Literature DB >> 35035735

Value of ultrasound elastography combined with contrast-enhanced ultrasound and micro-flow imaging in differential diagnosis of benign and malignant breast lesions.

Zuopeng Ding1, Weiyong Liu1, Nianan He1, Xiaopeng Ma2, Lili Fu3, Lei Ye1.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Breast cancer is one of the most common malignant tumors in women and shows a rising incidence at younger ages. Therefore, early diagnosis is of great significance for treatment and prognosis. This study aimed to compare the value of ultrasound elastography (UE) combined with contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) and micro-flow imaging (MFI) in differential diagnosis of benign and malignant lesions of the breast.
METHODS: The sonographic characteristics of UE and CEUS as well as the vascular characteristics of MFI of 109 breast lesions categorized as Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) category 4, confirmed by surgical or biopsy pathology were retrospectively analyzed. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were used to compare the diagnostic efficacy of the three examination modalities, either alone or in combination.
RESULTS: Of the 109 breast lesions, 78 lesions were pathologically diagnosed as malignant and 31 as benign. At diagnosis, the area under the ROC curve (AUC), sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of UE were 0.8495, 65.38%, 83.87% and 83.34%, respectively. The AUC, sensitivity, specificity and accuracy of MFI were 86.29%, 70.51%, 87.10% and 85.56%, respectively. The AUC, sensitivity, specificity and accuracy of CEUS were 90.84%, 88.46%, 74.19% and 89.16%, respectively. The AUC, sensitivity, specificity and accuracy of the combined diagnosis of UE, MFI, and CEUS were 93.90%, 85.90%, 90.32%, and 92.07%, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: The combination of UE, CEUS and MFI has the highest specificity and accuracy in the differential diagnosis of benign and malignant breast lesions compared to any one used singly. AJTR
Copyright © 2021.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Ultrasound elastography; accuracy; contrast enhanced ultrasound; diagnostic value; micro-flow imaging

Year:  2021        PMID: 35035735      PMCID: PMC8748137     

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Transl Res        ISSN: 1943-8141            Impact factor:   4.060


  35 in total

Review 1.  [Breast lump in a young woman].

Authors:  Tuomo Meretoja; Marjut Leidenius
Journal:  Duodecim       Date:  2015

2.  Color Doppler ultrasound in benign and malignant breast tumors.

Authors:  T C Chao; Y F Lo; S C Chen; M F Chen
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  1999-09       Impact factor: 4.872

Review 3.  The Role of Ultrasound in Breast Cancer Screening: The Case for and Against Ultrasound.

Authors:  Jaime Geisel; Madhavi Raghu; Regina Hooley
Journal:  Semin Ultrasound CT MR       Date:  2017-09-22       Impact factor: 1.875

Review 4.  Screening for breast cancer.

Authors:  Kimberly S Peairs; Youngjee Choi; Rosalyn W Stewart; Heather F Sateia
Journal:  Semin Oncol       Date:  2017-02-13       Impact factor: 4.929

Review 5.  [Tumor blood vessels].

Authors:  Stanisław Szala; Magdalena Jarosz
Journal:  Postepy Hig Med Dosw (Online)       Date:  2011-07-04       Impact factor: 0.270

Review 6.  BI-RADS update.

Authors:  Cecilia L Mercado
Journal:  Radiol Clin North Am       Date:  2014-05       Impact factor: 2.303

Review 7.  Ultrasound Imaging Technologies for Breast Cancer Detection and Management: A Review.

Authors:  Rongrong Guo; Guolan Lu; Binjie Qin; Baowei Fei
Journal:  Ultrasound Med Biol       Date:  2017-10-26       Impact factor: 2.998

Review 8.  Orbital metastases of invasive lobular breast carcinoma.

Authors:  Ismini Michail Tsagkaraki; Christoforos Dimitrios Kourouniotis; Georgia Leonidas Gomatou; Nikolaos Konstantinos Syrigos; Elias Alexandros Kotteas
Journal:  Breast Dis       Date:  2019

9.  Correlation between molybdenum target mammography signs and pathological prognostic factors of breast cancer.

Authors:  Y Zhang; A D Ma; H X Jia
Journal:  J Biol Regul Homeost Agents       Date:  2016 Jan-Mar       Impact factor: 1.711

Review 10.  Primary and secondary prevention of breast cancer.

Authors:  Agnieszka Kolak; Marzena Kamińska; Katarzyna Sygit; Agnieszka Budny; Dariusz Surdyka; Bożena Kukiełka-Budny; Franciszek Burdan
Journal:  Ann Agric Environ Med       Date:  2017-07-18       Impact factor: 1.447

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.