Ultrasound real-time elastography can predict malignancy in BI-RADS®-US 3 lesions

BMC Cancer

Sebastian Wojcinski¹  Esther Boehme²  André Farrokh²  Philipp Soergel¹  Friedrich Degenhardt²  Peter Hillemanns¹ 

[1] Hannover Medical School, Department of OB/GYN, OE 6410, Carl-Neuberg-Straße 1, Hannover, 30625, Germany

[2] Franziskus Hospital, Department of OB/GYN, Bielefeld, Germany

关键词: Breast imaging;    Breast cancer;    Diagnostic accuracy;    BI-RADS-US 3;    Breast lesions;    Sonoelastography;   

Others  :  1079831
DOI  :  10.1186/1471-2407-13-159

 received in 2012-08-12, accepted in 2013-03-19,  发布年份 2013

【 摘 要 】

Background

Lesions of the breast that are classified BI-RADS^®-US 3 by ultrasound are probably benign and observation is recommended, although malignancy may occasionally occur.

In our study, we focus exclusively on BI-RADS^®-US 3 lesions and hypothesize that sonoelastography as an adjunct to conventional ultrasound can identify a high-risk-group and a low-risk-group within these patients.

Methods

A group of 177 breast lesions that were classified BI-RADS^®-US 3 were additionally examined with real-time sonoelastography. Elastograms were evaluated according to the Tsukuba Elasticity Score. Pretest and posttest probability of disease (POD), sensitivity (SE), specificity (SP), positive (PPV) and negative predictive values (NPV) and likelihood-ratios (LR) were calculated. Furthermore, we analyzed the false-negative and false-positive cases and performed a model calculation to determine how elastography could affect the proceedings in population screening.

Results

In our collection of BI-RADS^®-US 3 cases there were 169 benign and eight malignant lesions. The pretest POD was 4.5% (95% confidence interval (CI): 2.1–9.0). In patients with a suspicious elastogram (high-risk group), the posttest POD was significantly higher (13.2%, p = 0.041) and the positive LR was 3.2 (95% CI: 1.7–5.9). With a benign elastogram (low-risk group), the posttest POD decreased to 2.2%. SE, SP, PPV and NPV for sonoelastography in BI-RADS^®-US 3 lesions were 62.5% (95% CI: 25.9–89.8), 80.5% (95% CI: 73.5–86.0), 13.2% (95% CI: 5.0–28.9) and 97.8% (95% CI: 93.3–99.4), respectively.

Conclusions

Sonoelastography yields additional diagnostic information in the evaluation of BI-RADS^®-US 3 lesions of the breast. The examiner can identify a low-risk group that can be vigilantly observed and a high-risk group that should receive immediate biopsy due to an elevated breast cancer risk.

【 授权许可】

   
2013 Wojcinski et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

Figure 2.

Figure 3.

Figure 4.

Figure 5.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Parkin DM, Bray F, Ferlay J, Pisani P: Global cancer statistics, 2002. CA Cancer J Clin 2005, 55(2):74-108.
• [2]IARC: Globocan Database. Lyon: International Agency for Research on Cancer; 2008.
• [3]IARC: World Cancer Report 2008. Lyon: International Agency for Research on Cancer, WHO Press; 2008.
• [4]Parkin DM, Fernandez LM: Use of statistics to assess the global burden of breast cancer. Breast J 2006, 12(Suppl 1):S70-S80.
• [5]Urbschat I, Kieschke J, Schlanstedt-Jahn U, Gehlen S, Thiel A, Jensch P: Beiträge bevölkerungsbezogener Krebsregister zur Evaluation des bundesweiten Mammographie-Screenings. Gesundheitswesen 2005, 67(7):448-454.
• [6]Wojcinski S, Farrokh A, Weber S, Thomas A, Fischer T, Slowinski T, Schmidt W, Degenhardt F: Multicenter study of ultrasound real-time tissue elastography in 779 cases for the assessment of breast lesions: improved diagnostic performance by combining the BI-RADS(R)-US classification system with sonoelastography. Ultraschall in der Medizin 2010, 31(5):484-491.
• [7]Mendelson EB, Baum JK, Berg WA, Merritt CR, Rubin E, BI-RADS: Ultrasound. In Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System: ACR BI-RADS - Breast Imaging Atlas. Edited by D’Orsi CJ, Mendelson EB, Ikeda DM. Reston, VA: American College of Radiology; 2002.
• [8]Hille H, Vetter M, Hackeloer BJ: The accuracy of BI-RADS classification of breast ultrasound as a first-line imaging method. Ultraschall Med 2012, 33(2):160-163.
• [9]Hahn M, Roessner L, Krainick-Strobel U, Gruber IV, Kramer B, Gall C, Siegmann KC, Wallwiener D: Kagan KO: [Sonographic criteria for the differentiation of benign and malignant breast lesions using real-time spatial compound imaging in combination with XRES adaptive image processing]. Ultraschall in der Medizin 2012, 33(3):270-274.
• [10]Fierbinteanu-Braticevici C, Andronescu D, Usvat R, Cretoiu D, Baicus C, Marinoschi G: Acoustic radiation force imaging sonoelastography for noninvasive staging of liver fibrosis. World J Gastroenterol 2009, 15(44):5525-5532.
• [11]Sadigh G, Carlos RC, Neal CH, Dwamena BA: Ultrasonographic differentiation of malignant from benign breast lesions: a meta-analytic comparison of elasticity and BIRADS scoring. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2012, 133(1):23-35.
• [12]DEGUM (Deutsche Gesellschaft für Ultraschall in der Medizin) - Mehrstufenkonzept Mammasonographie. http://www.degum.de/Mehrstufenkonzept_Mammasonogra.634.0.html webcite
• [13]Ciurea AI, Bolboaca SD, Ciortea CA, Botar-Jid C, Dudea SM: The influence of technical factors on sonoelastographic assessment of solid breast nodules. Ultraschall Med 2011, 32(Suppl 1):S27-S34.
• [14]KBV (Kassenärztliche Bundesvereinigung, German Federal Association of Fund Doctors): Ultrasound regulations. http://www.kbv.de/rechtsquellen/2488.html webcite
• [15]Itoh A, Ueno E, Tohno E, Kamma H, Takahashi H, Shiina T, Yamakawa M, Matsumura T: Breast disease: clinical application of US elastography for diagnosis. Radiology 2006, 239(2):341-350.
• [16]Ueno E: The utility of real-time tissue elastography for the breast, Hitachi Real-time Tissue Elastography: Publications; International Communications, Clinical Abstracts. http://www.bestcontact.com.my/support/downloads/hi-rte-publications-and-communications-clinical-abstracts---applications-in-womens-health-11-06-10.pdf webcite
• [17]Barr RG, Lackey AE: The utility of the “bull’s-eye” artifact on breast elasticity imaging in reducing breast lesion biopsy rate. Ultrasound Q 2011, 27(3):151-155.
• [18]Newcombe RG: Interval estimation for the difference between independent proportions: comparison of eleven methods. Stat Med 1998, 17(8):873-890.
• [19]Barr RG, Zhang Z, Cormack JB, Mendelson EB, Berg WA, Yeh N: Probably Benign Lesions on Screening Breast Sonography: Prevalence and Risk of Malignancy in the ACRIN 6666 Trial. In Presented at:Radiological Society of North America 2011 Scientific Assembly and Annual Meeting. Chicago, IL; 27 November - 2 December 2011
• [20]Madjar H, Ohlinger R, Mundinger A, Watermann D, Frenz JP, Bader W, Schulz-Wendtland R, Degenhardt F: BI-RADS-analogue DEGUM criteria for findings in breast ultrasound–consensus of the DEGUM Committee on Breast Ultrasound. Ultraschall Med 2006, 27(4):374-379.
• [21]Thomas A, Fischer T, Frey H, Ohlinger R, Grunwald S, Blohmer JU, Winzer KJ, Weber S, Kristiansen G, Ebert B, Kummel S: Real-time elastography–an advanced method of ultrasound: First results in 108 patients with breast lesions. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2006, 28(3):335-340.
• [22]Farrokh A, Wojcinski S, Heymer T, Dumke K, Weber EA, Degenhardt F: Die Real-Time Sonoelastographie in der Mammadiagnostik - Limitationen der Methode. Ultraschall Med 2010, 31:13_01.
• [23]Wojcinski S, Cassel M, Farrokh A, Soliman AA, Hille U, Schmidt W, Degenhardt F, Hillemanns P: Variations in the Elasticity of Breast Tissue During the Menstrual Cycle Determined by Real-time Sonoelastography. J Ultrasound Med: official journal of the American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine 2012, 31(1):63-72.
• [24]Thomas A, Degenhardt F, Farrokh A, Wojcinski S, Slowinski T, Fischer T: Significant differentiation of focal breast lesions: calculation of strain ratio in breast sonoelastography. Acad Radiol 2010, 17(5):558-563.
• [25]Wojcinski S, Farrokh A, Gyapong S, Degenhardt F: Sonoelastographie: Welche Verfahren gibt es? Wie sind Handhabung und Reproduzierbarkeit im klinischen Alltag? Senologie - Zeitschrift für Mammadiagnostik und -therapie 2009, 6:P042.
• [26]Moon WK, Choi JW, Cho N, Park SH, Chang JM, Jang M, Kim KG: Computer-aided analysis of ultrasound elasticity images for classification of benign and malignant breast masses. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2010, 195(6):1460-1465.