Clinical breast cancer · 2021
Can Ultrasound Elastography Help Better Manage Mammographic BI-RADS Category 4 Breast Lesions?
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Gu Yang, Tian Jiawei, Ran Haitao, Ren Weidong, Chang Cai, Yuan Jianjun, Kang Chunsong, Deng Youbin, Wang Hui, Luo Baoming, Guo Shenglan, Zhou Qi, Xue Ensheng, Zhan Weiwei, Zhou Qing, Li Jie, Zhou Ping, Zhang Chunquan, Chen Man, Gu Ying, Xu Jinfeng, Chen Wu, Zhang Yuhong, Li Jianchu, Wang Hongyan, Jiang Yuxin
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: To assess the performance of conventional ultrasound (US) combined with strain elastography (SE) in the Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) category 4 lesions on mammography.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Women with breast lesions identified as having mammography BI-RADS 4 lesions and underwent US examination were included in China. US features and US BI-RADS assessment were recorded in real-time and prospectively reported. The pathological result was referred to as the gold standard. The performance of US in the mammographic BI-RADS category 4 lesions was evaluated. Diagnostic performances of US BI-RADS, SE and combined both were compared.
RESULTS: A total of 751 women with 751 breast lesions classified as mammographic BI-RADS category 4 were included. For mammographic findings, 530 (70.6%) were true positive and 221 (29.4%) were false positive. Conventional US achieved higher positive predictive value (PPV) than mammography (78.5% vs. 70.6%, P=.001). The specificity increased from 34.4% to 47.1% (P< .001) without any loss in sensitivity and the PPV increased to 81.9% (P = .122) when conventional US was used in combination with SE. For conventional US combined with SE, it led to a correct diagnosis of no breast cancer in 104 of the 221 false-positive findings (47.1%) and achieved higher PPV than mammography regardless of patient age and lesion size.
CONCLUSION: Conventional US combined with SE is a helpful tool for the noninvasive examination of breast lesions classified as BI-RADS category 4 on mammography. It helped increase the PPV and had the potential to avoid unnecessary biopsies of BI-RADS category 4 lesions detected on mammography.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Women with breast lesions identified as having mammography BI-RADS 4 lesions and underwent US examination were included in China. US features and US BI-RADS assessment were recorded in real-time and prospectively reported. The pathological result was referred to as the gold standard. The performance of US in the mammographic BI-RADS category 4 lesions was evaluated. Diagnostic performances of US BI-RADS, SE and combined both were compared.
RESULTS: A total of 751 women with 751 breast lesions classified as mammographic BI-RADS category 4 were included. For mammographic findings, 530 (70.6%) were true positive and 221 (29.4%) were false positive. Conventional US achieved higher positive predictive value (PPV) than mammography (78.5% vs. 70.6%, P=.001). The specificity increased from 34.4% to 47.1% (P< .001) without any loss in sensitivity and the PPV increased to 81.9% (P = .122) when conventional US was used in combination with SE. For conventional US combined with SE, it led to a correct diagnosis of no breast cancer in 104 of the 221 false-positive findings (47.1%) and achieved higher PPV than mammography regardless of patient age and lesion size.
CONCLUSION: Conventional US combined with SE is a helpful tool for the noninvasive examination of breast lesions classified as BI-RADS category 4 on mammography. It helped increase the PPV and had the potential to avoid unnecessary biopsies of BI-RADS category 4 lesions detected on mammography.