Literature DB >> 16436810

Breast lesions: evaluation with US strain imaging--clinical experience of multiple observers.

Dawn M Regner1, Gina K Hesley, Nicholas J Hangiandreou, Marilyn J Morton, Michelle R Nordland, Duane D Meixner, Timothy J Hall, Michael A Farrell, Jayawant N Mandrekar, W Scott Harmsen, J William Charboneau.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To prospectively determine the accuracy of using an ultrasonographic (US) strain imaging technique known as lesion size comparison to differentiate benign from malignant breast lesions.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Institutional Review Board approval and patient informed consent were obtained for this HIPPA-compliant study. US strain imaging was performed prospectively for 89 breast lesions in 88 patients. Lesions were imaged by using freehand compression and a real-time strain imaging algorithm. Five observers obtained manual measurements of lesion height, width, and area from B-mode and strain images. By using these size measurements, individual observer and group performances were assessed by using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (A(z)). The performance of a single size parameter versus that of a combination of size parameters was evaluated by using univariate and multivariate logistic regression.
RESULTS: Group A(z) values showed that width ratio and area ratio yielded the best results for differentiating benign and malignant breast lesions, and they were not statistically different from one another (P = .499). For the group, the performance of area and width, which was superior to that of height and aspect ratio, was statistically significant for all cases (P < .011) except for those that compared area with aspect ratio (P = .118). By using a group threshold of 1.04 for width ratio and 1.13 for area ratio, the sensitivity and specificity of the technique were 96% and 21%, respectively, for width and 96% and 24%, respectively, for area. The best observer achieved a sensitivity of 96% and a specificity of 61% by using the area ratio. For all but one observer, combined size parameters did not improve observer performance (P > .258). Significant interobserver performance variability was observed (P < .001).
CONCLUSION: Results suggest that US strain imaging has the potential to aid diagnosis of breast lesions. However, manually tracing lesion boundaries for size ratio differentiation in a busy clinical setting did not match the diagnostic performance levels previously reported. Focusing on measurements of lesion width, along with additional observer training or automated processes, may yield a suitable method for routine clinical application. (c) RSNA, 2006

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16436810      PMCID: PMC1761922          DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2381041336

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Radiology        ISSN: 0033-8419            Impact factor:   11.105


  13 in total

Review 1.  Elastography: ultrasonic estimation and imaging of the elastic properties of tissues.

Authors:  J Ophir; S K Alam; B Garra; F Kallel; E Konofagou; T Krouskop; T Varghese
Journal:  Proc Inst Mech Eng H       Date:  1999       Impact factor: 1.617

2.  On the feasibility of remote palpation using acoustic radiation force.

Authors:  K R Nightingale; M L Palmeri; R W Nightingale; G E Trahey
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2001-07       Impact factor: 1.840

3.  A freehand elastographic imaging approach for clinical breast imaging: system development and performance evaluation.

Authors:  M M Doyley; J C Bamber; F Fuechsel; N L Bush
Journal:  Ultrasound Med Biol       Date:  2001-10       Impact factor: 2.998

4.  Freehand ultrasound elastography of breast lesions: clinical results.

Authors:  K M Hiltawsky; M Krüger; C Starke; L Heuser; H Ermert; A Jensen
Journal:  Ultrasound Med Biol       Date:  2001-11       Impact factor: 2.998

5.  Elastographic imaging of thermal lesions in the liver in vivo following radiofrequency ablation: preliminary results.

Authors:  T Varghese; J A Zagzebski; F T Lee
Journal:  Ultrasound Med Biol       Date:  2002 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 2.998

6.  "Sonoelasticity" images derived from ultrasound signals in mechanically vibrated tissues.

Authors:  R M Lerner; S R Huang; K J Parker
Journal:  Ultrasound Med Biol       Date:  1990       Impact factor: 2.998

7.  2-D companding for noise reduction in strain imaging.

Authors:  P Chaturvedi; M F Insana; T J Hall
Journal:  IEEE Trans Ultrason Ferroelectr Freq Control       Date:  1998       Impact factor: 2.725

8.  Adaptive strain estimation using retrospective processing [medical US elasticity imaging.

Authors:  M A Lubinski; S Y Emelianov; M O'Donnell
Journal:  IEEE Trans Ultrason Ferroelectr Freq Control       Date:  1999       Impact factor: 2.725

9.  Elastography: a quantitative method for imaging the elasticity of biological tissues.

Authors:  J Ophir; I Céspedes; H Ponnekanti; Y Yazdi; X Li
Journal:  Ultrason Imaging       Date:  1991-04       Impact factor: 1.578

10.  Elastography of breast lesions: initial clinical results.

Authors:  B S Garra; E I Cespedes; J Ophir; S R Spratt; R A Zuurbier; C M Magnant; M F Pennanen
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1997-01       Impact factor: 11.105

View more
  46 in total

1.  A pilot study to evaluate assisted freehand ultrasound elasticity imaging in the sizing of early breast cancer: a comparison of B-mode and AFUSON elasticity ultrasound with histopathology measurements.

Authors:  R E English; J Li; A J C Parker; D Roskell; R F Adams; V Parulekar; J Baldwin; Y Chi; J A Noble
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2011-06-01       Impact factor: 3.039

2.  US-guided diffuse optical tomography for breast lesions: the reliability of clinical experience.

Authors:  Min Jung Kim; Ji Youn Kim; Jung Hyun Youn; Myung Hyun Kim; Hye Ryoung Koo; Soo Jin Kim; Yu-Mee Sohn; Hee Jung Moon; Eun-Kyung Kim
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2011-01-28       Impact factor: 5.315

3.  Analysis of shear strain imaging for classifying breast masses: finite element and phantom results.

Authors:  Haiyan Xu; Tomy Varghese; Ernest L Madsen
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2011-11       Impact factor: 4.071

4.  Real-time US elastography in the differentiation of suspicious microcalcifications on mammography.

Authors:  Nariya Cho; Woo Kyung Moon; Jeong-Seon Park
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2009-02-18       Impact factor: 5.315

5.  Sonoelastographic lesion stiffness: preoperative predictor of the presence of an invasive focus in nonpalpable DCIS diagnosed at US-guided needle biopsy.

Authors:  Nariya Cho; Woo Kyung Moon; Jung Min Chang; Ann Yi; Hye Ryoung Koo; Jeong-Seon Park; In Ae Park
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2011-03-13       Impact factor: 5.315

6.  The diagnostic importance of evaluation of solid breast masses by sonoelastography.

Authors:  Hasan Yerli; Tuğbahan Yılmaz; Banu Ural; Hüseyin Gülay
Journal:  Ulus Cerrahi Derg       Date:  2013-06-01

7.  Real-time quasi-static ultrasound elastography.

Authors:  Graham Treece; Joel Lindop; Lujie Chen; James Housden; Richard Prager; Andrew Gee
Journal:  Interface Focus       Date:  2011-04-20       Impact factor: 3.906

8.  Diagnostic performances of shear wave elastography: which parameter to use in differential diagnosis of solid breast masses?

Authors:  Eun Jung Lee; Hae Kyoung Jung; Kyung Hee Ko; Jong Tae Lee; Jung Hyun Yoon
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2013-02-20       Impact factor: 5.315

Review 9.  Tissue elasticity properties as biomarkers for prostate cancer.

Authors:  Kenneth Hoyt; Benjamin Castaneda; Man Zhang; Priya Nigwekar; P Anthony di Sant'agnese; Jean V Joseph; John Strang; Deborah J Rubens; Kevin J Parker
Journal:  Cancer Biomark       Date:  2008       Impact factor: 4.388

10.  Linear and nonlinear elasticity imaging of soft tissue in vivo: demonstration of feasibility.

Authors:  Assad A Oberai; Nachiket H Gokhale; Sevan Goenezen; Paul E Barbone; Timothy J Hall; Amy M Sommer; Jingfeng Jiang
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2009-01-30       Impact factor: 3.609

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.