Literature DB >> 14992355

Contrast-enhanced power Doppler sonography in breast lesions: effect on differential diagnosis after mammography and gray scale sonography.

Ayşegül Zdemir1, Koray Kiliç, Hakan Ozdemir, Cem Yücel, Sebnem Andaç, Meriç Colak.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy of contrast-enhanced power Doppler sonography in the differential diagnosis of breast lesions after a mammography-gray scale sonography combination.
METHODS: Sixty-eight patients with 69 breast masses underwent power Doppler sonography before and after intravenous injection of a contrast agent. The lesions were diagnosed as "highly suggestive of malignancy" (category 5; n = 32), "suspicious" (category 4; n = 21), and "probably benign" (category 3; n = 16) by mammography and gray scale sonography, modeled on the American College of Radiology Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System classification. Power Doppler findings did not affect patient treatment. The authors subjectively evaluated the estimated area of vascularity, degree of enhancement following contrast agent administration, morphologic features, and distribution of vessels within the lesions.
RESULTS: The final diagnoses were malignant in 28 lesions and benign in 41. Significant enhancement after contrast agent injection was detected in both the malignant and benign groups. Only 2 criteria, estimated area of vascularity and degree of enhancement following contrast agent administration, proved to be significant diagnostic determinants for contrast-enhanced power Doppler sonography (P < .001; interobserver agreements, 74.4 and 77.8, respectively). Contrast-enhanced power Doppler sonography provided a higher specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value than power Doppler sonography but a lower sensitivity and negative predictive value than mammography-gray scale sonography. Only in the category 4 lesions could the combination of mammography-gray scale sonography and contrast-enhanced power Doppler sonography accomplish a higher specificity (71%) and positive predictive value (70%) than mammography-gray scale sonography (39% and 53%, respectively).
CONCLUSIONS: Power Doppler and contrast-enhanced power Doppler sonography cannot be recommended as confirmatory tests in Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System category 3 and category 5 lesions. Although contrast-enhanced power Doppler sonography may help reduce unnecessary biopsies in Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System category 4 lesions, recommendation of its use has many drawbacks, such as imperfectly established criteria, lack of absolute certainty, and high cost.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2004        PMID: 14992355     DOI: 10.7863/jum.2004.23.2.183

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Ultrasound Med        ISSN: 0278-4297            Impact factor:   2.153


  8 in total

Review 1.  [Imaging of molecular structures of breasts with new sonography techniques].

Authors:  M Reisegger; G Schueller; R Gruber; K Pinker; C Riedl; T H Helbich
Journal:  Radiologe       Date:  2010-11       Impact factor: 0.635

Review 2.  [Ultrasound contrast agents: substance classes, pharmacokinetics, clinical applications, safety aspects].

Authors:  C Krestan
Journal:  Radiologe       Date:  2005-06       Impact factor: 0.635

3.  Comparing contrast-enhanced color flow imaging and pathological measures of breast lesion vascularity.

Authors:  Flemming Forsberg; Babita Kuruvilla; Mark B Pascua; Manisha H Chaudhari; Daniel A Merton; Juan P Palazzo; Barry B Goldberg
Journal:  Ultrasound Med Biol       Date:  2008-04-24       Impact factor: 2.998

4.  Characterizing Breast Lesions Using Quantitative Parametric 3D Subharmonic Imaging: A Multicenter Study.

Authors:  Anush Sridharan; John R Eisenbrey; Maria Stanczak; Priscilla Machado; Daniel A Merton; Annina Wilkes; Alexander Sevrukov; Haydee Ojeda-Fournier; Robert F Mattrey; Kirk Wallace; Flemming Forsberg
Journal:  Acad Radiol       Date:  2019-12-16       Impact factor: 3.173

Review 5.  Quantitative Nonlinear Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound of the Breast.

Authors:  Anush Sridharan; John R Eisenbrey; Jaydev K Dave; Flemming Forsberg
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2016-05-25       Impact factor: 3.959

6.  Breast contrast-enhanced ultrasound: is a scoring system feasible? A preliminary study in China.

Authors:  Xiaoyun Xiao; Bing Ou; Haiyun Yang; Huan Wu; Baoming Luo
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-08-18       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  The correlation between HER-2 expression and the CEUS and ARFI characteristics of breast cancer.

Authors:  Xiao-Yan Wang; Qiao Hu; Meng-Yuan Fang; Yan He; Hai-Ming Wei; Xue-Xue Chen; Bing Zhang
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-06-01       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  CEUS helps to rerate small breast tumors of BI-RADS category 3 and category 4.

Authors:  Jian-xing Zhang; Li-shan Cai; Ling Chen; Jiu-long Dai; Guang-hui Song
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2014-05-25       Impact factor: 3.411

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.