Automated Breast Ultrasound vs. Handheld Ultrasound: BI-RADS Classification, Duration of the Examination and Patient Comfort

被引:16
作者
Prosch, H. [1 ,3 ]
Halbwachs, C. [2 ]
Strobl, C. [3 ]
Reisner, L. -M. [2 ]
Hondl, M. [2 ]
Weber, M. [1 ]
Mostbeck, G. H. [2 ]
机构
[1] Med Univ Wien, Abt Allgemeine Radiol & Kinderradiol, A-1090 Vienna, Austria
[2] Wilhelminenspital Stadt Wien, Inst Diagnost & Intervent Radiol, Vienna, Austria
[3] Otto Wagner Hosp, Inst Radiodiagnost, Vienna, Austria
来源
ULTRASCHALL IN DER MEDIZIN | 2011年 / 32卷 / 05期
关键词
breast; ultrasound; 3D/4D; MAMMOGRAPHY; CANCER; LESIONS; PERFORMANCE; WOMEN;
D O I
10.1055/s-0031-1273414
中图分类号
O42 [声学];
学科分类号
070206 ; 082403 ;
摘要
Purpose: Automated breast ultrasound (ABUS) is a potentially valuable adjunct to mammography in breast cancer screening. The reliability and the inter-observer variability in the BI-RADS classification, compared to handheld ultrasound (US), as well as the duration of the examination and patient comfort have only been investigated in a limited number of papers to date. Materials and Methods: In a prospective study, we examined 148 breasts of 76 patients with handheld US and ABUS. The ABUS data were evaluated separately by two investigators. Patient comfort was assessed using a standardized questionnaire. Results: The inter-observer agreement for the BI-RADS classification among the two observers using ABUS was high (K =0,750), the agreement with handheld US was moderate. The sensitivity in the detection of breast cancer was 87.5% for handheld US and 75% for the ABUS evaluation by observer 1. The sensitivity was 87.5% for the ABUS evaluation and 83% for mammography by observer 2. The ABUS examination was rated as completely painless by 64% of the patients. 25% of the patients indicated minor pain, and 10% indicated moderate pain. Handheld US was rated as completely painless by 66% of the patients. 26% of the patients indicated minor pain, and 8% indicated moderate pain. Conclusion: ABUS examinations focusing on the BIRADS classification have low inter-observer variability, compared to handheld US. The sensitivity of ABUS did not differ significantly from handheld US.
引用
收藏
页码:504 / 510
页数:7
相关论文
共 50 条
[31]   A computer-aided diagnosis system for breast ultrasound based on weighted BI-RADS classes [J].
Rodriguez-Cristerna, Arturo ;
Gomez-Flores, Wilfrido ;
de Albuquerque Pereira, Wagner Coelho .
COMPUTER METHODS AND PROGRAMS IN BIOMEDICINE, 2018, 153 :33-40
[32]   Novel approach in the evaluation of ultrasound BI-RADS 3 & 4 breast masses with a combination method of elastography & Doppler [J].
Reghunath, Anjuna ;
Mittal, Mahesh Kumar ;
Chintamani, Chintamani ;
Prasad, Rajni .
INDIAN JOURNAL OF MEDICAL RESEARCH, 2021, 154 (02) :355-366
[33]   Value of ultrasound elastography in diagnosis of BI-RADS 4B breast lesions based on conventional ultrasound [J].
Gong, Xia ;
Wang, Yi ;
Wu, Weihua .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CLINICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL MEDICINE, 2016, 9 (02) :2561-2566
[34]   A New Practical Decision Rule to Better Differentiate BI-RADS© 3 or 4 Breast Masses on Breast Ultrasound [J].
Pfob, Andre ;
Barr, Richard G. ;
Duda, Volker ;
Buesch, Christopher ;
Bruckner, Thomas ;
Spratte, Julia ;
Nees, Juliane ;
Togawa, Riku ;
Ho, Chi ;
Fastner, Sarah ;
Riedel, Fabian ;
Schaefgen, Benedikt ;
Hennigs, Andre ;
Sohn, Christof ;
Heil, Joerg ;
Golatta, Michael .
JOURNAL OF ULTRASOUND IN MEDICINE, 2022, 41 (02) :427-436
[35]   Correlation of ultrasound BI-RADS reporting and breast cancer clinical measures [J].
Alyahyawi, Amjad ;
Elasbali, Abdelbaset Mohamed .
BIOSCIENCE RESEARCH, 2021, 18 (02) :1694-1698
[36]   Non-mass lesions on breast ultrasound: why does not the ACR BI-RADS breast ultrasound lexicon add the terminology? [J].
Uematsu, Takayoshi .
JOURNAL OF MEDICAL ULTRASONICS, 2023, 50 (03) :341-346
[37]   Non-mass lesions on breast ultrasound: why does not the ACR BI-RADS breast ultrasound lexicon add the terminology? [J].
Takayoshi Uematsu .
Journal of Medical Ultrasonics, 2023, 50 :341-346
[38]   Downgrade BI-RADS 4A Patients Using Nomogram Based on Breast Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Ultrasound, and Mammography [J].
Xie, Yamie ;
Zhu, Ying ;
Chai, Weimin ;
Zong, Shaoyun ;
Xu, Shangyan ;
Zhan, Weiwei ;
Zhang, Xiaoxiao .
FRONTIERS IN ONCOLOGY, 2022, 12
[39]   Can Ultrasound Elastography Help Better Manage Mammographic BI-RADS Category 4 Breast Lesions? [J].
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 .
CLINICAL BREAST CANCER, 2022, 22 (04) :E407-E416
[40]   Mammography breast density: an effective supplemental modality for the precise grading of ultrasound BI-RADS 4 categories [J].
Li, Wei-Min ;
Sun, Qiu-Wei ;
Fan, Xiao-Fang ;
Zhang, Jun-Chao ;
Xu, Ting ;
Shen, Qi-Qi ;
Jia, Lei .
GLAND SURGERY, 2021, 10 (06) :2010-2018