Rasha Mohamed Kamal1, Maha Hussien Helal2, Rasha Wessam1, Sahar Mahmoud Mansour3, Iman Godda4, Nelly Alieldin5. 1. Radiology Department (Women's Imaging unit), Kasr ElAiny Hospital, Cairo University, Egypt. 2. Radiology Department (Breast Imaging unit), National Cancer Institute, Cairo University, Egypt. 3. Radiology Department (Breast Imaging unit), National Cancer Institute, Cairo University, Egypt. Electronic address: sahar_mnsr@yahoo.com. 4. Pathology Department, National Cancer Institute, Cairo University, Egypt. 5. Statistics Department, National Cancer Institute, Cairo University, Egypt.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To analyze the morphology and enhancement characteristics of breast lesions on contrast-enhanced spectral mammography (CESM) and to assess their impact on the differentiation between benign and malignant lesions. MATERIALS AND METHOD: This ethics committee approved study included 168 consecutive patients with 211 breast lesions over 18 months. Lesions classified as non-enhancing and enhancing and then the latter group was subdivided into mass and non-mass. Mass lesions descriptors included: shape, margins, pattern and degree of internal enhancement. Non-mass lesions descriptors included: distribution, pattern and degree of internal enhancement. The impact of each descriptor on diagnosis individually assessed using Chi test and the validity compared in both benign and malignant lesions. The overall performance of CESM were also calculated. RESULTS: The study included 102 benign (48.3%) and 109 malignant (51.7%) lesions. Enhancement was encountered in 145/211 (68.7%) lesions. They further classified into enhancing mass (99/145, 68.3%) and non-mass lesions (46/145, 31.7%). Contrast uptake was significantly more frequent in malignant breast lesions (p value ≤ 0.001). Irregular mass lesions with intense and heterogeneous enhancement patterns correlated with a malignant pathology (p value ≤ 0.001). CESM showed an overall sensitivity of 88.99% and specificity of 83.33%. The positive and negative likelihood ratios were 5.34 and 0.13 respectively. CONCLUSION: The assessment of the morphology and enhancement characteristics of breast lesions on CESM enhances the performance of digital mammography in the differentiation between benign and malignant breast lesions.
OBJECTIVE: To analyze the morphology and enhancement characteristics of breast lesions on contrast-enhanced spectral mammography (CESM) and to assess their impact on the differentiation between benign and malignant lesions. MATERIALS AND METHOD: This ethics committee approved study included 168 consecutive patients with 211 breast lesions over 18 months. Lesions classified as non-enhancing and enhancing and then the latter group was subdivided into mass and non-mass. Mass lesions descriptors included: shape, margins, pattern and degree of internal enhancement. Non-mass lesions descriptors included: distribution, pattern and degree of internal enhancement. The impact of each descriptor on diagnosis individually assessed using Chi test and the validity compared in both benign and malignant lesions. The overall performance of CESM were also calculated. RESULTS: The study included 102 benign (48.3%) and 109 malignant (51.7%) lesions. Enhancement was encountered in 145/211 (68.7%) lesions. They further classified into enhancing mass (99/145, 68.3%) and non-mass lesions (46/145, 31.7%). Contrast uptake was significantly more frequent in malignant breast lesions (p value ≤ 0.001). Irregular mass lesions with intense and heterogeneous enhancement patterns correlated with a malignant pathology (p value ≤ 0.001). CESM showed an overall sensitivity of 88.99% and specificity of 83.33%. The positive and negative likelihood ratios were 5.34 and 0.13 respectively. CONCLUSION: The assessment of the morphology and enhancement characteristics of breast lesions on CESM enhances the performance of digital mammography in the differentiation between benign and malignant breast lesions.
Authors: Maha H Helal; Sahar M Mansour; Mai Zaglol; Lamia A Salaleldin; Omniya M Nada; Marwa A Haggag Journal: Br J Radiol Date: 2017-02-22 Impact factor: 3.039
Authors: María Del Mar Travieso-Aja; Daniel Maldonado-Saluzzi; Pedro Naranjo-Santana; Claudia Fernández-Ruiz; Wilsa Severino-Rondón; Mario Rodríguez Rodríguez; Víctor Vega Benítez; Octavio Pérez-Luzardo Journal: Radiol Med Date: 2019-06-27 Impact factor: 3.469
Authors: Amanda Ling Fung Liew; Hollie Mei Yeen Lim; Elizabeth Chun Mei Fok; Siu Cheng Loke; Ern Yu Tan; Bee Kiang Chong; Yeong Shyan Lee; Patrick Mun Yew Chan; Niketa Chotai Journal: Breast J Date: 2022-03-24 Impact factor: 2.269
Authors: Thiemo Ja van Nijnatten; Maxine S Jochelson; Katja Pinker; Delia M Keating; Janice S Sung; Monica Morrow; Marjolein L Smidt; Marc Bi Lobbes Journal: BJR Open Date: 2019-03-11