MARATTO

article · The Egyptian Journal of Hospital Medicine

Abbreviated MRI Protocols: Efficacy in Improving Acquisition and Interpretation Time in Breast Cancer

2024Open accessSuez Canal University

Abstract

Background: To be cost-effective, theabbreviated magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) protocols have to be proved to reduce examination and reading times, while being clinically effective. Objective: To investigate the efficacy of these protocols in enhancing the efficiency of exams and reducing interpretation time. The study reviews the rationale behind abbreviated protocols and why they are an essential evolving tool in breast screening programs. Patients and methods: This was a prospective randomized study. 60 female patients were examined. They were presented to Kasr Al-Ainy Medical School Breast Unit for screening. Patients were stratified using a risk assessment model. Different risk categories were included. Results: Abbreviated MRI is proved to be a cost-effective method of screening for breast cancer. It has found to be faster to be performed compared with traditional mammogram, as given all the preparation required and proper position needed in mammograms, MRI would be a better modality. Average time for completing abbreviated MRI (AB-MRI) was 5.1 minutes, while mammograms took 10 min. Reading AB-MR took an average of 4.7 minutes, while traditional mammograms 5.7minutes. Regarding efficacy, when compared to traditional screening methods, AB-MR showed the following: 100% negative predictive value (NPV), 85.7% specificity, 50% positive predictive value (PPV), and 100% sensitivity in breast cancer. Conclusion: Abbreviated MRI was found to be an efficient method to identify breast cancer, with shorter imaging and reading times.

Research topics

  • Radiomics and Machine Learning in Medical Imaging
  • MRI in cancer diagnosis
  • Advanced MRI Techniques and Applications

Read the original research

This page summarises published work. The authoritative version sits with the publisher.

DOI: 10.21608/ejhm.2024.342169

Is something wrong with this record? Report it or request removal.

Discussion

Discuss this research

Have you built on this work, tried to replicate it, or seen it applied in practice? Share what you know. Verified researchers and MARATTO™ domain experts can open a discussion, and any member can reply. Contributions are reviewed before they appear.

No discussion yet. Open the first thread.