (range, 0-15.6 mm) for the z plane. Fourteen of 38 needles (37%) required repositioning for z-plane error. The corrected z-plane error improved to 3.2 mm (range, 0-10.0 mm). Factors that significantly increased the uncorrected error included tissue shift in the z plane (R = 0.7), small lesion size (R = -0.59), and fatty breast density (P = .029). CONCLUSION: The authors' system is accurate for performing MR-guided needle localizations for both medial and lateral approaches. Factors that increased the uncorrected needle placement error included small lesion size, fatty breast density, and tissue shift in the z plane. Published 25 July 2006 in Radiology, 240(2): 369-79.
© 2005-2008 Medical Physics Research Today. All Rights Reserved. |
| ||||||
