| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
|
|
|
|||||||
|
|||||||||
Radiology, Vol 203, 145-149, Copyright © 1997 by Radiological Society of North America
ARTICLES |
M Muller-Schimpfle, K Ohmenhauser, P Stoll, K Dietz and CD Claussen
Department of Diagnostic Radiology, University of Tubingen, Germany.
PURPOSE: To evaluate the influence of menstrual cycle and age on parenchymal contrast medium enhancement in magnetic resonance (MR) imaging of the breast. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Dynamic gadolinium- enhanced fast low-angle shot, three-dimensional breast MR imaging was performed with high temporal and spatial resolution (eight measurements in 10 minutes). Menstrual cycle evaluations and age-influence studies were performed in 44 patients aged 27-55 years with a regular cycle (mean age, 41.5 years) and in 103 patients aged 15-79 years (mean age, 49.3 years), respectively. A region of interest was placed in each quadrant of the breast for evaluation of parenchymal enhancement. Quadrants with complete involution or lesions and patients who received hormonal therapy were excluded [corrected]. Analysis of variance was performed. RESULTS: Parenchymal contrast medium enhancement in cycle days 7-20 (geometric mean enhancement at minutes 1-10 = 0.12-0.47) was significantly lower than that in cycle days 21-6 (geometric mean, 0.17- 0.98; P < or = .001). Contrast medium enhancement in patients aged 35- 50 years (mean enhancement, 0.17-0.75) was significantly higher than that in patients aged younger than 35 years or older than 50 years (mean enhancement, 0.12-0.40; P < .01). CONCLUSION: Patients showed statistically significantly lower parenchymal enhancement in menstrual cycle days 7-20 than in days 21-6. Patients aged 35-50 years yielded higher parenchymal enhancement than did younger patients and older patients.
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  J.-M. Lee, J. B. Kaplan, M. P. Murray, L. Bartella, E. A. Morris, S. Joo, D. D. Dershaw, and L. Liberman Imaging Histologic Discordance at MRI-Guided 9-Gauge Vacuum-Assisted Breast Biopsy Am. J. Roentgenol., October 1, 2007; 189(4): 852 - 859. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 C. Kuhl The Current Status of Breast MR Imaging * Part I. Choice of Technique, Image Interpretation, Diagnostic Accuracy, and Transfer to Clinical Practice Radiology, August 1, 2007; 244(2): 356 - 378. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
F. Pediconi, C. Catalano, A. Roselli, S. Padula, F. Altomari, E. Moriconi, A. M. Pronio, M. A. Kirchin, and R. Passariello Contrast-enhanced MR Mammography for Evaluation of the Contralateral Breast in Patients with Diagnosed Unilateral Breast Cancer or High-Risk Lesions Radiology, June 1, 2007; 243(3): 670 - 680. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
F. Sardanelli, F. Podo, G. D'Agnolo, A. Verdecchia, M. Santaquilani, R. Musumeci, G. Trecate, S. Manoukian, S. Morassut, C. de Giacomi, et al. Multicenter Comparative Multimodality Surveillance of Women at Genetic-Familial High Risk for Breast Cancer (HIBCRIT Study): Interim Results Radiology, March 1, 2007; 242(3): 698 - 715. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
D. R. Fischer, A. Malich, S. Wurdinger, J. Boettcher, M. Dietzel, and W. A. Kaiser The adjacent vessel on dynamic contrast-enhanced breast MRI. Am. J. Roentgenol., August 1, 2006; 187(2): W147 - W151. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 A. M. Kavanagh, J. Cawson, G. B. Byrnes, G. G. Giles, G. Marr, B. Tong, D. M. Gertig, and J. L. Hopper Hormone Replacement Therapy, Percent Mammographic Density, and Sensitivity of Mammography Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev., May 1, 2005; 14(5): 1060 - 1064. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
J.-P. Delille, P. J. Slanetz, E. D. Yeh, D. B. Kopans, E. F. Halpern, and L. Garrido Hormone Replacement Therapy in Postmenopausal Women: Breast Tissue Perfusion Determined with MR Imaging--Initial Observations Radiology, April 1, 2005; 235(1): 36 - 41. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
E. E. Deurloo, S. H. Muller, J. L. Peterse, A. P. E. Besnard, and K. G. A. Gilhuijs Clinically and Mammographically Occult Breast Lesions on MR Images: Potential Effect of Computerized Assessment on Clinical Reading Radiology, March 1, 2005; 234(3): 693 - 701. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
W. Huang, P. R. Fisher, K. Dulaimy, L. A. Tudorica, B. O'Hea, and T. M. Button Detection of Breast Malignancy: Diagnostic MR Protocol for Improved Specificity Radiology, August 1, 2004; 232(2): 585 - 591. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
A. Teifke, A. Hlawatsch, T. Beier, T. Werner Vomweg, S. Schadmand, M. Schmidt, H.-A. Lehr, and M. Thelen Undetected Malignancies of the Breast: Dynamic Contrast-enhanced MR Imaging at 1.0 T Radiology, September 1, 2002; 224(3): 881 - 888. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
S. G. Orel and M. D. Schnall MR Imaging of the Breast for the Detection, Diagnosis, and Staging of Breast Cancer Radiology, July 1, 2001; 220(1): 13 - 30. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. Brown, R. C. Smith, and C. H. Lee Incidental Enhancing Lesions Found on MR Imaging of the Breast Am. J. Roentgenol., May 1, 2001; 176(5): 1249 - 1254. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
C. K. Kuhl, R. K. Schmutzler, C. C. Leutner, A. Kempe, E. Wardelmann, A. Hocke, M. Maringa, U. Pfeifer, D. Krebs, and H. H. Schild Breast MR Imaging Screening in 192 Women Proved or Suspected to Be Carriers of a Breast Cancer Susceptibility Gene: Preliminary Results Radiology, April 1, 2000; 215(1): 267 - 279. [Abstract] [Full Text]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 C. J. Baines and R. Dayan A Tangled Web: Factors Likely to Affect the Efficacy of Screening Mammography J Natl Cancer Inst, May 19, 1999; 91(10): 833 - 838. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
| RADIOLOGY | RADIOGRAPHICS | RSNA JOURNALS ONLINE |
