Incidence and outcomes of incidental breast lesions detected on cross‐sectional imaging examinations. Issue 5 (23rd April 2018) - Falomo, Eniola
Abstract: The aim of this study was to determine the frequency and outcomes of incidental breast lesions detected on nonbreast specific cross‐sectional imaging examinations. A retrospective review of the medical records was performed to identify all patients without a known history of breast cancer, who had an incidentally discovered breast lesion detected on a nonbreast imaging examination performed at our institution between September 2008 and August 2012 for this IRB‐approved, HIPAA compliant study. Outcomes of the incidental lesions were determined by follow‐up with dedicated breast imaging (mammography, breast ultrasound, and/or breast MRI) or results of biopsy, if performed. Imaging modality of detection, imaging features, patient age, patient location at the time of the nonbreast imaging examination, type of follow‐up, and final outcome were recorded. Rates of malignancy were also calculated, and comparison was made across the different cross‐sectional imaging modalities. Kruskal‐Wallis and Fisher's exact tests were used to identify factors associated with an increased rate of malignancy. Logistic regression was used to model the risk of malignancy as a function of continuous predictors (such as patient age or lesion size); odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals were obtained. A total of 292 patients with incidental breast lesions were identified, 242 of whom had incidental lesions were noted on computed tomography (CT) studies, 25 on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and 25 on positron emission tomography (PET). Although most of the incidental breast lesions were detected on CT examinations, PET studies had the highest rate of detection of incidental breast lesions per number of studies performed (rate of incidental breast lesion detection on PET studies was 0.29%, compared to 0.10% for CT and 0.01% for MRI). Of the 121 of 292 (41%) patients who received dedicated breast imaging work‐up at our institution, 40 of 121 (33%) underwent biopsy and 25 of 121 (21%) had malignancy. There was a significantly increased rate of malignancy in older patients (odds ratio: 1.05, 95% CI: 1.02‐1.093; P = .006). Additionally, patients with PET‐detected incidental breast lesions had a significantly higher rate of malignancy (55%), compared to patients with CT‐detected (35%) and MRI‐detected (8%) incidental breast lesions ( P = .038). The rate of malignancy upon follow‐up of incidental breast lesions detected on nonbreast imaging examinations in this retrospective study was 21%, supporting the importance of emphasizing further work‐up of all incidentally detected breast lesions with dedicated breast imaging. Additionally, we found that PET examinations had the highest rate of detection of incidental breast lesions and the highest rate of malignancy, which suggests that PET examinations may be more specific for predicting the likelihood of malignancy of incidental breast lesions, compared to CT and MRI.