Related Experiment Video For Breast cancer
Updated: Feb 26, 2026

Clinical Imaging of Microwave Mammography
Published on: November 14, 2025
Contrast-enhanced mammography versus breast MRI in the preoperative evaluation of the nipple-areola complex: data
Michele Lorenzon1, Paola Minichetti2, Laura Casotto1,3
1Institute of Radiology, University Hospital S. Maria della Misericordia, Azienda Sanitaria Universitaria Friuli Centrale (ASUFC), Udine, Italy.
Objectives:
Accurate preoperative assessment of nipple-areolar complex (NAC) involvement is critical for surgical planning in breast cancer patients. While magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is the established modality for NAC evaluation, contrast-enhanced mammography (CEM) has emerged as a potential alternative. This study aims to compare the diagnostic performance of CEM and MRI in predicting NAC involvement in a real-world setting, using histopathology as the reference standard.
Materials And Methods:
A retrospective cohort of 195 women with biopsy-proven breast cancer (91 CEM, median age 66 years; 104 MRI, 53 years) underwent preoperative imaging at a single institution. Imaging criteria for NAC involvement were defined. Two radiologists independently evaluated the images, with discordances resolved by consensus. Diagnostic performance was compared between CEM and MRI using Fisher's exact test. Multivariable logistic regression identified predictors of NAC involvement.
Results:
NAC involvement was histologically confirmed in 11.0% (10/91) CEM and 19.2% (20/104) MRI cases (p = 0.110). Sensitivity was similar, 60% for CEM and 50% for MRI (p = 0.897), with nearly identical specificity (96.3% vs. 96.4%; p = 0.709). In situ components were frequently observed in NAC-positive cases (CEM: 90%; MRI: 75%) but were not statistically predictive. Independent predictors included peri-areolar thickening for CEM (OR 26.3; 95% CI 3.9-100; p = 0.0007) and abnormal NAC enhancement (OR 14; 95% CI 1.5-133.5; p < 0.001) and shorter tumor-to-nipple distance (OR 0.28, 95% CI 0.1-0.6; p < 0.001) for MRI.
Conclusions:
Notwithstanding a difference in patient age between the CEM and MRI cohorts, which mirrors the different clinical application of the two imaging modalities, CEM demonstrated diagnostic performance comparable to MRI for NAC assessment, offering high specificity and clinical utility in patients unsuitable for MRI. Key imaging features (e.g., peri-areolar thickening, NAC enhancement) aid preoperative decision-making. These findings support CEM as a viable alternative for NAC evaluation, particularly in cases of contraindications to MRI.
Key Points:
Question Preoperative assessment of nipple-areola complex (NAC) involvement in breast cancer impacts surgical decisions. It is unclear whether contrast-enhanced mammography (CEM) may provide diagnostic performance comparable to magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in assessing NAC involvement. Findings CEM and MRI show comparable diagnostic performance for NAC involvement, with similar sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values. Clinical relevance CEM offers a reliable, accessible alternative to MRI for evaluating NAC involvement, supporting surgical planning in breast cancer patients, especially when MRI is contraindicated or unavailable.
More Related Videos
13:35Endoscopic Bilateral Nipple-sparing Mastectomy via a Single Axillary Incision with Immediate Pre-pectoral Implant-based Breast Reconstruction
Published on: May 17, 2024
15:48Tracking the Mammary Architectural Features and Detecting Breast Cancer with Magnetic Resonance Diffusion Tensor Imaging
Published on: December 15, 2014
Related Concept Videos
Magnetic Resonance Imaging
Imaging Studies I: CT and MRI
Description of the Procedures
Computed Tomography (CT) scan:
Computed Tomography (CT) scans use X-ray technology to generate detailed images of bones, organs, and tissues. During the scan, the patient lies on a moving table...
Imaging Studies IV: Magnetic Resonance Imaging