Assessing Mode of Recurrence in Breast Cancer to Identify an Optimised Follow-Up Pathway: 10-Year Institutional Review.

BACKGROUND: Breast cancer surveillance programmes ensure early identification of recurrence which maximises overall survival. Programmes include annual clinical examination and radiological assessment. There remains debate around the value of annual clinical exam in diagnosing recurrent disease/second primaries. The aim was to assess diagnostic modalities for recurrent breast cancer with a focus on evaluating the role of annual clinical examination. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A prospectively maintained database from a symptomatic breast cancer service between 2010-2020 was reviewed. Patients with biopsy-proven recurrence/second breast primary were included. The primary outcome was the diagnostic modality by which recurrences/secondary breast cancers were observed. Diagnostic modalities included (i) self-detection by the patient, (ii) clinical examination by a breast surgeon or (iii) radiological assessment. RESULTS: A total of 233 patients were identified and, following application of exclusion criteria, a total of 140 patients were included. A total of 65/140 (46%) patients were diagnosed clinically, either by self-detection or clinical examination, while 75/140 (54%) were diagnosed radiologically. A total of 59/65 (91%) of patients clinically diagnosed with recurrence presented to the breast clinic after self-detection of an abnormality. Four (6%) patients had cognitive impairment and recurrence was diagnosed by a carer. Two (3%) patients were diagnosed with recurrence by a breast surgeon at clinical examination. The median time to recurrence in all patients was 48 months (range 2-263 months). CONCLUSION: Clinical examination provides little value in diagnosing recurrence (< 5%) and surveillance programmes may benefit from reduced focus on such a modality. Regular radiological assessment and ensuring patients have urgent/easy access to a breast clinic if they develop new symptoms/signs should be the focus of surveillance programmes.

Clinically guided core biopsy and cutaneous punch biopsy in the evaluation of breast lesions: a necessary test or an obsolete skill?

OBJECTIVE: The vast majority of breast cancers are diagnosed via image-guided procedures yet despite significant advances, imaging does not identify all breast malignancies. Clinically suspicious breast lesions with normal breast imaging remain a cause for concern. The aim of this study is to determine the diagnostic value of clinical core and cutaneous punch biopsies in the diagnosis of breast malignancy in clinically suspicious lesions with normal breast imaging. METHODS: All patients with suspicious clinical breast findings and normal imaging who underwent a clinical core and/or cutaneous punch biopsy from 2012 to 2019 were reviewed retrospectively. Patients with subsequent breast malignant diagnosis were analysed. RESULTS: A total of 283 biopsies (166 clinical core, 117 cutaneous punch) performed over the 7-year period were included in the analysis. A total of 263/283 (93%) yielded a benign outcome. A total of 2/283 (0.7%) yielded B3 lesions (probably benign). These lesions were benign on final surgical excision. A total of 18/283 (6.3%) yielded a malignant histopathology. Sixteen out of 18 were cutaneous punch biopsies, and 2/18 were clinical core biopsies. A total of 14/18 patients presented with nipple changes, while 4/18 had a palpable area of concern. Histopathological analysis demonstrated Paget's disease of the nipple in 8/18, invasive carcinoma in 9/18 out of which two represented a recurrence of breast malignancy. Cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma was diagnosed in 1/18. CONCLUSION: Clinical core and cutaneous punch biopsies remain a valuable tool in the diagnosis of breast cancer particularly in the management of clinically suspicious radiographically occult malignancies.

Value of Long-term Follow-up in Surgically Excised Lesions of Uncertain Malignant Potential in the Breast - Is 5 Years Necessary?

INTRODUCTION: B3 lesions are a heterogeneous group of breast lesions of uncertain malignant potential which usually require excision. The aim was to assess the efficacy of 5 years routine radiological or clinical follow-up of patients who had "high-risk" B3 lesions surgically excised, by analyzing recurrence and subsequent development of invasive/in-situ cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A 10-year retrospective review from 2010 to 2019 was performed of B3 lesions diagnosed on core needle biopsy, including patients who proceeded to surgical excision with a high-risk lesion on final histology. The database recorded 6 specific B3 lesion categories: 1. Atypical ductal hyperplasia (ADH), 2. Radial scars/complex sclerosing lesions (CSLs) with epithelial atypia 3. Classical Lobular neoplasia (ALH/LCIS), 4. Papillary lesions with epithelial atypia, 5. Mixed, 6. Flat epithelial atypia (FEA), including radiological and clinical follow-up data. RESULTS: Six hundred sixteen patients had a B3 lesion after core biopsy. 110 patients had "high risk" lesions. This included 17 (15.5%) Atypical Ductal Hyperplasia (ADH), 22 (20%) radial scars/CSLs with epithelial atypia, 47 (42.7%) classical lobular neoplasia (LCIS/ALH), 7 (6.4%) papillary lesions with epithelial atypia, 13 (11.8%) mixed lesions & 4 (3.6%) Flat Epithelial Atypia (FEA) lesions. 4 of 110 (3.6%) developed invasive/in-situ disease and 4 of 110 (3.6%) developed recurrence during follow-up. 33 of 616 (5.4%) upgraded to invasive/preinvasive disease after surgical excision. CONCLUSION: Five years of routine radiological surveillance may not be necessary in patients who undergo surgical excision of "high-risk" B3 lesions. Clinical surveillance appears to be of little benefit, especially in patients with radial scars, papillary lesions, and FEA. Subsequent development of invasive/in-situ disease in patients who undergo surgical excision of atypical B3 lesions remains low.

An appraisal of the computed axial tomographic appearance of the human mesentery based on mesenteric contiguity from the duodenojejunal flexure to the mesorectal level.

OBJECTIVE: The human mesentery is now regarded as contiguous from the duodenojejunal (DJ) to anorectal level. This interpretation prompts re-appraisal of computed tomography (CT) images of the mesentery. METHODS: A digital model and reference atlas of the mesentery were generated using the full-colour data set of the Visible Human Project (VHP). Seventy one normal abdominal CT images were examined to identify mesenteric regions. CT appearances were correlated with cadaveric and histological appearances at corresponding levels. RESULTS: Ascending, descending and sigmoid mesocolons were identifiable in 75%, 86% and 88% of the CTs, respectively. Flexural contiguity was evident in 66%, 68%, 71% and 80% for the ileocaecal, hepatic, splenic and rectosigmoid flexures, respectively. A posterior mesocolic boundary corresponding to the anterior renal fascia was evident in 40% and 54% of cases on the right and left, respectively. The anterior pararenal space (in front of the boundary) corresponded to the mesocolon. CONCLUSIONS: Using the VHP, a mesenteric digital model and reference atlas were developed. This enabled re-appraisal of CT images of the mesentery, in which contiguous flexural and non-flexural mesenteric regions were repeatedly identifiable. The anterior pararenal space corresponded to the mesocolon. KEY POINTS: The Visible Human Project (VHP) allows direct identification of mesenteric structures. Correlating CT and VHP allows identification of flexural and non-flexural mesenteric components. Radiologic appearance of intraperitoneal structures is assessed, starting from a mesenteric platform.

Split-bolus MDCT urography: Upper tract opacification and performance for upper tract tumors in patients with hematuria.

OBJECTIVE: Our purpose was to assess upper urinary tract opacification and the performance of split-bolus MDCT urography for upper tract tumors in patients with hematuria. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between January 2004 and December 2006, we identified 200 patients (119 men, 81 women; median age, 58 years, age range, 18-89 years) who underwent MDCT urography for hematuria. MDCT urography included unenhanced and combined nephrographic and excretory phase imaging of the urinary tract. Images were independently reviewed by two radiologists blinded to the final diagnosis. The degree of upper urinary tract opacification and the diagnosis were recorded. Prospective interpretations were also reviewed. The standard of reference included all available clinical, imaging, and laboratory data for up to 12 months after MDCT urography. Sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, and positive and negative predictive values were calculated for upper tract tumors for prospective and retrospective interpretations. RESULTS: For reviewers 1 and 2, 85.1% and 84.5% of segments were at least 50% opacified, respectively. Final diagnoses for hematuria were no cause, 123 (61.5%); urothelial cancer, 27 (13.5%); nonmalignant, 46 (23%) and indeterminate, four patients (2%). There were nine upper tract cancers. Sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy for upper tract cancers for prospective interpretation, reviewer 1 and reviewer 2, were 100%, 99%, 99%; 100%, 99.5%, 99.5%; and 88.9%, 99.0%, 98.5%, respectively. CONCLUSION: Split-bolus MDCT urography provided at least 50% opacification of the majority of upper urinary tract segments and had high sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy for the detection of upper urinary tract tumors.

Evidence-based practice in radiology: step 5 (evaluate)--caveats and common questions.

So far, this series has described and illustrated the first four steps of the five-step evidence-based practice (EBP) process that was originally designed and taught by the medical epidemiologists of McMaster University (Hamilton, Ontario, Canada) and the National Health Service Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine (University of Oxford, Oxford, England). This article in the series first briefly considers the fifth step (evaluate). A more detailed consideration of caveats, common questions, and challenges relevant to EBP in radiology then follows. These are issues that merit some thought by those beginning or continuing work in EBP.

Evidence-based radiology: steps 1 and 2--asking answerable questions and searching for evidence.

Evidence-based medicine originated at McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada, where it was defined as "the integration of current best evidence with clinical expertise and patient values" by the Evidence-based Medicine Working Group led by Drs Gordon Guyatt and David Sackett. From this developed the McMaster University and National Health Service Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine, University of Oxford, paradigm of evidence-based practice, which consists of five steps that can be used by ordinary practitioners: formulate answerable questions with which to search for evidence, search the literature, appraise the retrieved evidence by using explicit methods, apply results to a patient or patient group, and evaluate one's evidence-based practice and clinical performance and practice. This communication is about the first two steps of this process. Step 1 provides a framework for more effective question formulation that improves subsequent literature searches. It works equally well for questions about diagnostic and interventional radiology. A clinical scenario for a diagnostic question is used to illustrate the formulation of an answerable question. This question is then used to illustrate step 2-how and where to search for evidence.

Finding evidence-based answers to practical questions in radiology: which patients with inoperable hepatocellular carcinoma will survive longer after transarterial chemoembolization?

To some, evidence-based practice (EBP) means the identification of centers that produce evidence reports and technology assessments to support guideline development. To others, EBP is the best research evidence integrated with clinical expertise and patient values. Inherent in the first approach is the implication that only central academic organizations can produce valid, reliable analyses of existing literature, which will then be distributed to ordinary practitioners. The second approach implies that ordinary practitioners can learn to use a stepwise approach and a preprepared set of rules and tools to effectively find the best current literature, appraise it, and then apply local circumstances to these rules and tools in their hospital. Paul Glasziou, director of the Centre for Evidence-based Practice in Oxford, England, has coined the phrases top-down EBP and bottom-up EBP to describe these approaches. In this article, the authors describe how knowledge gaps in an ordinary radiology practice can be addressed by using stepwise bottom-up EBP techniques. The following clinical scenario is used: Your hospital's recently appointed chief hepatobiliary surgeon questions the use of transarterial chemoembolization for inoperable hepatocellular carcinoma because of his concerns after reading a recent review article suggesting that there is no clear survival benefit to using this procedure. What would you do? Here is how the authors would do it.

Advanced hepatocellular carcinoma associated with cystic fibrosis.

Advances in the treatment of the respiratory complications of cystic fibrosis, including the availability of lung transplantation have led to a greater awareness of the manifestations of liver disease in up to 40% of patients with Cystic Fibrosis (CF). We report the case of an 18 year old female with CF who presented with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma and no prior clinical evidence of chronic liver disease. Hepatocellular carcinoma is usually the most severe manifestation of advanced cirrhosis although its development in non-cirrhotic cases of chronic liver disease has been reported. With the increasing life expectancy of CF patients it is likely that more unusual hepatic complications of this disease may be identified. Greater awareness may perhaps lead to earlier diagnosis in those at risk.