| Literature DB >> 25741668 |
Alexandra Athanasiou1, Heldmuth Latorre-Ossa2, Aline Criton3, Anne Tardivon1, Jean-Luc Gennisson2, Mickael Tanter2.
Abstract
Purpose Firstly to evaluate the feasibility and diagnostic performance of three-dimensional (3 D) shear wave elastography (SWE) volume measurements in patients with breast lesions compared to breast dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (DCE-MRI) lesion volumes and 3D-US B-mode volumes. Secondly to assess the treatment monitoring performance of 3D-SWE in patients under neoadjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer by comparing it to 3D-US lesion volume. Materials and Methods This prospective study was approved by the institutional review board. Informed consent was provided. 33 patients with 33 lesions were included. The feasibility of 3D-SWE was evaluated in 23 patients. In the 10 remaining patients receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy, 3D-SWE was evaluated before and during treatment. Tumor volume and qualitative and quantitative elasticity analysis measurements were performed and compared to the tumor volume as estimated by 3D-US and DCE-MRI. Statistical analysis was performed using the Pearson correlation coefficient. Results 3D-SWE was feasible in patients with breast lesions. Tumor volume calculated with 3D-US and 3D-SWE showed very good and moderate concordances with DCE-MRI volume, respectively (Pearson correlation coefficients equal to ρ = r = 0.88, p < 0.00 002 and ρ = r = 0.5, p = 0.32, respectively). Modification of tumor elasticity and heterogeneity was correlated with response to treatment. In good responders, elasticity and elasticity heterogeneity diminished. Conclusion Tumor 3D-US volume measurements showed very good concordance with DCE-MRI volume. 3D-SWE can provide valuable information: reduction of tissue stiffness during treatment could be a potential indicator of response. These preliminary results should be confirmed on a larger number of patients. © Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2015 PMID: 25741668 DOI: 10.1055/s-0034-1398980
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Ultraschall Med ISSN: 0172-4614 Impact factor: 6.548