Efficacy of single voxel 1H MR spectroscopic imaging at 3T for the differentiation of benign and malign breast lesions.

PURPOSE: The aim of our study was to evaluate the effect of 1H Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy (MRS) in differentiating breast lesions. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Single voxel 1H Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy (1H-MRS) was performed with 3T magnet in 45 women. The choline cut off point was set semi-quantitavely. Sensitivity, specificity and accuracy of MRS were calculated. RESULTS: Twenty-four of 25 (96%) malignant and 9 of 26 (35%) benign lesions had choline peak. With the use cutoff value of 19,5 MRS provided a 96% sensitivity, 65% specificity and 80% accuracy. CONCLUSION: MRS has a high diagnostic accuracy in differentiating breast lesions.

Multiparametric breast MRI with 3T: Effectivity of combination of contrast enhanced MRI, DWI and 1H single voxel spectroscopy in differentiation of Breast tumors.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of dynamic contrast enhanced breast MRI (DCE-MRI) combined with diffusion weighted imaging (DWI) and 1H single-voxel magnetic resonance spectroscopy (1HMRS) in differentiating malignant from benign breast lesions. METHODS: One hundred twenty-nine patients with 138 lesions were included in the study. Multiparametric MRI of the breast was performed with a 3T unit. A DWI is followed by DCE-MRI and 1HMRS. All lesions were biopsied within one week after MRI. Histopathologic findings were accepted as the standard of reference. Probability of malignancy was assessed according to BI-RADS for DCE-MRI. ADC values were measured for DWI and choline peaks were assessed using a semi-quantitative method in 1HMRS. Two blinded radiologists evaluated findings in consensus. Diagnostic performance of DCE-MRI, DWI and 1HMRS alone or in combination for multiparametric imaging were statistically evaluated. RESULTS: Histopathology revealed malignancy in 54.4% of lesions (75/138). DCE-MRI showed the highest AUC (0.978), sensitivity (97.33%) and specificity (88.89%) compared to DWI and 1HMRS. Sensitivity was 100% when a positive result from any one of three techniques was accepted as malignancy, albeit with a trade-off for 65.1% specificity. Highest specificity (98.4%) was attained when all three techniques were required to be positive, though with a lower sensitivity (82.7%) as trade-off. Logistic regression analysis confirmed significant association with DCE-MRI (p<0.001) and 1H MRS (p=0.009) but not with DWI (p=0.127). There was one case of fat necrosis which was false positive in all three techniques. CONCLUSIONS: Multiparametric imaging with combination of DCE-MRI, DWI and 1HMRS does not improve, and may even reduce the diagnostic accuracy of breast MRI. Although, the specificity may be improved with a trade-off for lower sensitivity, we have not set a convenient algorithm for the combined use of these techniques.