A review of breast imaging following mastectomy with or without reconstruction in an outpatient community center

Contrast-Enhanced Chest Computed Tomography for In-Breast Recurrence Detection: Clinical and Imaging Predictors of Visibility

Purpose: Routine surveillance chest CT is not recommended by current guidelines; however, its use has been increasing with improved accessibility. This study aimed to evaluate the utility of surveillance contrast-enhanced chest computed tomography (CT) in detecting in-breast recurrence among survivors, focusing on imaging and clinicopathological features that enhance tumor visibility. Additionally, this study sought to determine which patient populations may derive benefit from contrast-enhanced chest CT. Materials and Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted on records of patients diagnosed with in-breast recurrence through biopsy during follow-up after breast cancer surgery between January 2016 and August 2022. Patients who underwent contrast-enhanced chest CT within one month of diagnosis were included. Two radiologists reviewed the chest CT scans for breast cancer lesions by consensus, and their findings were validated by two other radiologists blinded to tumor locations. Statistical analyses were performed to evaluate associations among clinicopathological factors, image features, and visibility. Results: Eighty-nine recurrent tumors in 85 patients were included. Fifty-eight recurrent tumors were identified by radiologists who were not blinded. The blinded radiologists independently identified 50 and 56 recurrences, with substantial inter-observer agreement (κ-value = 0.768, p < 0.001). The visible group had a significantly higher rate of invasive ductal carcinoma (IDC) compared to the non-visible group (81.0% vs. 54.8%, p = 0.002). Additionally, the visible group exhibited larger tumors than the non-visible group (mean ± SD: 1.9 ± 1.5 cm vs. 1.3 ± 0.6 cm, p = 0.018). Tumors located in fatty backgrounds demonstrated significantly greater visibility on chest CT than those in glandular backgrounds (67.2% vs. 16.1%, p < 0.001). Recurrent breast cancer was also more frequently visible on chest CT in patients who had undergone mastectomy compared to those who had received breast-conserving surgery (p < 0.001). Conclusions: Contrast-enhanced chest CT can aid in the detection of in-breast recurrence, particularly in patients who have undergone mastectomy, as a complementary imaging modality. Tumors in fatty backgrounds, large tumors, mass-type tumors, and IDCs are better visible on chest CT.

Screening chest wall ultrasound in the mastectomy patient

BACKGROUND

While there are clear guidelines regarding chest wall ultrasound in the symptomatic patient, there is conflicting evidence regarding the use of ultrasound in the screening of women post-mastectomy.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the utility of screening chest wall ultrasound after mastectomy and to assess features of detected malignancies.

METHODS

This IRB approved, retrospective study evaluates screening US examinations of the chest wall after mastectomy. Asymptomatic women presenting for screening chest wall ultrasound from January 2016 through May 2017 were included. Cases of known active malignancy were excluded. All patients had at least one year of clinical or imaging follow-up. 43 exams (8.5 %) were performed with a history of contralateral malignancy, 465 exams (91.3 %) were performed with a history of ipsilateral malignancy, and one exam (0.2 %) was performed in a patient with bilateral prophylactic mastectomy.

RESULTS

During the 17-month period, there were 509 screening US in 389 mastectomy patients. 504 (99.0 %) exams were negative/benign. Five exams (1.0 %) were considered suspicious, with recommendation for biopsy, which was performed. Out of 509 exams, 3 (0.6 %) yielded benign results, while 2 (0.39 %) revealed recurrent malignancy, with a 95 % confidence interval (exact binomial) of 0.05 % to 1.41 % for screening ultrasound. Both patients who recurred had previously recurred, and both had initial cancer of lobular histology.

CONCLUSION

Of 509 chest wall screening US exams performed in mastectomy, 2 malignancies were detected, and each patient had history of invasive lobular carcinoma and at least one prior recurrence prior to this study, suggesting benefit of screening ultrasound in these populations.

Palpable Lumps after Mastectomy: Radiologic-Pathologic Review of Benign and Malignant Masses

Patients who have undergone mastectomy, with or without reconstruction, are not universally screened with mammography or US. Therefore, clinical breast examination by the physician and patient-detected palpable abnormalities are crucial for detecting breast cancer or recurrence. Diagnostic US is the first-line modality for evaluation of postmastectomy palpable masses, with occasional adjunct use of diagnostic mammography for confirming certain benign masses. In the setting of a negative initial imaging evaluation with continued clinical concern, diagnostic MRI may aid in improving sensitivity. Knowledge of the typical multimodality imaging appearances and locations of malignant palpable abnormalities-such as invasive carcinoma recurrence, cancer in residual breast tissue, radiation-induced sarcoma, and metastatic disease-is crucial in diagnosis and treatment of these entities. In addition, familiarity with the range of benign palpable postmastectomy processes-including fat necrosis, fat graft, seroma, granuloma, neuroma, fibrosis, and infection-may help avoid unnecessary biopsies and reassure patients. The authors review common and rare benign and malignant palpable masses in mastectomy patients, describe multimodality diagnostic imaging evaluation of each entity, review radiologic and pathologic correlation, and acquaint the radiologist with management when these findings are encountered. ^©RSNA, 2021.

An Unusual Cutaneous Recurrence of Carcinoma in the Mastectomy Bed and Its Imaging Features: A Case Report

Patient: Female, 44

Final Diagnosis: Cutaneous recurrence of carcinoma in the mastectomy bed

Symptoms: Palpable lump

Medication: —

Clinical Procedure: —

Specialty: Radiology

Yield of surveillance magnetic resonance imaging after bilateral mastectomy and reconstruction: a retrospective cohort study

PURPOSE

There are no evidence-based guidelines for surveillance of women after bilateral mastectomy and reconstruction. Several societies recommend against routine breast imaging in this setting. Despite these recommendations, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is frequently used to follow these women. We sought to examine the findings on MRI studies done in this setting.

METHODS

This is a retrospective cohort study including all consecutive MRI exams done after bilateral mastectomy and reconstruction between January 2010 and April 2018. Data collected included demographic information, family history, BRCA status, indication for bilateral mastectomy, type of reconstruction, findings on MRI, and work-up of MRI findings. Cancer detection rate and interval cancer rates were calculated.

RESULTS

One hundred fifty-nine women had 415 surveillance MRI exams. Most (372, 90%) studies were done in women with implant-based reconstruction. Four hundred and five (98%; 95% confidence interval (CI) 96-99%) of the studies were negative. One breast recurrence was found on MRI (cancer detection rate 2.4 per 1000 MRI exams, 95% CI 0.4-13); however, this woman was simultaneously diagnosed with metastatic disease. The false-positive rate was 90% (95% CI 54-99%). During follow-up three women were diagnosed with local recurrence (interval cancer rate 5 per 1000, 95% CI 1.3-17) and 4 women were diagnosed with metastatic disease.

CONCLUSION

The yield of surveillance MRI in women with bilateral mastectomy and reconstruction is very low. As most of the cohort had retro-pectoral implant-based reconstruction, it appears safe to recommend against surveillance MRI in this setting regardless of the indication for mastectomy.

Positive predictive value of biopsy of palpable masses following mastectomy

Determine the positive predictive value (PPV) of biopsy of palpable masses following mastectomy (MX). Determine if there are patient characteristics, tumor, or imaging features more predictive of cancer. IRB-approved retrospective review of 16 396 breast ultrasounds June 2008-December 2015 identified patients with MX presenting with palpable masses. Medical records and imaging studies were reviewed. Statistical analysis was performed using Fisher's exact test. 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated. In all, 117 patients presented with palpable masses on the MX side. 101/117 patients who had a palpable mass on physical examination had a true sonographic mass to correlate with the clinical findings. 91/101 (90%) underwent biopsy: 19/91 (21%, 95% CI; 13-31) biopsies were malignant. 72/91 (79%) were benign. All 19 cancers were on the original cancer side. Recurrences ranged from 0.4 to 4.5 cm maximum diameter, mean 1.3 cm. Prophylactic vs therapeutic mastectomy was very statistically significant (P = .01). The use of tamoxifen or an AI was also statistically significant (P = .04). Patient age (P = 1.0), radiation therapy (P = 1.05), chemotherapy (P = .2), immediate breast reconstruction (P = .2), or implant vs flap (P = .2) had no statistically significant association with finding cancer on biopsy. Lesion shape (irregular vs oval/round) was highly statistically significant (P = .0003) as was non-parallel orientation on ultrasound (P = .008). Circumscribed vs non-circumscribed margins was also statistically significant (P = .008). The PPV of biopsy of palpable masses on the side of MX was 21% (95% CI; 13-31). All recurrences were on the original cancer side and this was very statistically significant.

Local recurrence following mastectomy and autologous breast reconstruction: incidence, risk factors, and management

Background

Breast reconstruction (BR), including autologous breast reconstruction (ABR) after mastectomy (MST), has been gaining popularity all around the world, especially in the People’s Republic of China during the past decade. However, there is a small proportion, but a significant number, of patients who develop local recurrence (LR) of breast cancer postoperatively. The purpose of this study is to examine the incidence of LR, discuss risk factors associated with LR, and management of LR following MST and ABR.

Methods

A total of 397 patients who underwent MST and ABR after diagnosis of breast cancer were included in this retrospective study. Data were analyzed by the Kaplan–Meier method, the log-rank statistical test, and Cox proportional hazards model.

Results

From January 1999 to December 2011, 400 ABRs were performed in 397 patients in Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center. The median follow-up time in the study was 3.6 years. LR occurred in 11 of 397 patients, with a median time to LR of 2.9 years. In univariate and multivariate analyses, tumor stage, hormonal therapy (yes or no), and tumor type (multifocal or nonmultifocal) were significantly associated with LR after ABR following MST.

Conclusion

ABR is an oncologically safe surgical procedure with an acceptable LR rate of 2.8%. Risk factors associated with high rate of LR were higher tumor stage, absence of hormonal therapy, and multifocal tumor type.

Current approaches and challenges in early detection of breast cancer recurrence

Early detection of breast cancer recurrence is a key element of follow-up care and surveillance after completion of primary treatment. The goal is to improve survival by detecting and treating recurrent disease while potentially still curable assuming a more effective salvage surgery and treatment. In this review, we present the current guidelines for early detection of recurrent breast cancer in the adjuvant setting. Emphasis is placed on the multidisciplinary approach from surgery, medical oncology, and radiology with a discussion of the challenges faced within each setting.

Current approaches and challenges in monitoring treatment responses in breast cancer

Monitoring response to treatment is a key element in the management of breast cancer that involves several different viewpoints from surgery, radiology, and medical oncology. In the adjuvant setting, appropriate surgical and pathological evaluation guides adjuvant treatment and follow up care focuses on detecting recurrent disease with the intention of improving long term survival. In the neoadjuvant setting, assessing response to chemotherapy prior to surgery to include evaluation for pathologic response can provide prognostic information to help guide follow up care. In the metastatic setting, for those undergoing treatment, it is crucial to determine responders versus non-responders in order to help guide treatment decisions. In this review, we present the current guidelines for monitoring treatment response in the adjuvant, neoadjuvant, and metastatic setting. In addition, we also discuss challenges that are faced in each setting.