ACR PRACTICE PARAMETER FOR THE PERFORMANCE OF MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING–GUIDED BREAST INTERVENTIONAL PROCEDURES

PREAMBLE

I. INTRODUCTION

II. INDICATIONS AND CONTRAINDICATIONS

III. QUALIFICATIONS AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF PERSONNEL

IV. SPECIFICATIONS OF THE PROCEDURE

V. DOCUMENTATION

VI. EQUIPMENT SPECIFICATIONS

VII. QUALITY CONTROL AND IMPROVEMENT, SAFETY, INFECTION CONTROL, AND PATIENT EDUCATION

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

REFERENCES

1. Bruening W, Fontanarosa J, Tipton K, Treadwell JR, Launders J, Schoelles K. Systematic review: comparative effectiveness of core-needle and open surgical biopsy to diagnose breast lesions. Ann Intern Med. 2010;152(4):238-246.
2. Levin DD, Rao VV, Frangos AA, Parker LL, Sunshine JJ. Current practice patterns and recent trends in breast biopsy among radiologists and surgeons. J Am Coll Radiol 3:707-9, .
3. Parker SH, Burbank F, Jackman RJ, et al. Percutaneous large-core breast biopsy: a multi-institutional study. Radiology. 1994; 193(2):359-364.
4. White RR, Halperin TJ, Olson JA, Soo MS, Bentley RC, Seigler HF. Impact of core-needle breast biopsy on the surgical management of mammographic abnormalities. Ann Surg. 2001 Jun;233(6):769-77.
5. Lehman CD, Isaacs C, Schnall MD, et al. Cancer yield of mammography, MR, and US in high-risk women: prospective multi-institution breast cancer screening study. Radiology. 2007;244(2):381-388.
6. Mann RM, Kuhl CK, Moy L. Contrast-enhanced MRI for breast cancer screening. [Review]. Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging. 50(2):377-390, 2019 08.J Magn Reson Imaging. 50(2):377-390, 2019 08.
7. Bassett LL, Dhaliwal SS, Eradat JJ, et al. National trends and practices in breast MRI. AJR Am J Roentgenol 191:332-9, .
8. Stout NK, Nekhlyudov L, Li L, et al. Rapid increase in breast magnetic resonance imaging use: trends from 2000 to 2011. JAMA Internal Medicine. 174(1):114-21, 2014 Jan.
9. Wernli KK, DeMartini WW, Ichikawa LL, et al. Patterns of breast magnetic resonance imaging use in community practice. JAMA Intern Med 174:125-32, .
10. Monticciolo DL, Newell MS, Moy L, Niell B, Monsees B, Sickles EA. Breast Cancer Screening in Women at Higher-Than-Average Risk: Recommendations From the ACR. Journal of the American College of Radiology. 15(3 Pt A):408-414, 2018 03.
11. American College of Radiology. ACR Practice Parameter for the Performance of Contrast-Enhanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) of the Breast. Available at: https://gravitas.acr.org/PPTS/GetDocumentView?docId=6+&releaseId=2
12. Ruiz-Flores LL, Whitman GG, Le-Petross HH, Hess KK, Parikh JJ. Variation in Technical Quality of Breast MRI. Acad Radiol 27:468-475, .
13. Niell BB, Gavenonis SS, Motazedi TT, et al. Auditing a breast MRI practice: performance measures for screening and diagnostic breast MRI. J Am Coll Radiol 11:883-9, .
14. Brennan SS. Breast magnetic resonance imaging for the interventionalist: magnetic resonance imaging-guided vacuum-assisted breast biopsy. Tech Vasc Interv Radiol 17:40-8, .
15. Brennan SS, Sung JJ, Lee CC, Dershaw DD, Morris EE. Lessons learned from MR-guided breast-biopsy. Eur J Radiol 81 Suppl 1:S10, .
16. Landheer MM, Veltman JJ, van Eekeren RR, Zeillemaker AA, Boetes CC, Wobbes TT. MRI-guided preoperative wire localization of nonpalpable breast lesions. Clin Imaging 30:229-33, .
17. McGrath AA, Price EE, Eby PP, Rahbar HH. MRI-guided breast interventions. J Magn Reson Imaging 46:631-645, .
18. Papalouka VV, Kilburn-Toppin FF, Gaskarth MM, Gilbert FF. MRI-guided breast biopsy: a review of technique, indications, and radiological-pathological correlations. Clin Radiol 73:908.e17-908.e25, .
19. Veltman JJ, Boetes CC, Wobbes TT, Blickman JJ, Barentsz JJ. Magnetic resonance-guided biopsies and localizations of the breast: initial experiences using an open breast coil and compatible intervention device. Invest Radiol 40:379-84, .
20. Lewin AA, Heller SL, Jaglan S, et al. Radiologic-Pathologic Discordance and Outcome After MRI-Guided Vacuum-Assisted Biopsy. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 208(1):W17-W22, 2017 Jan.
21. Spick C, Baltzer PA. Diagnostic utility of second-look US for breast lesions identified at MR imaging: systematic review and meta-analysis. Radiology 2014;273:401-9.
22. Abe HH, Schmidt RR, Shah RR, et al. MR-directed ("Second-Look") ultrasound examination for breast lesions detected initially on MRI: MR and sonographic findings. AJR Am J Roentgenol 194:370-7, .
23. DeMartini WW, Hanna LL, Gatsonis CC, Mahoney MM, Lehman CC. Evaluation of tissue sampling methods used for MRI-detected contralateral breast lesions in the American College of Radiology Imaging Network 6667 trial. AJR Am J Roentgenol 199:W386-91, .
24. Hollowell LL, Price EE, Arasu VV, Wisner DD, Hylton NN, Joe BB. Lesion morphology on breast MRI affects targeted ultrasound correlation rate. Eur Radiol 25:1279-84, .
25. D'Orsi CJ, Sickles EA, Mendelson EB, et al. ACR BI-RADS® Atlas, Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System. Reston, VA: American College of Radiology; 2013.
26. Gao Y, Bagadiya NR, Jardon ML, et al. Outcomes of Preoperative MRI-Guided Needle Localization of Nonpalpable Mammographically Occult Breast Lesions. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2016 Sep;207(3):676-84.
27. El Khouli RR, Macura KK, Kamel II, Bluemke DD, Jacobs MM. The effects of applying breast compression in dynamic contrast material-enhanced MR imaging. Radiology 272:79-90, .
28. Brennan SS, Sung JJ, Dershaw DD, Liberman LL, Morris EE. Cancellation of MR imaging-guided breast biopsy due to lesion nonvisualization: frequency and follow-up. Radiology 261:92-9, .
29. Johnson KK, Baker JJ, Lee SS, Soo MM. Cancelation of MRI guided breast biopsies for suspicious breast lesions identified at 3.0 T MRI: reasons, rates, and outcomes. Acad Radiol 20:569-75, .
30. Niell BB, Lee JJ, Johansen CC, Halpern EE, Rafferty EE. Patient outcomes in canceled MRI-guided breast biopsies. AJR Am J Roentgenol 202:223-8, .
31. Pinnamaneni N, Moy L, Gao Y, et al. Canceled MRI-guided Breast Biopsies Due to Nonvisualization: Follow-up and Outcomes. Academic Radiology. 25(9):1101-1110, 2018 09.
32. Somerville PP, Seifert PP, Destounis SS, Murphy PP, Young WW. Anticoagulation and bleeding risk after core needle biopsy. AJR Am J Roentgenol 191:1194-7, .
33. Colletti PM. Magnetic resonance procedures and pregnancy. In: Shellock FG, ed. Magnetic Resonance Procedures: Health Effects and Safety. Boca Raton, Fla.: CRC Press; 2001.
34. Expert Panel on MR Safety, Kanal E, Barkovich AJ, et al. ACR guidance document on MR safe practices: 2013. J Magn Reson Imaging. 37(3):501-30, 2013 Mar.
35. Sawyer-Glover AM, Shellock FG. Pre-MRI procedure screening: recommendations and safety considerations for biomedical implants and devices. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2000 Jul;12(1):92-106.
36. Shellock FG. Magnetic Resonance Procedures: Health Effects and Safety. Boca Raton, Fla.: CRC Press; 2001.
37. Shellock FG. Biomedical implants and devices: assessment of magnetic field interactions with a 3.0-Tesla MR system. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2002 Dec;16(6):721-32.
38. Shellock FG, Crues JV. MR procedures: biologic effects, safety, and patient care. Radiology 2004;232:635-52.
39. Shellock FG, Crues JV. MR procedures: biologic effects, safety, and patient care. Radiology. 2004 Sep;232(3):635-52.
40. Shellock FG, Tkach JA, Ruggieri PM, Masaryk TJ, Rasmussen PA. Aneurysm clips: evaluation of magnetic field interactions and translational attraction by use of "long-bore" and "short-bore" 3.0-T MR imaging systems. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2003 Mar;24(3):463-71.
41. American College of Radiology. ACR Committee on Drugs and Contrast Media. Manual on Contrast Media. Available at: https://www.acr.org/Clinical-Resources/Clinical-Tools-and-Reference/Contrast-Manual.
42. American College of Radiology. ACR Practice Parameter for Continuing Medical Education. Available at https://gravitas.acr.org/PPTS/GetDocumentView?docId=130+&releaseId=2
43. American College of Radiology. ACR–AAPM Technical Standard for Diagnostic Medical Physics Performance Monitoring of Magnetic Resonance (MR) Imaging Equipment. Available at https://gravitas.acr.org/PPTS/GetDocumentView?docId=57+&releaseId=2
44. American College of Radiology. ACR Practice Parameter for Communication of Diagnostic Imaging Findings. Available at https://gravitas.acr.org/PPTS/GetDocumentView?docId=74+&releaseId=2
45. Maglione KK, Lee AA, Ray KK, Joe BB, Balassanian RR. Radiologic-Pathologic Correlation for Benign Results After MRI-Guided Breast Biopsy. AJR Am J Roentgenol 209:442-453, .
46. Imschweiler TT, Haueisen HH, Kampmann GG, et al. MRI-guided vacuum-assisted breast biopsy: comparison with stereotactically guided and ultrasound-guided techniques. Eur Radiol 24:128-35, .
47. Heller SS, Moy LL. Imaging features and management of high-risk lesions on contrast-enhanced dynamic breast MRI. AJR Am J Roentgenol 198:249-55, .
48. Lee JJ, Kaplan JJ, Murray MM, et al. Underestimation of DCIS at MRI-guided vacuum-assisted breast biopsy. AJR Am J Roentgenol 189:468-74, .
49. Lee JJ, Kaplan JJ, Murray MM, et al. Imaging histologic discordance at MRI-guided 9-gauge vacuum-assisted breast biopsy. AJR Am J Roentgenol 189:852-9, .
50. Lee JJ, Kaplan JJ, Murray MM, Liberman LL. Complete excision of the MRI target lesion at MRI-guided vacuum-assisted biopsy of breast cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol 191:1198-202, .
51. Li J, Dershaw DD, Lee CH, Kaplan J, Morris EA. MRI follow-up after concordant, histologically benign diagnosis of breast lesions sampled by MRI-guided biopsy. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 193(3):850-5, 2009 Sep.
52. Crystal PP, Sadaf AA, Bukhanov KK, McCready DD, O'Malley FF, Helbich TT. High-risk lesions diagnosed at MRI-guided vacuum-assisted breast biopsy: can underestimation be predicted?. Eur Radiol 21:582-9, .
53. Heller SS, Elias KK, Gupta AA, Greenwood HH, Mercado CC, Moy LL. Outcome of high-risk lesions at MRI-guided 9-gauge vacuum- assisted breast biopsy. AJR Am J Roentgenol 202:237-45, .
54. Heller SS, Hernandez OO, Moy LL. Radiologic-pathologic correlation at breast MR imaging: what is the appropriate management for high-risk lesions?. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 21:583-99, .
55. Liberman LL, Holland AA, Marjan DD, et al. Underestimation of atypical ductal hyperplasia at MRI-guided 9-gauge vacuum-assisted breast biopsy. AJR Am J Roentgenol 188:684-90, .
56. Strigel RM, Eby PR, Demartini WB, et al. Frequency, upgrade rates, and characteristics of high-risk lesions initially identified with breast MRI. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 195(3):792-8, 2010 Sep.
57. Verheyden C, Pages-Bouic E, Balleyguier C, et al. Underestimation Rate at MR Imaging-guided Vacuum-assisted Breast Biopsy: A Multi-Institutional Retrospective Study of 1509 Breast Biopsies. Radiology. 281(3):708-719, 2016 Dec.
58. Lourenco AA, Khalil HH, Sanford MM, Donegan LL. High-risk lesions at MRI-guided breast biopsy: frequency and rate of underestimation. AJR Am J Roentgenol 203:682-6, .
59. Speer ME, Huang ML, Dogan BE, et al. High risk breast lesions identified on MRI-guided vacuum-assisted needle biopsy: outcome of surgical excision and imaging follow-up. Br J Radiol. 91(1090):20180300, 2018 Oct.
60. Shaylor SD, Heller SL, Melsaether AN, et al. Short interval follow-up after a benign concordant MR-guided vacuum assisted breast biopsy--is it worthwhile?. European Radiology. 24(6):1176-85, 2014 Jun.
61. Hayward JH, Ray KM, Wisner DJ, Joe BN. Follow-up outcomes after benign concordant MRI-guided breast biopsy. Clin Imaging. 40(5):1034-9, 2016 Sep-Oct.
62. Pinkney DD, Chikarmane SS, Giess CC. Do benign-concordant breast MRI biopsy results require short interval follow-up imaging? Report of longitudinal study and review of the literature. Clin Imaging 57:50-55, .
63. Huang MM, Speer MM, Dogan BB, et al. Imaging-Concordant Benign MRI-Guided Vacuum-Assisted Breast Biopsy May Not Warrant MRI Follow-Up. AJR Am J Roentgenol 208:916-922, .