Literature DB >> 22123663

Correlates of mammographic density in B-mode ultrasound and real time elastography.

Sebastian Michael Jud1, Lothar Häberle, Peter A Fasching, Katharina Heusinger, Carolin Hack, Florian Faschingbauer, Michael Uder, Thomas Wittenberg, Florian Wagner, Martina Meier-Meitinger, Rüdiger Schulz-Wendtland, Matthias W Beckmann, Boris R Adamietz.   

Abstract

The aim of our study involved the assessment of B-mode imaging and elastography with regard to their ability to predict mammographic density (MD) without X-rays. Women, who underwent routine mammography, were prospectively examined with additional B-mode ultrasound and elastography. MD was assessed quantitatively with a computer-assisted method (Madena). The B-mode and elastography images were assessed by histograms with equally sized gray-level intervals. Regression models were built and cross validated to examine the ability to predict MD. The results of this study showed that B-mode imaging and elastography were able to predict MD. B-mode seemed to give a more accurate prediction. R for B-mode image and elastography were 0.67 and 0.44, respectively. Areas in the B-mode images that correlated with mammographic dense areas were either dark gray or of intermediate gray levels. Concerning elastography only the gray levels that represent extremely stiff tissue correlated positively with MD. In conclusion, ultrasound seems to be able to predict MD. Easy and cheap utilization of regular breast ultrasound machines encourages the use of ultrasound in larger case-control studies to validate this method as a breast cancer risk predictor. Furthermore, the application of ultrasound for breast tissue characterization could enable comprehensive research concerning breast cancer risk and breast density in young and pregnant women.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22123663     DOI: 10.1097/CEJ.0b013e32834e3214

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Cancer Prev        ISSN: 0959-8278            Impact factor:   2.497


  4 in total

1.  Differences in breast density assessment using mammography, tomosynthesis and MRI and their implications for practice.

Authors:  A Tagliafico; G Tagliafico; N Houssami
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2013-10-28       Impact factor: 3.039

2.  Association of breast cancer risk, density, and stiffness: global tissue stiffness on breast MR elastography (MRE).

Authors:  Bhavika K Patel; Kay Pepin; Kathy R Brandt; Gina L Mazza; Barbara A Pockaj; Jun Chen; Yuxiang Zhou; Donald W Northfelt; Karen Anderson; Juliana M Kling; Celine M Vachon; Kristin R Swanson; Mehdi Nikkhah; Richard Ehman
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2022-04-30       Impact factor: 4.624

3.  Evaluation of breast stiffness measured by ultrasound and breast density measured by MRI using a prone-supine deformation model.

Authors:  Jeon-Hor Chen; Siwa Chan; Yang Zhang; Shunshan Li; Ruey-Feng Chang; Min-Ying Su
Journal:  Biomark Res       Date:  2019-09-11

4.  RANKL and OPG and their influence on breast volume changes during pregnancy in healthy women.

Authors:  Marius Wunderle; Matthias Ruebner; Lothar Häberle; Eva Schwenke; Carolin C Hack; Christian M Bayer; Martin C Koch; Judith Schwitulla; Ruediger Schulz-Wendtland; Ivona Kozieradzki; Michael P Lux; Matthias W Beckmann; Sebastian M Jud; Josef M Penninger; Michael O Schneider; Peter A Fasching
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2020-03-20       Impact factor: 4.379

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.