Comparison of the sensitivity of mammography, ultrasound, magnetic resonance imaging and combinations of these imaging modalities for the detection of small (≤2 cm) breast cancer.

Abstract

The aim of this study was to compare the sensitivity of mammography (MG), ultrasound (US), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and combinations of these imaging modalities for the detection of small (≤2 cm) breast cancer and to evaluate the benefit of preoperative breast MRI after performing conventional imaging techniques for small breast cancer.This was an observational retrospective review of 475 patients with pathologically confirmed breast cancer. We reviewed the medical records; assessed the preoperative reports of MG, US, and MRI; and categorized them as benign features (BI-RADS 1–3) or malignant features (BI-RADS 4 or 5). The criterion standard for detection was the pathologic assessment of the surgical specimen. The sensitivities of the different techniques were compared using the McNemar test.Among the 475 women, the sensitivity of MG was significantly greater in patients with low breast density than in those with high breast density (84.5% vs 65.8%, P < .001). US had higher sensitivity than MG (P < .001), and the combination of MG + US showed better sensitivity than MG or US alone (P < .001). Further addition of MRI to the combination of MG and US statistically contributed to the sensitivity yield (from 93.3% to 98.2%; P < .001) but did not significantly increase the mastectomy rate (from 48.2% to 49.3%; P = .177).MG has limited diagnostic sensitivity in patients with small breast cancer, especially in those with dense breast tissue. US is better than MG at detecting small breast cancer, regardless of breast density. The addition of MRI to MG and US could increase sensitivity without increasing the mastectomy rate. This study suggests performing MRI routinely on the basis of MG and US for small (≤2 cm) breast cancer.