Diagnostic efficacy of ultrasound, ultrasound elastography and magnetic resonance imaging for breast lesions
A comparative study
Keywords:
ultrasound, elastography, magnetic resonance imagingAbstract
Background: The present study was conducted for comparing the diagnostic efficacy of ultrasound, ultrasound elastography and magnetic resonance imaging for breast lesions. Materials & methods: A total of 100 subjects were enrolled. Complete demographic details and clinical details of all the subjects were enrolled. All the patients were subjected to B-mode USG assessment. US Elastography was also done. The two-dimensional USG was followed by Real Time ultrasound elastography. The stiffness of the lesion was evaluated. All patients were placed prone on a 0.5 Tesla MRI scanner equipped with a dedicated breast surface coil. The lesion was categorized as benign, probably benign, malignant and probably malignant. Fine needle aspiration cytology (FNAC) or biopsy was performed and the specimen was evaluated cytologically/histopathologically to confirm the diagnosis. All the results were recorded and analysed by SPSS software. Results: Sensitivity and specificity of USG was 78.6 percent and 86.2 percent respectively. Sensitivity and specificity of Elastography was 89.5 percent and 92.6 percent respectively. Sensitivity and specificity of MRI was 96.2 percent and 93.1 percent respectively. Conclusion: MRI was most sensitive and most specific followed by USG elastography.
Downloads
References
Itoh A, Ueno E, Tohno E, et al. Breast disease: clinical application of US elastography for diagnosis. Radiology. 2006;239:341–350.
Ophir J, Céspedes I, Ponnekanti H, et al. Elastography: a quantitative method for imaging the elasticity of biological tissues. Ultrason Imaging. 1991;13:111–134.
Parker KJ, Fu D, Graceswki SM, et al. Vibration sonoelastography and the detectability of lesions. Ultrasound Med Biol. 1998;24:1437–1447.
Zhou J, Zhan W, Dong Y, Yang Z, Zhou C. Stiffness of the surrounding tissue of breast lesions evaluated by ultrasound elastography. Eur Radiol. 2014;24:1659–1667.
Zhang ZM, Zhao L, Wang YL, Liu Y, Wang SL, He Y. Diagnostic value of ultrasonic elastography, color doppler flow imaging and mammography in breast diseases. Chongqing Med. 2013;12:3604–3606.
Wu YQ, Jin M, He LL, Huang AQ. Value of ultrasonic elastography ratios for differentiating malignant and benign breast lesions. Diagnostic Imaging Interventional Radiol. 2015;24:134–137.
Chaturvedi P, Insana MF, Hall TJ. Testing the limitations of 2-D companding for strain imaging using phantoms. IEEE Trans Ultrason Ferroelectr Freq Control. 1998;45:1022–1031.
Woodhams R, Matsunaga K, Kan S, et al. ADC mapping of benign and malignant breast tumors. Magn Reson Med Sci. 2005;4:35–42.
Rubesova E, Grell AS, De Maertelaer V, et al. Quantitative diffusion Imaging in breast cancer: a clinical prospective study. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2006;24:319–324.
Lyng H, Haraldseth O, Rofstad EK. Measurement of cell density and necrotic fraction in human melanoma xenograft by diffusion weighted magnetic resonance imaging. Magn Reson Med. 2000;43:828–836. 9. Taouli B, Tolia AJ, Losada M, et al. Diffusion-weighted MRI for quantification of liver fibrosis: preliminary experience. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2007;189:799–806
Roka Namoto Matsubayashi 1, Mika Imanishi, Shino Nakagawa, Ryuji Takahashi, Momoko Akashi, Seiya Momosaki, Toru Muranaka. Breast ultrasound elastography and magnetic resonance imaging of fibrotic changes of breast disease: correlations between elastography findings and pathologic and short Tau inversion recovery imaging results, including the enhancement ratio and apparent diffusion coefficient. J Comput Assist Tomogr. Jan-Feb 2015;39(1):94-101.
Cheng R, Li J, Ji L, Liu H, Zhu L. Comparison of the diagnostic efficacy between ultrasound elastography and magnetic resonance imaging for breast masses. Exp Ther Med. 2018;15(3):2519-2524.
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
Copyright (c) 2022 International journal of health sciences
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Articles published in the International Journal of Health Sciences (IJHS) are available under Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial No Derivatives Licence (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0). Authors retain copyright in their work and grant IJHS right of first publication under CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. Users have the right to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of articles in this journal, and to use them for any other lawful purpose.
Articles published in IJHS can be copied, communicated and shared in their published form for non-commercial purposes provided full attribution is given to the author and the journal. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal.
This copyright notice applies to articles published in IJHS volumes 4 onwards. Please read about the copyright notices for previous volumes under Journal History.
