Min Yang1, Xiao-ning Gu2, Fang Liu2, Ying-ying Wang2, You-li Cai2, Dong-mei Liu2, Wei-jun Zhou2. 1. Department of Ultrasound, Affiliated Beijing Shijitan Hospital, Capital Medical University; No. 9 Affiliated Clinic Hospital, Beijing University, Beijing 100038, China. Email: yangminivf60@163.com. 2. Department of Ultrasound, Affiliated Beijing Shijitan Hospital, Capital Medical University; No. 9 Affiliated Clinic Hospital, Beijing University, Beijing 100038, China.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To explore the diagnostic values of breast imaging and reporting data system (BI-RADS) and ultrasonic elastography (UE) for benign and malignant breast lesions. METHODS: A total of 122 breast lesions were studied with BI-RADS and UE scoring to compare the sensitivity and specificity according to the pathologic results. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were used to assess the diagnostic value of BI-RADS, UE and combination. RESULTS: Among them, pathological examinations showed that there were 72 benign and 50 malignant cases. Statistically significant differences in specificity existed between BI-RADS lexicon (as ≥ 4) and UE or combination (P < 0.05) while sensitivity showed no difference (P > 0.05); Statistically significant differences in sensitivity existed between BI-RADS (as ≥ 4B) and UE or combination (P < 0.05) while there was no difference in specificity (P > 0.05); No statistically significant differences existed between UE or combination. The area under the ROC curve was above 0.7. CONCLUSION: Both BI-RADS and UE have a great diagnostic value for breast disease. UE is somewhat superior to BI-RADS. However, the value of combination may be more significant.
OBJECTIVE: To explore the diagnostic values of breast imaging and reporting data system (BI-RADS) and ultrasonic elastography (UE) for benign and malignant breast lesions. METHODS: A total of 122 breast lesions were studied with BI-RADS and UE scoring to compare the sensitivity and specificity according to the pathologic results. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were used to assess the diagnostic value of BI-RADS, UE and combination. RESULTS: Among them, pathological examinations showed that there were 72 benign and 50 malignant cases. Statistically significant differences in specificity existed between BI-RADS lexicon (as ≥ 4) and UE or combination (P < 0.05) while sensitivity showed no difference (P > 0.05); Statistically significant differences in sensitivity existed between BI-RADS (as ≥ 4B) and UE or combination (P < 0.05) while there was no difference in specificity (P > 0.05); No statistically significant differences existed between UE or combination. The area under the ROC curve was above 0.7. CONCLUSION: Both BI-RADS and UE have a great diagnostic value for breast disease. UE is somewhat superior to BI-RADS. However, the value of combination may be more significant.