Distinguishing Benign from Malignant Masses at Breast US: Combined US Elastography and Color Doppler US-Influence on Radiologist Accuracy

被引:123
|
作者
Cho, Nariya [1 ]
Jang, Mijung [2 ]
Lyou, Chae Yeon [2 ]
Park, Jeong Seon [3 ]
Choi, Hye Young [4 ]
Moon, Woo Kyung [1 ]
机构
[1] Seoul Natl Univ, Coll Med, Seoul Natl Univ Hosp, Dept Radiol, Seoul 110744, South Korea
[2] Seoul Natl Univ, Bundang Hosp, Dept Radiol, Gyeonggi Do, South Korea
[3] Hanyang Univ, Hanyang Univ Hosp, Coll Med, Dept Radiol, Seoul 133791, South Korea
[4] Gyeongsang Natl Univ Hosp, Dept Radiol, Jinju, South Korea
关键词
MICROBUBBLE CONTRAST AGENT; INITIAL-EXPERIENCE; LESIONS; MAMMOGRAPHY; ULTRASOUND; DIAGNOSIS; CANCER; WOMEN;
D O I
10.1148/radiol.11110886
中图分类号
R8 [特种医学]; R445 [影像诊断学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100207 ; 1009 ;
摘要
Purpose: To investigate the effect of the combined use of ultrasonographic (US) elastography and color Doppler US on the accuracy of radiologists in distinguishing benign from malignant nonpalpable breast masses and in making the decision for biopsy recommendations at B-mode US. Materials and Methods: This prospective study was conducted with institutional review board approval; written informed consent was obtained. A cohort of 367 biopsy-proved cases in 319 women (age range, 22-78 years; mean age, 48.6 years) with B-mode US, US elastographic, and Doppler US images was included. Five blinded readers independently scored the likelihood of malignancy for four data sets (ie, B-mode US alone, B-mode US and elastography, B-mode US and Doppler US, and B-mode US, US elastography, and Doppler US). The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (A(z)) values, sensitivities, and specificities of each data set were compared. Results: The A(z) of B-mode US, US elastography, and Doppler US (average, 0.844; range, 0.797-0.876) was greater than that of B-mode US alone (average, 0.771; range, 0.738-0.798) for all readers (P = .001 for readers 1, 2, and 3; P < .001 for reader 4; P = .002 for reader 5). When both elastography and Doppler scores were negative, leading to strict downgrading, the specificity increased for all readers from an average of 25.3% (75.4 of 298; range, 6.4%-40.9%) to 34.0% (101.2 of 298; range, 26.5%-48.7%) (P < .001 for readers 1, 2, 4, and 5; P = .016 for reader 3) without a significant change in sensitivity. Conclusion: Combined use of US elastography and color Doppler US increases both the accuracy in distinguishing benign from malignant masses and the specificity in decision-making for biopsy recommendation at B-mode US. (C) RSNA, 2011
引用
收藏
页码:80 / 90
页数:11
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] OVARIAN MASSES - CAN BENIGN AND MALIGNANT LESIONS BE DIFFERENTIATED WITH COLOR AND PULSED DOPPLER US
    BROWN, DL
    FRATES, MC
    LAING, FC
    DISALVO, DN
    DOUBILET, PM
    BENSON, CB
    WAITZKIN, ED
    MUTO, MG
    RADIOLOGY, 1994, 190 (02) : 333 - 336
  • [2] Benign and malignant breast masses and axillary nodes: Evaluation with echo-enhanced color power Doppler US
    Yang, WT
    Metreweli, C
    Lam, PKW
    Chang, J
    RADIOLOGY, 2001, 220 (03) : 795 - 802
  • [3] Evaluation of Screening US-detected Breast Masses by Combined Use of Elastography and Color Doppler US with B-Mode US in Women with Dense Breasts: A Multicenter Prospective Study
    Lee, Su Hyun
    Chung, Jin
    Choi, Hye Young
    Choi, Seon Hyeong
    Ryu, Eun Bi
    Ko, Kyung Hee
    Koo, Hye Ryoung
    Park, Jeong Seon
    Yi, Ann
    Youk, Ji Hyun
    Son, Eun Ju
    Chu, A. Jung
    Chang, Jung Min
    Cho, Nariya
    Jang, Myoung-jin
    Kook, Shin Ho
    Cha, Eun Suk
    Moon, Woo Kyung
    RADIOLOGY, 2017, 285 (02) : 660 - 669
  • [4] Combined use of the automated breast volume scanner and the US elastography for the differentiation of benign from malignant lesions of the breast
    Chaoli Xu
    Shuping Wei
    Yingdong Xie
    Xiaoxiang Guan
    Ninghua Fu
    Pengfei Huang
    Bin Yang
    BMC Cancer, 14
  • [5] Combined use of the automated breast volume scanner and the US elastography for the differentiation of benign from malignant lesions of the breast
    Xu, Chaoli
    Wei, Shuping
    Xie, Yingdong
    Guan, Xiaoxiang
    Fu, Ninghua
    Huang, Pengfei
    Yang, Bin
    BMC CANCER, 2014, 14
  • [6] Benign versus malignant solid breast masses: US differentiation
    Rahbar, G
    Sie, AC
    Hansen, GC
    Prince, JS
    Melany, ML
    Reynolds, HE
    Jackson, VP
    Sayre, JW
    Bassett, LW
    RADIOLOGY, 1999, 213 (03) : 889 - 894
  • [7] Malignant and benign breast masses on 3D US volumetric images: Effect of computer-aided diagnosis on radiologist accuracy
    Sahiner, Berkman
    Chan, Heang-Ping
    Roubidoux, Marilyn A.
    Hadjiiski, Lubomir M.
    Helvie, Mark A.
    Paramagul, Chintana
    Bailey, Janet
    Nees, Alexis V.
    Blane, Caroline
    RADIOLOGY, 2007, 242 (03) : 716 - 724
  • [8] Differentiating benign from malignant solid breast masses with US strain imaging
    Burnside, Elizabeth S.
    Hall, Timothy J.
    Sommer, Amy M.
    Hesley, Gina K.
    Sisney, Gale A.
    Svensson, William E.
    Fine, Jason P.
    Jiang, Jinfeng
    Hangiandreou, Nicholas J.
    RADIOLOGY, 2007, 245 (02) : 401 - 410
  • [9] Nonpalpable breast masses: Evaluation by US elastography
    Cho, Nariya
    Moon, Woo Kyung
    Park, Jeong Seon
    Cha, Joo Hee
    Jang, Mijung
    Seong, Min Hyun
    KOREAN JOURNAL OF RADIOLOGY, 2008, 9 (02) : 111 - 118
  • [10] Microbubble contrast agent for color Doppler US: Effect on breast masses
    Kedar, RP
    Cosgrove, D
    McCready, VR
    Bamber, JC
    Carter, ER
    RADIOLOGY, 1996, 198 (03) : 679 - 686